Philosophy often serves as a guide for those seeking to live a more meaningful life. However, an important concept within Walter Benjamin’s philosophy—commodity fetishism—is frequently misunderstood, despite its significance. Understanding this idea can profoundly impact how we apply philosophical principles to enrich our lives. This article will examine Walter Benjamin’s philosophy, explore the concept of commodity fetishism, and discuss its relevance in our quest for a more meaningful existence.
Key features of Walter Benjamin’s philosophy
Walter Benjamin was a German philosopher and cultural critic whose work focused on the interplay between art, culture, and society. One of his key ideas was the concept of “aura,” which he used to describe the unique presence and authenticity of a traditional work of art. He argued that the development of modern technologies, such as photography and film, diminished this aura because they allowed for mass reproduction, stripping art of its sacred and singular nature.
Benjamin also explored themes of history and progress. He believed the traditional view of history as a linear progression of events ignored the experiences of marginalized groups. Instead, he saw history as fragmented and suggested that we must critically reflect on the past to free ourselves from its injustices. His famous metaphor of the “Angel of History” illustrates this view, depicting the angel being pushed forward by the winds of progress while facing the wreckage of the past.
Additionally, Benjamin emphasized the importance of technology and media in shaping human perception. He saw media as both a tool for societal enlightenment and a potential source of manipulation. Overall, his philosophy invites us to critically examine the forces that influence art, history, and culture, encouraging a deeper understanding of their impact on modern life.
What is commodity fetishism?
Walter Benjamin viewed commodity fetishism as a way society becomes enchanted by objects that are produced for exchange, rather than appreciating their true use or the labor that created them. He was particularly concerned with how this phenomenon shaped the way people saw and interacted with the world. According to Benjamin, the system of capitalism creates a kind of illusion around commodities, where their value seems to exist independently of the people and social processes behind them. This illusion masks the reality of human labor and economic relations, making products appear as if they have an intrinsic, almost magical quality.
For Benjamin, this disconnect was problematic because it concealed the true nature of the social and economic systems that governed people’s lives. He argued that this process created a distance between individuals and the material realities of production. By focusing on the commodity as a self-contained object of desire, he believed society was ignoring the human stories and social inequalities involved in its creation. Through this lens, commodity fetishism not only misrepresented the value of objects but also contributed to a distorted view of reality, one shaped by the forces of profit and consumerism. Benjamin sought to uncover how this affected culture, art, and people’s understanding of their surroundings.
This example helps to demonstrate the essence of this philosophical perspective. A clear instance of Walter Benjamin’s view about commodity fetishism can be seen through the lens of modern advertising. Imagine walking past a billboard promoting a luxury watch. The watch itself is simply a tool to tell time, yet the advertisement highlights it as a symbol of success, status, and sophistication. The emphasis shifts from the practical function of the watch to an emotional and aspirational connection. People start valuing the watch not for its utility but for what it represents in society. It becomes something desirable because of the ideas and prestige linked to it, rather than its use as an object. This transformation turns the product into a fetishized commodity, where its material purpose is overshadowed by intangible meanings crafted by culture and marketing strategies.
Challenges to Walter Benjamin’s view about commodity fetishism
One reason some philosophers object to Walter Benjamin’s views on commodity fetishism is that his approach often incorporates a mix of Marxist and aesthetic theories, which some critics see as overly complex or inconsistent. These philosophers argue that Benjamin’s use of poetic and metaphorical language can lead to ambiguities, making his arguments difficult to apply in a clear, practical way. Unlike more straightforward economic analyses, his ideas blend cultural criticism with social philosophy, which some thinkers feel dilutes the clarity needed for dissecting materialist theories.
Another critique comes from those who favor a purer interpretation of Marxist theory. For these philosophers, Benjamin’s focus on art, culture, and subjective experience can seem like a departure from the core principles of Marx’s original critique of capitalism. They contend that this shift risks placing too much importance on individual or cultural responses to commodities rather than addressing the systemic and structural dimensions of capitalist economies. This perceived shift in focus opens his work to criticism for being overly idealistic or symbolic, potentially disregarding the material realities of the labour and production processes that Marx prioritized.
Additionally, some philosophers object to Benjamin’s emphasis on the psychological or emotional appeal of commodities, feeling this reduces the focus on the underlying economic exploitation that drives fetishism. They argue that commodity fetishism, at its core, is about disguising the labor relations embedded in products, not just about the emotional or aesthetic allure commodities might possess. By including these cultural aspects, Benjamin’s interpretation is sometimes seen as broadening the concept to the point where it loses analytical rigor.
Finally, there are those who question whether Benjamin’s approach adequately captures the dynamics of modern capitalism. By tying his critique closely to cultural and historical phenomena, such as art or 19th-century consumer society, some feel it neglects the evolving nature of global markets, digital economies, or contemporary labor conditions. These philosophers believe a theory about commodity fetishism should address capitalism’s present and future forms rather than being deeply rooted in historical or artistic analysis.
Why commodity fetishism is important to Walter Benjamin’s philosophy
These are some of the main reasons why grasping the concept of commodity fetishism is crucial to comprehending Walter Benjamin’s philosophy.
- Commodity fetishism helps explain the relationship between people and objects in society.
