Social class becomes salient at particular times and place within the Harvard community. At these intersection points,we have the opportunity to experience the cultures of social classes different from our own. For example, Jeremy and Zack, are roommates who come from very different social classes; this situation often creates tension and strife in the room. Jeremy is a financial-aid student who works a part-time job and lives on a farm. Zack, on the other hand, comes from an upper class family in England and is accustomed to having a chauffeur, a housekeeper, and a chef reside in his house.
Jeremy hails from a working class family and expressed frustration over his roommate’s inability to understand his financial situation. Because Jeremy comes from a poorer family, he is very stringent with his money. He is not only on one of the highest levels of financial aid, but he also has a weekly job to help cover the costs of school supplies and other odds-and-ends. As a result of his 10 hours a week job and frugal spending, Jeremy is capable of being financially independent from his parents and does not need to ask them for money. He told me that he has not purchased a new article of clothing since arriving on campus, while his roommate has already ordered 18 boxes of new clothes because “his dad pays the credit card bill.” From these interactions, it is evident that Jeremy habitus is characterized by a taste for necessity. Rather than purchase exorbitant amounts of clothes like his roommate does, he only uses his spending money for items like staples, pens, and printing paper, all of which he views as necessities. Often times, Jeremy feels that his roommate does not understand his financial situation and expects him to chip in when paying for parties and alcohol. When his roommate invites friends over, they purchase liquor and then ask Jeremy to help pay for it after the fact. Jeremy feels very uncomfortable in these circumstances because he wants to help out but he does not want to spend his well-earned money on alcohol every weekend. To him, it seems that his roommate, because he is from a higher socioeconomic class, automatically assumes that everyone is capable of spending twenty or more dollars per weekend. His opinion on this issue was, “if you’ve been brought up in an environment where money is not an issue, then you have no problem asking for it and taking it from your parents.” This perspective reveals the stark differences between Jeremy habitus and that of his roommate Zack's. Jeremy's childhood on a farm shaped his habitus to value thriftiness and independence, while Zack's youth led him to grow accustomed to always having spending money within reach. Because the roommates’ distance from economic necessity, one of the intrinsic properties of class, are substantially different, their interactions with money have evolved in separate ways. When discussing the intrinsic properties of class during lecture, Professor Nelson noted that people from the middle class are more concerned with status and making the wrong move while those from the upper class have no care for others’ judgement. This concept was very noticeable in my interviews with Jeremy and Zack. While Jeremy complained often about Zack's careless spending and financial dependency on his parents, Zack was not embarrassed to reveal exactly how much he has spent so far on clothing and dining. Jeremy also seemed hesitant to discuss his job and financial aid package in front of Zack. The unease that Jeremy felt when discussing finances in contrast to Zack's frankness with the situation reflects the disparities between upper and lower class views towards class differences.
Zack, on the other hand, did not express concerns with the class differences that exist in his room. As I interviewed Zack, Jeremy remained in the common room with us. Despite Jeremy's presence, Zack openly revealed how much money he spends. When Zack casually commented that he has already spent $4,000 so far and should probably be more careful with his money, Jeremy let out a gasp of surprise. Unlike Jeremy, who works for a hourly wage, Zack is allotted $6,000 a semester by his parents as spending money. When I asked what he spends his money on, he responded that he likes to eat out at restaurants in Cambridge. When Jeremy heard this comment, he grew aggravated and retorted, “Why don’t you just eat at Annenberg where it’s free?” Because Zack is accustomed to life in the dominant class, he has developed a habitus characterized by a taste for freedom. Since Zack is financially free from the practical needs and urgencies of making a life, he is able to stylize and formalize natural functions like meals and clothing. Rather than purchase a coat for practical reasons, as Jeremy might, Zack purchased a $700 sweater because it was in-style and fashionable. These types of purchases, along with his more expensive dining selections, reveal Zack's taste for freedom. Despite the stark contrast between Jeremy's and Zack's lifestyles, however, Zack does not feel uncomfortable about their class differences. He acknowledges that Jeremy might not have as much money as him, but does not feel that the financial imbalance creates any tension in the room. Jeremy, however, was bothered by Zack's openness about his expenses and grew bitter, claiming (after Zack had left the room) that Zack flaunted his money and made him feel inferior. As seen by the interaction between Zack and Jeremy, members of the upper class tend to accept the inequalities and are comfortable coexisting with people of lower classes, while lower class people are often more unhappy with the situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment