Fetishizing Excess
There is an eerie quality about the fascination that we share with large quantities. There is an infatuation and excitement that fills us when we view someone eating heaps of food with sauces rolling on top of each other into a state of unfettered oblivion. Or the doe-eyed addictive clicks as we watch someone unpack hundreds of dollars worth of clothing. Or jealously drool over the lavish marble stoned counters of our favorite celebrities or flourishing makeup collections of our go-to influencers. As the media has developed and expanded to various platforms, so has it’s ability to foster deeper connections with its users, especially related to excess. To have more, bigger, better, and larger. It is evident that this is a form of consumerism (consumer behavior characterized by the relentless need to have more material goods) by the people creating the media. But what is not as distinct is what this behavior meant to the consumers of this media (the people behind the screens). The satisfaction we derive from consuming these media sources is undeniable and it’s roots seem to be entrenched in our devotion to capitalist ideals of consumption and the values we unconsciously associate with consumption.
To elucidate this, one can draw upon the popular trend on social media platforms (primarily YouTube) known as Mukbangs in which people eat large amounts of food with various different specialized features such as ASMR, spicy, different food brands, etc. Popular YouTuber Trisha Paytas has received 7.8 million views on her Pizza Hut Mukbang and 9.9 million views on her Taco Bell Mukbang. Zach Choi ASMR has 14 million subscribers and thousands of views on his videos where he eats extremely large quantities of a range of different foods. By far the most stark example is Nikocado Avocado, the YouTuber who began Mukbangs in 2016 and has since then put on 200 pounds while his viewers, popularity and therefore revenue continued to grow. There is no doubt thus that there is a demand for these types of videos and, there is an industry with income for creators to be able to profit off dangerously excessive eating habits.
It is absurd to reflect and consider that many of us watch and enjoy these videos. They are a source of entertainment and even comfort. Mukbangs originated in South Korea in 2010 inspired by South Korean cooking shows which often had more emphasis on eating rather than cooking. They became a media trend to help people feel connected through a screen. Today they are a global sensation with people gravitating towards them. This behavior can be understood as a form of voyeurism that has become part and parcel of social media. The gratifying satiation that people experience upon opening up a Mukbang video reminds them of the very act of consuming a large meal themselves and living vicariously through the creator. This offers the viewer an experience in exchange for the revenue the creator makes of ads and any future income from loyal viewers buying merchandise. This is what characterizes the very ‘fetish’ that we seem to have as media viewers for the excessive. In our modern society we have a sort of gigantomania, less associated with architecture like those in totalitarian societies and more with material goods and services. There is an attraction to large things: piles of food, clothing, makeup products and cars.
This is visible in various other instances of our media consumption. Looking slightly earlier, the dominance of the Beauty Guru era in 2010s YouTube brought upon rampant consumerism among teenagers as one article outlines. Critiquing the common ‘Monthly Favorite’ videos of many creators such as Anna Edit and Zoella, this article explains how it can become common for young viewers to often feel pressurized to have the same large and constantly changing amount of makeup products. Jordan Theresa, a commentator on YouTube discussed these trends further and acknowledges the role of beauty standards as well. However as Theresa points out in the theory she proposes, the 2010s saw a growth in makeup tutorials on YouTube alongside more affordable full coverage makeup (for example with Morphe products). This allowed for a ‘democratization of desire’ as Leach described in his 1933 book ‘Land of Desire’ within which the envy of consumerism became widely accessible. Similar to Late 19th century Britain with the accessibility of different food items to people in the urban middle class, there was an increase in spending. Those unable to afford this food still shared the values as those who did buy these products because the display of these products in shops fostered ‘envy’ and created a ferocious need for more. These YouTube videos create a similar concept for viewers. They pushed the idea of an ‘excess’ which seemed so overwhelmingly exciting to so many viewers and indirectly reinforced ideals of consumerism.
Theresa goes on to describe this makeup consumerism as related to the aftermath of 9/11 where heavy spending was considered patriotic and helping the economy. While the strength of this relationship is not as clear, it is clear as Theresa indicates that the tragedy of 9/11 set the foundations of a consumption driven economy with her examples of George Bush urging families to take holidays with children. Additionally, Theresa’s example illustrates another key tenet of this media fetish: that goods exist as more than their value as a good but also as a social symbol. A red lipstick in 1770s England served as more than a tint but as a declaration of sexual immorality, witchcraft and indecency and was banned for ‘seducing men’. Utilizing that example, the consumption of heavy excessive makeup also clearly serves as a symbol of social acceptance for many teenagers and young adults in order to be able to mimic the popular trends at the time. What is necessary to recognize is that this is evidently linked to the values of capitalism and the behavior it tries to promote.
