
The Oppressive Gospel of ‘Minimalism’ - prismatic
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/31/magazine/the-oppressive-gospel-of-minimalism.html?_r=1
======
mrec
I've seen this "minimalism == privileged posing" line of argument a few times
now. It may be fair in many cases, but I think there's another angle that
never seems to get mentioned: I'd guess that a disproportionate number of
these "posers" live in tech hubs like SF, NY or London. In places like that,
owning stuff may simply be unaffordable, not because the stuff itself is
unaffordable but because space to put it is unaffordable. That is, they may be
cash-rich but space-poor, whereas the stereotypical rural redneck with 3 old
cars up on bricks in the front yard for spares may be cash-poor but space-
rich.

You can call this "sour grapes" or "making a virtue of necessity", depending
on how generous you're feeling, but I think there's more to it than just
posing.

~~~
maxxxxx
I just wish they would write about it only a few years after they have started
to go minimalist and have actually lived it. There are so many articles who
write how great being minimalist is two weeks after they have sold their car
or whatever.

~~~
madamelic
It gets depressing.

I pared down a lot of what I owned simply because I didn't use it and the
clutter bothered me, plus I had to move apartments by myself.

At first, it was really great. No clutter, only what I needed, super basic
life.

But then you walk into your apartment where you only have a (simple) bed and
desk, maybe a few pieces of clothing on the ground and you feel empty and
depressed. It isn't because I _want_ stuff... I actually really don't like
buying things (that is another aspect: I have major anxiety around money so I
hoard money, which is convenient for a "minimalist". Think "money anorexic")
It just feels empty. Like another poster mentioned: it consumes you. You
constantly have to consider the space / minimalism implications of buying
something. It is weird to describe.

Yeah, all of this sounds overly dramatic but I do feel sad when I look at my
apartment some times.

My partner is pushing me to buy a couch because they don't like laying in my
bed when they come over. Also it is a little embarrassing to pull out the
sleeping bag and air mattress when I have guests come over...

~~~
sliverstorm
It's easy to take too far.

For me, good minimalism is selling things I haven't used in a long time, or
furniture that doesn't "fit" in the floorplan of my house (for example, no one
needs two kitchen tables). Stuff that just occupies space.

Bad minimalism is getting rid of decorations (art, photos, plants) and key
furniture.

I want my house to feel like someone lives there, so a bare room with a laptop
in the middle is OUT.

A much easier razor than "is this minimal or not" is, "am I going to wind up
selling this in six months because I don't use it, god that'll be a pain"

~~~
madamelic
You have hit the nail exactly on the head. This is exactly how I feel about
minimalism now.

------
iamleppert
Don't these people have any hobbies or interests? Hobbies and interests, a
personality, dare I might say, require "stuff". You develop a sense of style,
and you get things around you that help to describe and tell your story in
life.

I don't understand the people that are content with this kind of self-imposed
"I can do with just the bare essentials" lifestyle. Unless you're traveling,
or doing something of that nature, I am generally distrustful of people who
can be gone in an hour. There's something about this kind of lifestyle (I've
known several minimalist people well) that is synonymous with fear of
commitment and general instability in their life.

A lot of people I met have adopted the lifestyle because it's a learned
behavoir from either years of instability, an off-beat childhood, or some kind
of abusive relationship. Human beings need stuff around them, and it's
perfectly normal to accumulate stuff if you've lived somewhere any length of
time.

On the other end of the spectrum of minimalism would of course be hoarding.
Not saying that either lifestyle is "bad", but you wouldn't call hoarding
exactly normal, would you?

~~~
chris_7
Guitars and bikes are practically mandatory in #minimal shots, are these not
hobbies? Gym memberships for lifting take no space. Climbing shoes take almost
no space. Music production? Programming? Digital art?

~~~
marcosdumay
If your guitar is your only hobby, I'd expect you to have a sound system, a
library of music sheets, extra guitars or cases, stuff to tune, fix or mod
your guitar. There's probably more, but I don't have this hobby, so I wouldn't
know.

Climbers have all kinds of equipment. Music production requires recording and
sound absorbing gear, and also playback. Programmers used to have plenty of
books and extra computers - nowadays will almost certainly have Arduinos and
Raspberry Pis around (and gaming gear). I don't know much about digital art,
but I strongly suspect most of their practitioners also practice the non-
digital real works counterparts.

~~~
chris_7
Why do you need anything more than an acoustic guitar and some picks? (yes, a
case/bag/stand)

All you need for climbing is some shoes and a chalk bag. Possibly a crash pad.
You're a hobbyist, and even pros (see: Alex Honnold, or anyone that primarily
does bouldering) can climb with only that.

All you need to make music is some software, a playback device, and possibly a
microphone (purely electronic music is a thing, of course). It's a _hobby_ ,
you're not a professional producer.

Don't needlessly raise the barrier to entry.

~~~
drblast
If you're _really_ into guitar, you pretty much need a traditional single coil
Stratocaster, humbucker Les Paul or SG, and either a Taylor or Martin acoustic
to be minimally happy. And either multiple amps or something expensive like a
Mesa Boogie Mark V that does everything.

And as you enter your 40's you'll need a Telecaster too.

Also odds are good you'll be in a music store at some point and play a Music
Man or high-end Jackson or Charvel for the first time and realize one of those
are a necessity too.

