- Use Value and Aesthetics
That style obsolescence should have been seen as so problematic is, as noted at the outset of the chapter, on reflection, somewhat perplexing. For why should aesthetics be excluded from considerations of usefulness? If, for example, a consumer chooses to upgrade her car after three years (as was typical for automobiles), then it would be reasonable to assume that the aesthetic benefits of owning the new model justifies its price. That is certainly how an economist would typically explain the consumer’s behavior. And indeed, as we have seen, industry spokespersons often took that interpretation as self-evident and were incredulous that anyone could find objectionable yearly model changes for which there seemed to be genuine demand. And yet the attacks on planned “style” or “psychological” obsolescence presupposed a categorical distinction between the aesthetic and functional properties of products, with “real value” accruing to consumers only from the latter. The normative force of that distinction is reflected in the strategy followed by industry to justify frequent model changes by claiming that they entailed substantive (that is, functional) improvements, as opposed to “superficial,” merely aesthetic changes.
Moral Panic about Utility
261