Marx proposed the idea of commodity fetishism in which upon the mass production of a good it progresses from being tied to it’s material use to also being tied to people ‘fetishizing it’. In this example the advertising of higher quality chocolate such as Godiva places the ideals of upper-class luxurious frivolities and high quality lifestyles on a pedestal creating ‘false consciousness’ and facilitating class divides while also promoting the consumption of a more premium priced chocolate. Likewise, the creation of extravagant makeup collections or binging of tons of fried foods facilitated capitalism by continuing to disillusion people with the idea that ‘more’ is intrinsically better. This form of voyeurism can be noted in other forms of media too such as modern music with the lyrics describing money, designer clothing and jewelry as well as reality TV shows which highlight the luxurious, private-jet lifestyles of affluent celebrities and their extraordinarily large wardrobes, homes and purchases.
The International Journal of Business Management asserts that ‘media in all its form, print or electronic, is a mirror of the times and society we live in.’
Henceforth, the media we consume can depict the priorities of the world we live in today: to spend. This priority is so heavily enshrined in the functioning of our world that we gain gratification from not only having excess, but viewing excess. We begin to support obnoxiously overindulgent media because the idea of an ‘excess’ is attractive to us.
There is the counter-argument that there seems to be no link between consumerism and capitalism. Some may cite the role of trends such as the full coverage makeup of the 2010s with the popularity of ABH Cosmetics and the natural aesthetic of lighter coverage, skin-friendly makeup in 2022 with Glossier products which instead create consumerism rather than capitalism. Yet even these trends seem to return to support capitalism by creating psychological obsolescence for these products in the mind of the consumer as per Vance Packard’s work titled ‘Waste Makers’. This encourages the consumer to purchase more and support the materialist mentality that is the backbone of capitalism. Others argue that free market forces such as the price mechanism and the importance of capital accumulation actually prevent consumerism and it is government intervention that instead pushes consumerism. One economist argues that by buying the cheaper option, consumers always purchase and consume ‘less resources’ and tax by governments lowering prices ruins this (with an example of a winter coat). However this fails to account for the increase of homogenous but ‘varied products’ in the capitalist market place that support the capitalist concept of consumer choice and thus spending. Plus, government intervention of tax merely lowers the prices of essential goods rather than goods that are non-essential such as winter coats. Capitalism pushes the concept that happiness lies in surplus- whether that be of income, goods or winter coats. It is this that pushes consumerism.
Continuing with pushing ideas, in the 1950s, advertisers would attempt to transform previously inaccessible products due to their luxury into must-have essentials by selling ‘status’ in the ‘form of endless material objects’. In a way these media trends attempt to sell us an ‘idea’. 200 USD Shein Hauls, Reality TV Shows and Makeup favorites sell us the idea that being ‘trendy’ and in line with the demands of dynamically evolving expectations arises from spending more. While the Mukbangs operate less with trends, they still allure us with the supposed satisfaction of purchasing more. It may not be intentional of these creators to project these attitudes, since they themselves are subject to the same societal consensus as we are. Yet, consequently we transform into enthusiasts of excess that take pleasure in watching consumption and eventually engaging in it. Psychologists have argued in discussing capitalism and identity that our identity cultivates as a result of cultural, historical and political forces. Throughout our constant consumption of media which incorporate all of these influences, our identities begin to establish a hunger for excess and the relentless cravings that follow.
This is common to everyone and is never-ending. Our need to consume in society is very difficult to eradicate, as are the influences pushing us to do so. In an article on the role of the media in cultural transformation in Africa, Eric Masinde Aseka prefaces how the media sells a ‘postmodern personality’ through advertising certain products.
“As America settles into its nightly routine of television viewing, Africa follows suit in sheer mimicry, and corporate profiteers are quick to substitute the lure of material luxury and consumer gratification for the fading community spirit that is cultural. As the media continue to advertise products in the market in the name of selling an image of the postmodern personality — an empty shell because it has lost its moral essence — Africa will continue to be hollow and vulnerable to imperial manipulation.”
It is no doubt that these videos indirectly remind us of the aspects of life that are deemed ideal and desirable in the dominant culture, allowing us to characterize our desires from this for those very same lifestyles of excess. It is however up to us whether we choose to succumb to this fetish or build our own personality to the best of our ability, free from the influences enforced on us.