This is if you're a strict minimalist.

~~~
shermanyo
> And as you enter your 40's you'll need a Telecaster too.

Caught me off guard, still laughing :)

------
fembot__
I am a millenial that makes decent money and lives in manhattan. The following
are true of me:

1) I sold my car when I moved here, and I usually walk or take Uber.

2) I sold many of my clothes when I got here (because my closet is small) and
now use Rent the Runway Unlimited to have a revolving supply of designer
clothes.

3) I do not have a washer or dryer so I use an app called Cleanly to pick up
my clothes, wash, and return them.

4) I do not have a dishwasher or a microwave, so I never bought many
dishes/utensils, and I order most meals I eat at home from seamless or
PostMates.

5) I don't have a vaccum, a broom, a mop, a dustpan, cleaning supplies, etc so
I use an app called Handy that sends a cleaner that has these things to my
apartment every two weeks.

So, technically I own less things. But only because I can afford to pay to
rent them (uber, rent the runway) or pay someone else to make up for not
owning them (postmates/cleanly/handy). I imagine that the same is true for
many of the people who live the lifestyle the author is describing. So in a
way, I can see her point: we're not really minimalist, we're just rich enough
to not have to own stuff.

But on the other hand, isn't it cool that technology has created a world where
I don't have to own all this stuff to have a convenient, clean, fashionable
life? I am not even a minimalist but I do think that the aesthetic idea of
minimalism has influenced some of the technological advances that have led to
some of the most innovative "shared economy" and peer to peer service
companies. And if the people who came up with the ideas for these apps want to
live in a white apartment with succulents, who cares?

~~~
existencebox
Hey; honest question for you (don't mean this in the pejorative sense)

How much does that cost you on a month to month basis? I have no point of
reference due to living out in the burbs but my knee jerk is "jesus that must
cost so much overhead" and I'd like to see if that's a false assumption or
not.

For level playing field/full disclosure, my list looks something like: 1\. Car
costs: ~40$/month for gas (mostly bus), 20k amortized over 10 years of
ownership ~160$/month (assuming no major maitanance, given how little I drive)
2\. Clothes: ~20$/month (assuming I spend <100$ yearly on clothes which is
probably accurate, probably avg. 1 pair of shoes + one full outfit a year, and
that's likely a high estimate) 3\. Washer/dryer: This one is hard since it's
merged with the water/power bill, but as a point of reference I pay about 100$
water and 120$ power monthly for a 3b2b house. 4\. See above re: utilities,
food probably comes to ~200$ per month buying at costco (two trips monthly of
~150-200 each for the wife and I) 5\. Cleaning: "free" (time isn't free yadda
yadda)

All together probably between 650-700$ monthly on non-mortgage necessities,
the largest portions of which are car+utilities+groceries in relatively even
thirds, which is a hard bar to push lower for me so I'm looking for ways to be
creative. :)

~~~
fembot__
1\. Uber: ~$250-300 a month

2\. Rent the Runway: $150 a month

3\. Laundry: ~$40 a month + Dry cleaning (can be the in 100s)

4\. Water is payed for by the building, electricity averages $100 a month.

5\. Food: This one is tougher. If I order pad thai, I can eat it for two days
and its $6 a day. If I order lobster pasta, its $40 and I eat it all right
then! According to mint I spend $500 a month on average. But some of what I
pay for is in cash so it could be more.

It's definitely not cheaper to live like this but it's much less friction! :)

~~~
existencebox
thanks for the candid answer; I can certainly see the appeal, and the laundry
bill is _surprisingly good_ + would add a big convenience factor too, that's
one I might have taken up on if I were still in a city.

Food I can definitely see, and if I would splurge this is probably where I'd
do it. Those uber costs though, - not having your own car as well seems like a
much harder trade.

------
noonespecial
Minimalism is not having no knives in your kitchen drawer.

Minimalism is having one very good knife that works extremely well instead of
10 that work so terribly they never get used "just in case".

The poser proudly boasts that they freed their lives from the tyranny of
owning knives, but doesn't mention that they substituted eating out all the
time for cooking.

~~~
anigbrowl
As a former working cook, you need more than one good knife. there are
different knives for different purposes, and when you're cooking a lot then
hygeine requires that yo don't use the same knife for everything unless you
want to massively increase the probability of food poisoning. Use the right
tool for the job. There is no One Tool To Rule Them All.

~~~
nommm-nommm
I just wash my knife?

I have a santoku and a paring knife. I wouldn't know what to do with more
knives. Of course I don't cook gourmet meals either.

------
l33tbro
>The fetishized austerity and performative asceticism of minimalism is a kind
of ongoing cultural sickness.

It's hardly more than a design trend. Similar to naturalism in the 1970's,
when the walls of your home and your television set had a wooden finish.

>We misinterpret material renunciation, austere aesthetics and blank, emptied
spaces as symbols of capitalist absolution, when these trends really just
provide us with further ways to serve our impulse to consume more, not less.

Not really. It's more the fact that a guy called Steve Jobs reanimated a dying
computer business into a global mega-cult, wholeheartedly embracing and
thereby popularizing ideas of people like Dieter Rams.

