Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T08:00:16.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reply to Frank Trentmann's comment: Consumer Society – RIP

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2010

ANDREAS WIRSCHING*
Affiliation:
Lehrstuhl für Neuere und Neueste Geschichte, Sekretariat (Raum 2006), Universitätsstraße 10, 86159 Augsburg, Germany; andreas.wirsching@phil.uni-augsburg.de

Extract

Frank Trentmann is not very happy with my article, for the following three main reasons: First: the term ‘consumer society’ is applied too extensively and is not sufficiently defined. Second, my parameters of space and time are unclear, with the result that I neglect the differences in consumption and ‘consumer society’ in different parts of the world and at different periods. Furthermore, I do not establish a clear chronology with respect to the historical relationship between work and consumption. On this basis, third, Trentmann remains unconvinced by my critical remarks on the problems of individuality, citizenship and the pitfalls of historical teleology.

Type
Interpretations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Wirsching, Andreas, ‘From Work to Consumption. Transatlantic Visions of Individuality in Modern Mass Society’, Contemporary European History, 20, 1 (2011), 126CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Trentmann, FrankConsumer Society – RIP. A Comment’, Contemporary European History, 20, 1 (2011), 2731CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Butterfield, Herbert, The Whig Interpretation of History (London: G. Bell and Sons, 1931), 11Google Scholar.