This concept highlights how economic systems can cause people to prioritize material goods over social connections or human values. By focusing on commodities themselves, rather than the work or relationships involved in making them, commodity fetishism shows how objects seem to take on a life of their own. This is crucial for understanding broader cultural and social dynamics, as it explains why people’s interactions with objects often overshadow their perception of the labour and human effort behind them. It serves as a lens to explore how societies start valuing things for what they appear to be, not what they represent or how they’re made.
- It connects to the idea of alienation in modern life.
Commodity fetishism is deeply tied to the way people become disconnected or “alienated” in capitalist systems. Workers often don’t see or engage with the final product of their labour, nor do consumers think about the workers who created the objects they use every day. This disconnection amplifies a sense of isolation, as human relationships are essentially replaced by relationships with commodities. By examining this phenomenon, it becomes easier to understand how modern economies can erode communal ties and individual well-being, making this idea a key element in assessing philosophical and cultural developments.
- It reveals patterns of symbolic meaning attached to objects.
One of the important aspects of commodity fetishism is how individual objects gain symbolic value that often exceeds their practical use. For example, a luxury brand purse may be valued not for its durability or functionality but for the social status it provides to the person who owns it. This phenomenon helps explore how societies assign meaning and create hierarchies through material possessions, which in turn reflect deeper cultural values and ideologies. Recognizing these patterns can provide insight into habits, desires, and collective identities.
Contrasting Walter Benjamin’s philosophy with Smith’s philosophy
Walter Benjamin’s view of commodity fetishism diverges significantly from Adam Smith’s philosophy, particularly in how they understand value and human relationships to goods. While Smith, as a classical economist, is primarily focused on the mechanics of supply, demand, and labour as foundations for the value of a commodity, his view tends to emphasize the material and functional aspects of economic systems. Smith’s framework considers commodities as objects of utility whose value is determined by the labour required to produce them and their function in satisfying human needs.
Walter Benjamin takes a different perspective by integrating cultural and social analysis into his critique of commodity fetishism, a concept he explores through Marxist influences. To Benjamin, commodity fetishism is not just an economic concept but a cultural and ideological phenomenon. He is particularly concerned with how commodities in a capitalist society become imbued with an almost magical aura, detaching them from the labour and human relationships that produce them. This creates a system where objects are not valued for their use or the effort behind them, but for their symbolic power and allure, which tends to obscure the realities of production and exploitation.
The key difference lies in their scope and focus. Where Smith is largely concerned with tangible economic principles and systems of production, Benjamin critiques the deeper cultural and ideological implications of capitalism. His perspective shifts the conversation to how commodities influence individual perception and social structures, making his analysis more critical of modern consumer culture as a whole.
Commodity Fetishism, Walter Benjamin’s philosophy and the philosophy of life
Reflecting on Walter Benjamin’s view about commodity fetishism, regardless of whether you agree with it or not, holds practical importance when developing your own philosophy of life because it encourages a deeper understanding of how material objects influence our values and decisions. By engaging with his ideas, you are prompted to consider your relationship with consumer culture and the ways in which it shapes your priorities and worldview. This kind of reflection is essential because it pushes you to question whether your desires and goals are truly your own or if they’ve been subtly dictated by societal norms and commercial influences.
Benjamin’s philosophy invites you to step back and explore not just the immediate appeal of material things but the broader implications they have on your life. This self-examination can reveal whether the pursuit of commodities aligns with your core values or distracts you from more meaningful pursuits, such as relationships, personal growth, or creative expression. Philosophical exploration often begins by questioning assumptions, and reflecting on these views opens a door for asking critical questions about modern life—and your role within it.
Additionally, thinking about these ideas promotes mindfulness and intentionality in your choices. It brings awareness to the kind of life you are constructing through your habits and decisions. Are you defining your sense of purpose and identity primarily through what you consume, or are you grounding it in deeper convictions and aspirations? Asking yourself questions like these can guide you toward a philosophy of life that is more rooted in authenticity and self-awareness rather than external pressures.
Lastly, whether or not you find Benjamin’s perspective compelling, reflecting on it fosters critical thinking—a skill that is invaluable as you craft your personal philosophy. Engaging with ideas that challenge your current beliefs or make you slightly uncomfortable can be a catalyst for growth. It inspires adaptability, curiosity, and a better understanding of your values. Therefore, considering Walter Benjamin’s views is more than an intellectual exercise; it is a practical tool for living a life that feels intentional, fulfilling, and true to who you are.
Further reading
Benjamin, W. (1999). The arcades project (H. Eiland & K. McLaughlin, Trans.). Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1982)
Benjamin, W. (2006). Selected writings, volume 4: 1938-1940 (H. Eiland & E. Jephcott, Eds.). Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Buck-Morss, S. (1991). The dialectics of seeing: Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project. MIT Press.
Gilloch, G. (1996). Myth and metropolis: Walter Benjamin and the city. Polity Press.
Hanssen, B. (2006). Walter Benjamin and the arcades project. Continuum.
Lowy, M. (2005). Fire alarm: Reading Walter Benjamin’s On the concept of history (C. Turner, Trans.). Verso.
Marx, K. (1990). Capital, Volume 1 (B. Fowkes, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1867)
Tiedemann, R. (2008). Dialectics at a standstill: Synthesis, reification, and fetishism in Walter Benjamin’s Arcades Project. Bloomsbury Academic.
Wolin, R. (1994). Walter Benjamin, an aesthetic of redemption. University of California Press.