While some alternatives to minimalism would be nice, I think what the author
is (rightly) dissatisfied with is our economic system and the exchange of
goods, not the actual way in which those goods are selected and consumed.

~~~
LordHumungous
I do often wonder if exposed beams and varnished concrete floors will be as
ridiculous to people in 2030 as shag carpets and faux wood paneling are to us
today.

~~~
hosh
I'd like to see that!

------
abakker
I am not a minimalist. I have _many_ hobbies that require things - cameras,
woodworking, metalworking, automotive work, mountain bikes, drones, art,
guitar. I have the equipment for all these things, and in many cases, much
more specialized equipment for working with or on these things. Need to put a
new crankset on your bike? I have the tools for that. Need to do an oil change
in a land rover? I have those too. Need to laser engrave some wood, or cut it
with a CNC router? yep. Better yet, I do it in San Francisco (I rented a house
with a 2 car garage 4 years ago).

Minimalism is great, but it makes you either completely dependent on others
and services for your everyday needs - cooking, cleaning, repairing, making,
hobbies - or means you can't do or have those things. IN cities like SF and
NY, I have many friends that just rely on apps and services to get stuff done,
and would rather pay the bike shop $100 for a tune up than buy $100 worth of
tools and never need to pay for a tune up again. They are often the same
friends that are very specialized in their fields or in single hobbies and
don't tend to look outside of those things they do well.

I reject that philosophy completely. In general, I find minimalism fights with
experimentation, creativity, and serendipity. The more you try, and the more
you learn, the better off you are, I think.

Take this example: I recently bought a drone. I didn't know anything much
about drones except for a few reviews before buying one. If I had been a
minimalist, I would have considered that a drone would further clutter my
office (very cluttered already), and potentially would be hard to resell given
how fast the technology advances. My risk then is having a drone I don't like
and taking some financial loss on something I didn't enjoy. As someone who is
not a minimalist, my worries were that it would be hard to fly, or that I
would regret not getting a different drone. As it happens, the latter is true,
and I likely will take some financial loss in selling the one I bought, but by
happy accident, I am now writing and researching commercial drone use for work
and using the drone I have to prepare for getting licensed as a commercial
drone pilot. I didn't anticipate there being any connection to my work when I
got into it, but because I did I ended up gaining some benefits I wouldn't
have otherwise had. (it also turns out that I have most of the equipment from
woodworking and metalworking to make my own drones, so I'm looking into that
angle as well now).

~~~
davegauer
I'm far from a hoarder, but I still find myself thinking, "what is all this
crap?" while cleaning the house. Upon closer examination, much of it is art
supplies, tools, and books. These are things which allow me to improve, learn,
create, and invent. They enrich my life. I really wouldn't be the same person
without the ability to explore my world in this way.

------
LordHumungous
One problem I have with this article is that it treats minimalism as something
new. Minimalism has recurred throughout history, from Buddhist philosophy, to
the Roman stoics, to medieval Christian monks, to Japanese culture, to Islamic
art, to modernist art. Taste seems to oscillate between baroque and
minimalist. It's not surprising that minimalism is in vogue during the current
age of internet driven over-stimulation.

~~~
hosh
This is the wrong frame to look at it. If you are conceiving of minimalism as
aesthetic taste, you miss the whole point of the Buddhist and Stoics, or any
of the ascetic practices.

The contents of your living area is a reflection of the contents of your mind.
Memories inside of you are attached to the external objects. A disorganized
room tends to be a reflection of a disorganized mind. I've seen myself and
others leave trash on the floor for months, because it is anchored to some
piece of trash internally that one is reluctant to get rid of.

This stuff has more to do with your experience as a consciousness rather than
social signaling. The article here, and many of the comments here discusses
minimalism as social signaling. Yet the people who originated the ascetic
practices got rid of stuff not as a response to social trends, but as part of
their personal practice to pare away the wrapping in their _consciousness_ and
find their true selves. Going against the social grain is a powerful way to
detach your identification. Yet if you blindly follow minimalism or boroque as
a social trend because other people are, then you're still jumping from one
attachment to the next.

------
jdmoreira
I didn't get into minimalism as a fad or even something I read on the web. I
simply moved to another country and could only bring what would fit in my
suitcase. As a result I got rid of a lot of the stuff I had accumulated during
my life, I got rid of almost everything I owned. As soon as I did it, I was
overwhelmed with a sensation of freedom and peace of mind that I can't compare
to anything else.

Another major simplification I've done was to dress almost the same everyday.
I own multiple items of the same clothes. All my tshirts are the same, all my
socks/underwear are the same. I also buy the same shoes and jeans again and
again. I look better and I feel much better!

I also quit all social media except LinkedIn and HN and stopped reading the
news.

The thing I'll try next is to eat the same meals everyday. Maybe it won't work
but I'll try it.

I would also like to live in a bedroom with not much more than a futon and a
desk. But it's going to be hard because my girlfriend doesn't share my
enthusiasm.

This is anecdotal, take it with skepticism if you want, but I regard this
changes as some of the best decisions I made in my life.

~~~
sndean
> I would also like to live in a bedroom with not much more than a futon and a
> desk. But it's going to be hard because my girlfriend doesn't share my
> enthusiasm

At least in my n=1 experience, it's not that bad. Just have to accept that 99%
of the stuff will be your girlfriend's. One positive is that she'll have
difficult time complaining to you that you need to clean up, since it'll
always be her mess.

