Why Are Upper-Class People Less Likely to Be Philistine?
It is often said that upper-class people are more likely to be philistines, uncultured and uninterested in the arts. However, recent evidence from prominent personalities and cultural institutions such as the Guggenheim, Getty Museums, and Carnegie Hall suggests a different perspective. The affluent of today have grown up in an era where addressing pressing global issues like AIDS through medical advancements takes precedence over traditional arts funding. While it may be easy to see the new wealthy investing their fortunes into cures and charities, it is important to consider what makes someone a philistine.
What Does it Mean to Be Philistine?
A philistine, by definition, is a person who is materially driven and dismissive of intellectual and artistic values. This interpretation is the polar opposite of what wealth and education promote. To be upper-class often means having to decide where and how to allocate funds. My own mother's journey into the world of art collecting, for instance, involved significant learning and investment in appreciating valuable assets. Art, furniture, and real estate required her to understand their provenance, value, and the artistry behind them. This process often involved advice from professionals, but also a personal investment in discerning quality and authenticity.
Education and Culture
Furthermore, the vast majority of the upper class, over 90%, are well-educated, whether formally or informally. This educational background often exposes them to a rich tapestry of literature, art, and intellectual figures. Cultural exposure is a cornerstone of the upper-class lifestyle, and this is reflected in their choice of clothing, art collections, and other forms of leisure and investment. For example, my mother, who started collecting art, also invested in Italian furniture. This process not only enhanced her appreciation of historical and artistic value but also taught her about the real estate market from an aesthetic perspective.
Contrasts in Media and Reality
Popular media often portrays the rich as superficial and philistine, focusing on their material wealth and lack of intellectual concerns. However, this portrayal is designed to resonate with a broader audience, particularly the middle and lower classes. Television and other media are crafted to appeal to a larger consumer base and thus paint a particular image of the wealthy. It is a form of 'soft social class porn' that simplifies a complex reality.
The reality is that the wealthy are often far more thoughtful and considerate in their spending and investments. An example I can share is my own experience with luxury brands such as Armani and its lesser-known line, Emporio Armani. I have several suits from the former, while I hesitate to enter the latter. This is not just due to price but an appreciation of the craftsmanship and artistic value that goes into each item. Similarly, purchasing high-end accessories from Hermes or Coach over cheaper knockoffs is a testament to this value.
Philistinism and Materialism
The true philistines, in my view, are often the less-privileged or middle-class individuals who are obsessed with status symbols and labels without genuine intellectual investment. If you find yourself salivating over special sales and holiday shopping, it may indicate a philistine mindset. Conversely, if you put effort into researching and budgeting for items, it suggests a more upper-class approach, characterized by thoughtfulness and consideration.
It is crucial to recognize that wealth and education can foster a deeper appreciation for culture and the arts. The upper class often invests in these areas, not just as a form of status symbol, but as a pathway to cultural enrichment and intellectual engagement. This investment extends beyond mere donations to include a personal commitment to enhancing one’s understanding and appreciation of the world around them.