Nearly everyone who doesn’t consider himself a minimalist has some criticism. Much of that is simply because it’s a trend, and people tend to attack anything trendy. But I think a bigger reason is that people feel threatened when they feel their lifestyle is criticized — and at its core, that’s what minimalism is. A criticism of the (modern) American way of life.
minimalism's critics
I was wondering when Leo would respond to the critics of minimalism, and he has finally done it. I really liked this part:
That critique is threatening to many people, and minimalism’s critics are often justifying their way of life. Take just one of many criticisms (there are too many to name): “I’m not a minimalist, I’m an appropriatist”. Or something like that (I haven’t seen the original quote). Sounds good, but if minimalism is asking “is this really necessary?”, then what does an appropriatist ask? “Is this appropriate?” Well, anyone can say anything is appropriate — my BMW is appropriate for my life, right? Basically, an appropriatist can also be called a “status quoist”.
I have to agree with Leo. Minimalism is a challenge to others to rethink their lives. For what it is worth, I am a minimalist. For me, the issue is over the label and the beliefs behind that label. If we did a head to head comparison, my life is almost certainly more minimalistic than Leo's life. He doesn't own a car, but I don't own a bicycle either. I also don't have six kids. If it is a question of living the lifestyle, I do it. I just don't take pictures of my sparse apartment and post them on the internet. At some point, we get to the cup of Diogenes and arguing whether it made sense for him to throw it away or not. As I pointed out before, this sort of thing is almost a bizarro version of keeping up with the Joneses.
Now, if I drove a BMW or owned all sorts of grown up toys, I might feel challenged by what Leo said. I am a minimalist, but that is like a Unitarian claiming to be a Christian. The term takes on a different meaning when applied to a Southern Baptist, a Lutheran, and a Roman Catholic. At some point, we have to attach qualifiers. Minimalism is at this point. As other bloggers point out, minimalism is person relative. Leo lives without a TV while I live with a TV that I barely watch that is permatuned to CNN. Someone needs to inject some orthodoxy into the debate, so I suppose it falls to me to do it.
What is a minimalist?
A minimalist is one who retains what is essential and removes the non-essential. For Leo, owning a bicycle is essential. For me, it is not. For me, owning a television is essential. For Leo, it is not. The essential part is person relative. I can only speak for myself, but I regularly edit my lifestyle to remove the non-essential. I find my life is easier and smoother with fewer things in it. The only real problem I have had comes from information and learning to deal with it. But this is non-material life-of-the-mind stuff. When it comes to material things like clothes, housing, gadgets, and transportation, less is more.
The reason people like me and others now shy away from the term "minimalist" is because it is becoming a cartoon of itself. The way it is now, being a minimalist means you are a broke slacker with a Macbook Pro, a blog, and an apartment within walking distance of a Starbucks with free WiFi. That image has become so indelible that I am certain that this is why Everett Bogue recoiled from the movement and said, "Fuck minimalism."
What we can all agree on is that a consumerist lifestyle dedicated to acquiring stuff instead of experiences is not the way to happiness. Living simply and cheaply makes your life better. It has solved a lot of problems for me. But with every solution comes new problems. Minimalism does not answer those problems. It is not a panacea. The fact is that when people simplify to such an extreme in all facets of their lives they are left with an empty white space. This is why so many minimalist bloggers are leaving their blogs to start new ones. How much can you write on being a minimalist? (This is why I never became a minimalist blogger but kept with this highly individualistic project called "Charlie's Blog." Unlike the minimalists, I can go in new directions and talk about different things such as politics, economics, philosophy, or whatnot without betraying the expectations of my readers. I'm not a single subject blogger.)
I'm a fan of Leo Babauta, so I don't really disagree with his points. What I will say is that Leo needs to address the real issue in this debate. I call it "post-minimalist emptiness." What happens when you make it your purpose to eliminate the non-essential from your life and you have achieved it? What do you do after that? This is the question people are asking. Leo is like Moses. He has gotten us out of Egypt, but here we are in the wilderness. What happens next?
I am answering that question now since no one else seems to be answering it. Stick with the simplicity. Be frugal in your material life. Eliminate the distractions. But after that, you need to work. The problem isn't minimalism. It is SLACK. The maximalist materialist mindset had one thing going for it. It was a great motivator to go out and work to maintain the payments on all that shit you didn't need. The minimalist no longer has the payments and finds freedom from the whole senseless treadmill of acquisition and status. Without that material reason to work hard and achieve, minimalists have become bums. All that idleness now leads to boredom and dissatisfaction. This is why I have been turning to the Puritans for the answers. They worked hard but for non-material reasons. They knew there was no joy in idleness. Happiness comes from work.
I will have more on this in future posts. This is a topic I know my readers have been screaming for me to write more on, so I will satisfy that demand. It has been cooking in my brain, and I feel it is time to deliver.
0 comments:
Post a Comment