~~~
throwanem
> One positive is that she'll have difficult time complaining to you that you
> need to clean up, since it'll always be her mess.

In _my_ n=1 experience, this is an assumption that won't necessarily be borne
out in practice.

------
twblalock
Minimalists who spend significant time thinking about minimalism and
discussing it on online forums are just as obsessed about their possessions as
the people they criticize. The only difference is that minimalists obsess
about having fewer possessions, and the people they criticize obsess about
having more.

People who are truly unburdened by their possessions do not need to spend much
time thinking about them.

------
pavs
I get very easily distracted with things in my life. Both online and offline.
So I tried minimalistic lifestyle a shot, which to me basically means to get
rid of anything that I don't really need but just taking a space in my life
and simply get rid of it. It took a long time over 4 months and I am still
working on chucking things out of my life. I can honestly say that it made
life so much better, I feel less cluttered in my mind. I have better
concentration and I feel more productive instead of doing busy-work throughout
the day.

It might not work for everyone, but it works for me.

~~~
madamelic
I think there is nothing wrong with striving to be minimalistic but I think
getting competitively minimalist or even encouraging others to hit some point
(throw out 1 thing, then 2, then 50... then 60...) is a little silly.

Clearing your mind and physical space is something every one should strive for
in my opinion but there is no use in this ultimate minimalism where you are
living with no furniture.

------
uberstuber
There's aesthetic minimalism and lifestyle minimalism. These two can overlap
but often they clash, and are largely different movements.

I'm trying to figure out why minimalism gets such a negative reaction from
people. Is it because aesthetic minimalism is too popular on instagram/tumblr,
and now it's cool to hate on the popular thing? No one's forcing you to get
rid of your stuff, no one's forcing you to read minimalism blogs.

~~~
twblalock
The negative reaction generally comes from the implied (or sometimes explicit)
argument from minimalists that everyone else is some kind of slave to their
possessions, consumerist sheep, etc.

~~~
hosh
I'm not a minimalist, but I'll be explicit.

Pretty much 99% (I made that number up; pretty much everyone) of the people
are controlled by impulses and confuse them for their real selves. I have seen
people who identify themselves as minimalist do the same -- though they might
be a slave to an idea rather than to a physical object. I've seen myself slip
into that frame from time to time.

Depending on who I talk to about this, I might get a thoughtful response, or
an angry response. But yeah, unless you are going to be impeccably honest
about yourself, you're likely to be a slave to your possession and a
consumerist sheep and don't know it.

Yet at the same time, within each person, buried under all those layers of
consumerist sheep, is an amazing being. It is rare for someone to actualize
that, but it's there. If you pay attention, you can see it. And it has nothing
to do with your tastes, likes, wants, desires, fears, ambitions, goals,
passions, possessions, profession, race, gender, creed, politics, morality, or
personality for that matter. This amazing self has nothing to do with the
conditioned or social self.

And for some reason, people get offended when I dismiss their conditioned
self. For me, it is, "hey, look at this amazing being underneath all of that,"
and the response is, "How dare you! I like my conditioned self just fine,
thank you." "Uh, sure, ok..."

~~~
abakker
Alternatively: my possessions, hobbies, tools are extensions of my real self.
I do not NEED them, but I am more actualized when I have them. Do you identify
yourself as a software engineer? Do you continue to be one when someone takes
your access to all computers away? The computer actualizes part of how you
identify yourself. It is hard to think of yourself as a mechanic when you have
no ability to act on your talents or skills because of a lack of tools.

Consider that maybe instead of 99% of people being consumerist sheep, you do
not possess the knowledge or authority to judge accurately when the actions of
others are impulsive, or in service to a different ideal.

I believe that maybe stripped of all my possessions, socializations, and
thought patterns you might indeed find some foundational, unformed version of
_me_. However, in finding that thing, you would have stripped away many of the
structures and artifices that I have constructed myself out of. You would find
something that was more like an alpha-version, _in potentia_ , stateless. That
may be what you want, but it would be incomplete compared to the version of me
you would meet in real life.

~~~
hosh
By the way, I think you are onto something when you say:

"You would find something that was more like an alpha-version, in potentia,
stateless." and in relation to what you were talking about with actualization.

This is addressed in medieval, classical Tantra, specifically the philosophy
(the View) of transcendental non-dual Shaiva Tantra. Before encountering that,
I was struck with that paradox of seeking that "stateless, in potentia". Yet
the little bit of reading I did (via Christopher Wallis's Tantra Illuminated)
shows that classical Tantra has powerful answers to the concerns you raise.
Despite being hundreds of years old, the classical Tantra View addresses ills
we have yet to resolve from modernity and post-modernity. And it does it in a
way _without_ advocating extreme austerity and asceticism that seems to be the
trend in Western Buddhism these days. It favors beauty, passion, and yeah,
very much so self-actualization, stuff that your typical Vipassana
practitioner will attempt to eject from their life.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how accessible that philosophy is. I have
difficulty talking about insight meditation and mindfulness to people (and
your response is very typical) much less something like Tantra which requires
a sufficiently clear mind, or at least some sort of experiences to really
start grokking it.

~~~
abakker
Interesting. I suppose it is possible that my concerns are somewhat orthogonal
to minimalism <-> stuff axis, which is what you do with it. My things aren't
really anti minimalism, but in service of something more akin to Persig's
_quality_. I do things with my stuff that favors craft, creativity, and a
general building/progress goal. My desire to serve these needs pushes me away
from minimalism, but not in pursuit of things, things are a consequence, not a
goal.

~~~
hosh
I love Pirsig's book, though I read it when I was younger and now I'm
interested in revisiting it with this perspective. In Tantra, you're not just
talking about object-subject duality. One of the concepts is object-process-
subject with a transcendental ground. So "seen", "seeing", and "seer", all of
which arising and dissolving back into that transcendental ground. Pirsig's
"quality" and "arete" which he talks about as being prior to object-subject
maps well to that frame.

I totally get the idea of curating the ideas, beliefs, and things in your
life. I also think that a minimalist practice can reveal some of those things,
but if it is minimalism for it's own sake ...

I also thought of something else -- I read this article:
[http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2016/09/philosophy...](http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2016/09/philosophy-
sartre-blend-uncovering-birth-existentialism)

I only superficially read on existentialism in high school, via one of Albert
Camus's book. I did not like it :-) Part of that was a bias where my mother
accused me of being an existentialist (at least, it felt accusatory at the
time). Reading that review made me realize, there may be something in Western
philosophy that has a similar base with the medieval Tantra I was reading six
months ago.

That idea that existentialism is a search for meaning (I'm not explaining this
from first principles and I'm explaining this badly), and being able to
develop a philosophy from a cup of coffee is appealing. So maybe there are
aspects of Tantra that are not as inaccessible as I thought, and
existentialism has a lot of interesting things to say.

Lastly, another bit of Western philosophy I'd like to deep-dive into is Rene
Girad's mimetic philosophy. From the superficial reading, it seems the central
idea is that our desires are not intrinsic, but instead are mimicked from
other people. That can paradoxically lead to mimetic rivalry (where the
mimicked desire becomes an object to contend over) and from there, mimetic
violence.

So far, in my reading, I don't find it complete in and of itself. From the
Tantric perspective, it explains a lot about the workings of the conditioned
or acquired self. Non-dual Tantra also offers an explanation of will that
arises from the transcendental ground. I'm not sure how this all maps to each
other. I do wonder, though

I think, minimalism, when taken as _mimetic_, leads to the things criticized
in that NY Times article. But so can another other philosophy or view.

~~~
abakker
Thank you for that answer. This is why I like to comment and read here. A lot
to wrap my head around and very thought provoking.

In closing, I'd encourage you to read "why we make things and why it matters"
by peter Korn. Takes from persig, but gets much more into the philosophy of
work.

~~~
hosh
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll check it out.

------
sosuke
How is bird watching like minimalism or paleo? I love bird watching but
completely miss the connection. What is the "material purge" of bird watching?

~~~
mikestew
"And, as with watching birds or going Paleo, talking about the material purge
is just as important as actually doing it."

The implication is that, like your friends who "went Paleo" or your CrossFit
buddy, bird watchers will...not...shut up about it. But I don't think I've
ever known a single person in my relatively long life that would go on and on
about bird watching, so I don't get the comparison, either.

~~~
Aqueous
_But I don 't think I've ever known a single person in my relatively long life
that would go on and on about bird watching_

In contrast, all the people I've known who go on and on about bird-watching
have been single.

~~~
mikestew
I'll risk the down votes to simply say: well played. :-)

------
Luc
'I don't like something other people like. Now I must find every way possible
to rationalize my dislike, and use lots of adjectives doing so!'

~~~
mcguire
That's ok. They don't like what you like, either, and are perfectly happy to
explain why in detail.

------
edblarney
My grandfather was born on a farm, but started a lumber yard and was
eventually very wealthy.

He grew all his own vegetables and probably did not know what 'organic' meant.

He made solar panels to heat the water in his store, but 'green' was just a
colour to him.

He made preserves every year, but wouldn't know what the word 'hipster' meant.

He was pretty 'minimalist' and probably had never even heard the word in his
life.

I think he would have called himself 'frugal' if you really pushed him to,
that said, he was just the same as everyone else around him ...

------
ramblenode
I have gradually evolved into a minimalist after years of frequent moving and
having realized that many of the things I used to own came with a
psychological "weight" that's only fully apparent in the thing's absence.
Aside from the practical aspect of anchoring me to a single physical location,
having unnecessary things around distracts me and tends to elevate my anxiety.

Anyway, this piece strikes me as a critique looking for a cultural phenomenon.
Of course most First World minimalists, including myself, realize there is a
vast infrastructure supporting the few things we have in our possession. To
say otherwise is just a straw man. This isn't the privilege of being a
minimalist; it's the privilege of living in a rich and well-connected society.

Despite the author elaborating the history of minimalist aesthetics in modern
Western culture (which is only superficially related to minimalism as a
lifestyle), it has a far richer history than merely "pop philosophy".
Minimalism is an important component of philosophies as culturally distant as
Cynicism and Buddhism, but none of these even get a nod.

To the author's credit, I'm sure it's much harder to write an article about
real people than Silicon Valley caricatures upending their lives for a fashion
statement or a productivity panacea.

------
module0000
What this fancy article calls "minimalism", I think anyone who has ever been
through basic training is very familiar with. Except it wasn't trendy,
fashionable, and certainly not "elite" \- it was how you kept your personal
area and your belongings unless you wanted a good smoking from your platoon
sergeant. Additionally, the more uses you could find for a single item, meant
less items for you to hump in your pack on a N-mile road march.

------
freshhawk
This is the standard status quo objection to anything counter cultural these
days.

You can always find a group of people on the internet into the idea in
question and stuck in a filter bubble and completely out of touch. For any
trend you want to discuss.

Yes, our culture is able to apply more social pressure on the poor and
disadvantaged to buy status symbols. Encouraging them to ignore the system
built to keep them poor by selling them overpriced garbage with lifestyle
marketing is the act of an ally. Of course having purchasing habits considered
weird in a culture of conspicuous consumption is easier for the privileged.
That's what being privileged means, doing anything different is easier.

And I'll argue that the minimalism hipsters are a good thing. They are carving
out a space where saving money and not engaging in conspicuous consumption
carries social status. It would be great news for the disadvantaged and poor
if that caught on more.

You could apply this argument to getting exercise, eating a healthy diet,
having social activities other than watching garbage TV. All done by
privileged people, many of whom turn it into performative virtue signaling to
get attention and annoy everyone.

~~~
mcguire
But there's many varieties of conspicuous consumption. At least one of these
looks very minimal: by not owning things that you need, you signal that you
can afford to rent them, or hire someone to do the task, or buy them for one
use and then dispose of them.

I rather suspect that if you suggested that any of the minimalists described
in the article, or those that occasionally pop up elsewhere having discarded
their earthly possessions, were trying to save money, then they would be
somewhat offended.

Or, on the other hand, perhaps they're like Paul Erdős and and somehow
psychologically impaired.

------
jondiggsit
Remove the "ism" here. It's not a damn philosophy or religious movement.

What people basically want is simplification in an ever increasing world of
sensory overload. That's it folks.

~~~
ctdonath
Speak for yourself. Such simplification has long been a critical step in
achieving philosophical or religious ideals.

------
louprado
The problem with minimalism is that you can slowly become extreme without
realizing. This is partly because society won't stop you from going too far.
Saving money, self-sacrifice, and reducing your carbon footprint are societal
virtues.

However, like most extremes it comes with a price. Primarily isolation and
anxiety in this case. Gone are the days where buddies come over to work on
motorcycles and cars in your garage. You can also forget about hosting a fun
party in your boring minimalist studio. You probably won't have guests at all.
And while most people don't think about the impact taking a long flight, as a
minimalist that flight may double your carbon footprint leading to anxiety.

If you take this path it's up to you to ensure you stay balanced and not pass
a tipping point.

------
chdupont
The article says minimalism is in reality about consuming more, but I don't
see it explaining why. Did I miss something?

Also, minimalist lifestyle and minimalist aesthetics are certainly different
things.

I have been into minimalism (the lifestyle) for about a year or so, reading a
lot about it, so here is my summary of it: it is an optimization tool among
others, kind of like code refactoring.

In my case it helped me focus on what's important (family, passions), have
more energy and more time. And believe me, when you have a young child, you
need as much time and energy as possible.

Less stuff is less useless stuff, all fun, meaningful or useful stuff is still
there, I just spend less time and energy making decisions about what to wear,
cleaning and tidying stuff, etc.

Less distractions is less meaningless distractions, by all means I have more
fun spending time with my family than playing video games.

Knowing from experience that my family and me don't need much to be happy is
extremely important and gives me confidence to face the future. Our financial
situation is not so good, but I know that we can still do great whatever
happens.

On the same topic, if you know you can do well with not so much, you are less
afraid to take risks, for example starting a business.

------
hosh
I once talked to a guy who thought of himself as Zen / minimalist -- and
thought I was too.

Minimalism isn't a thing for me. It's not a sense of aesthetics, though I do
like the ascetic and pared-down aesthetic ... but also the decadent and
baroque of Victorian and steampunk.

What I do and what I am got confused with minimalism because I actually
practice meditation, and I actually know what kind of effect things, objects,
emotions, thoughts, and narratives have on the psyche. Minimalism, when it
becomes a a thing one identifies with, as a form of social signaling, and as a
form of narrative about yourself tells me that that person is no longer
practicing impeccably.

"Do you own the object or does the object own you?" still applies even if you
become obsessed with minimalism. You might have purged a number of consumer
goods out of your life, and yet the very _idea_ of minimalism continues to
possess and obsess you.

It has never been about getting every little thing out of your life. It's
sufficient for it to reveal enough of your truer self. It's about shedding
your social identities, not heaping ostentation upon more ostentation.

------
munchbunny
I think there's a bit of a problem on both sides of this discussion in a way
that is missing the forest for the trees. Then again, I'm only talking about
the "finding happiness" angle of the discussion and not so much the question
of aesthetics or design.

If your goal is to improve your quality of life, then there are two guidelines
that I think are generally applicable. There are other ideas like "earn more
money," but that's an external process and I wanted to focus on the internal
processes:

1\. Practice mindfulness, especially appreciation for both the big things and
small things.

2\. Learn not to depend on unimportant things for happiness (aka fear of
missing out). These things are often possessions, activities, or even
relationships.

Generally as you do both of those things more, you feel less of a desire for
non-essential physical possessions. It shouldn't be about trying to see how
minimal you can go. It should be about finding happiness internally, and as a
consequence not depending on a cultural performance (gadgets and fashion are
common examples) for validation or identity.

In that sense I think the decluttering movement (I'm aware the article isn't
just about decluttering) has things kind of backwards. Removing distractions
is good, but if you don't learn the underlying lesson about mindfulness, then
you'll just end up emotionally dependent on something else, like seeing just
how much you can throw away.

The broader point is that minimalism (in the lifestyle sense, not the product
design sense) isn't an end. It should be a result of learning to appreciate
what is essential, not a result of removing everything until you think you've
found what is essential. Some people might learn the first from doing the
second, but not everyone does. I've seen friends get lost in the act of trying
to simplify their lives, only to not end up any happier because they forgot to
learn to appreciate what was left.

------
WalterBright
I'm a hoarder by nature, I have a hard time getting rid of old magazines and
broken VCRs. But I'm not a minimalist, either, I need tools (for example) to
work on my car and other projects that I enjoy.

Look for me on a future episode of "Hoarding: Buried Alive".

~~~
mcguire
Hi! My name is mcguire and my decorating tastes go toward a bewildering array
of things poorly organized. I'm practically a Victorian. Except for taxidermy.
I don't decorate with dead animals.

------
mschillemore
I think some of you have missed the point on minimalism....

Buy, own, keep things that you love and need.

If you enjoy having a cozy rug in your bedroom under your desk while you work
because it brings you joy and happiness then you should own one!

If you have guests over often and having them sit on your bed bothers you,
makes you embarrassed; buy a small functional couch.

Don't buy excess amounts of things; buy what you need and love.

If you do art often, it's a passion, etc then it's OK to own a closet or
cupboard with supplies.

Take care of what you own, invest in quality items that will last, and make
sure it's something you love, use and need.

------
abritinthebay
This is an impressive rant but it is pretty rambling and incoherent for the
most part.

Minimalism advocates can be dogmatic and that tends to be bad, but taking cues
from minimalism isn't a bad thing _when it makes something better_.

Will it be better for all time? Probably not, but that's ok.

------
whack
Wow. I was expecting to see some logical arguments made against minimalist
lifestyles, and what I got instead is a bunch of strawmans and ad hominem. It
requires "privilege" to be a minimalist? Seriously? "Internet access" is now
worthy of privilege shaming?

Is it possible to overdo minimalism? Sure. It's also possible to overdo
exercise. It's also possible to overdo generosity and community service. But
materialism is a far worse problem than minimalism.

If you have an argument to make against minimalism, as practiced by mainstream
minimalists, then make it. But attacking it just because it's not a cure-all
and because you don't like its advocates, just makes you sound like a petulant
child.

------
digi_owl
Hmm, minimalism as signaling. Makes me think of how it always seemed that
those most in favor of the EU was those that could up and relocate their work
to anywhere with a net connection and a credit card terminal.

------
usmeteora
As another comment, I think the author of this article is confusing the
decorative products the resulting fashion trend that minimalism has created
with the actual lifestyle and the improvements it provides for people where
time, efficiency and reduced mental clutter and life clutter is of the
essence.

Not everyone buying minimalist wallart from urbanoutfitters and posting it on
instagram is necessarily representative of people who have organized their
thoughts time, schedule, social life, work life and have a resulting apartment
decor that represents that.

------
akeck
In my personal exploration of minimalism, I find being too minimal cuts into
resilience (see "Team of Teams"). I've since changed to pursuing "minimal but
resilient," which accepts that things wear out or get lost, so you need more
than one of some things, and that sometimes not having something used once or
twice per year creates a crisis. Finally, in line with the commenter who said
deep minimalism depressed them, I also hold onto things that make me happy,
even if I don't use them much.

------
usmeteora
hmm

1\. Addressing the claim that minimalism is for the elite, I think its a
result for people who have the luxury of time and money to take a thorough
look at their life needs, have the time and structure in their life to have
long term goals and then organize their life to fit those goals and optimize
their things around their life which is centered around a busy work schedule.

Absolutely, if you are a poor refugee you are making ends meet from day to
day. you are not organizing kitchen ware, you are at Salvation Army buying
clothing for your children and just as you have a spare $60 in your paycheck
your sons discount coat's zipper is broken in the middle of winter so you need
to buy a new one, but you only have $60, ha probably a fraction of that to
figure out a solution. You are not on Amazon finding a long term investment
triple wool down Northface jacket that is light yet warm and will last your
son until college.

It is true that it takes time, organization and a higher initial capital to
invest in long term sustainable products that are planned in advance to meet a
lifestyle you have planned, but that does not mean its arrogant.

There will be people who aspire, just like they aspire to every "trend" to
emulate this hoping to fit in with an image as a result, but it's not fair
rational or logical to assign the whole group of people to that when the
pioneers of this in technology ended up living this life as a RESULT of trying
to optimize their life, not deciding in advance this is what they wanted. It
ended up that optimizing your life helps you work more, live more organized
and have less hiccups in life when time and efficiency is of the essence.

2\. It's also not fair to assume the same people who had wealth 50 years ago
living in mansions and lavish wealth are the same genre of people who have
"dissavowed the advantages that helped them obtain wealth". The people using
this lifestyle mostly in technology are new people creating new wealth and
were never associated nor did they grow up with the lavish lifestyle they are
supposedly disavowing. Steve jobs started his company in a garage and
basically always lived out of his backpack, and the saying goes he didnt even
leave the office long enough to unpack into his new place for months after
going back to Apple. Is that arrogance of just living efficiently and not
putting trinkets and pictures on your wall to stare at while youre on the
couch because youre never on the couch?

3\. Personally, I've gone minimalist as a result of being a tech graduate with
student loans so constrained money, and also not knowing if I'm going to be
living on the east coast or west coast in two years. I have a very minimalist
apartment and everything I buy I base the quality of whether it's something
I'm willing to ship across the country in the next few years or something I am
fine to give away when it's time to move 3,000 miles, and in general most of
the time I decide not to buy it at all.

I am not doing this so I can take minimalist photos on instagram of my blank
living room apartment, I'm doing it because for my lfie style, clutter is a
result of downtime not scraping by on day to day needs like refugees which I
totally sympathize with but my minimalism is not arrogant or looking down on
them, it's how I choose to live life for me, not to put my nose up to poor
people, and not to tag it on instagram.

This article is not even journalism, it's opinion with barely any facts
excepts the numerical results for clicking the "minimalism" hashtag on
instagram.

This is also entirely leaving out that given the housing crisis and the
economy, people in their 20s like me, my generation has way less trust in
stocks, the economy and the promise of the American Dream aka owning a house
with a wife a 2 kids (given college is outrageously expensive and the divorce
rate and broken families of this country is outrageous as well and the
finances associated with it that atleast half of us in this country grew up
wtinessing first hand), and companies do massive layoffs and on average people
in my generation switch jobs every 7 years as opposed to more than double that
20 years ago. We are economically incentivized to be mobile and adept learners
so electronics aid us in that, not houses and long term relationships that
lock us into a lifetime of financial debt if they don't work out. I think this
is the most valid reason why it catches on regardless of the elite few who
initiated the lifestyle out of in my opinion efficiency not arrogance, yet the
composer of this article is like "maybe its this" in one sentence (referring
to the summarized version of everything I've said in Part 3) or maybe its
arrogance and pomposity and spends the majority of the article on that, and
then refers to the "elite few" to blame for this instead of the usual mass of
people who are always going to jump on anything trendy.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
> Addressing the claim that minimalism is for the elite, I think its a result
> for people who have the luxury of time and money to take a thorough look at
> their life needs, have the time and structure in their life to have long
> term goals and then organize their life to fit those goals and optimize
> their things around their life which is centered around a busy work
> schedule.

There is a component of elitism here. If you're poor, you hang on to stuff,
because it may come in handy. If you have enough money and some left over, you
can get rid of stuff, because if it turns out you really needed one of the
things you got rid of, you can buy a new one. But if you can't afford the new
one, you keep stuff "just in case".

But, even if minimalism may require a certain level of financial not-on-the-
edge, for many of us, it's not a pose. For myself, I just hate clutter. As
Paul Graham said, a cluttered scene takes more mental energy to parse. If
there's enough clutter that you have to move around stuff, it takes more
physical energy just to walk across the room. I don't have time in my life for
that kind of waste.

~~~
madamelic
>If you're poor, you hang on to stuff, because it may come in handy. If you
have enough money and some left over, you can get rid of stuff, because if it
turns out you really needed one of the things you got rid of, you can buy a
new one. But if you can't afford the new one, you keep stuff "just in case".

Yep!

This is my exact argument for why minimalism works well for more well-off
people.

If you can afford to buy a $3 screwdriver again, why keep it around if you
only use it once a year. It is just clutter.

There is another argument of using Craigslist as storage (sell what you don't
need, buy it back when you need it). It also relies on having free money to be
able to do such a thing though.

~~~
jff
Or, or, OR, I can just keep a toolbox in the garage instead of spending an
hour+ searching craigslist and meeting some dude in a 7/11 parking lot every
time I need to tighten a fucking screw!

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Sure. But I know people [EDIT: OK, one person] who routinely pick up random
pieces of metal that the find lying on the side of the road. At least once,
they happened to have the perfect piece of metal to weld across the bottom of
a bucket when the original bottom finally gave out.

My solution: I just buy a new bucket at that point, throw the old one away,
and don't have to put up with a place that has to store all those random
pieces of metal. On the other hand, yes, I keep a toolbox, with several
screwdrivers.

------
c3534l
I don't think lifestyle minimalism is new. Read Walden where Henry David
Thoreau tries to live a life as simple as possible. A far better critique and
analysis than this essay.

~~~
ctdonath
Modern equivalent to recommend: The Man Who Quit Money.

While few of us will ever go quite that far, it is an intriguing study of how
far one _can_ go in minimizing, and the costs & benefits of doing so.

------
lacampbell
I feel compelled to point out the irony of the New York Times calling
something an "Oppressive Gospel".

------
jasoncchild
Minimalism via choice vs via circumstance :)

------
galfarragem
'The dose makes the poison.'

I would point for a middle ground between minimalism and suburban hoarding:
essencialism.

