• Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Patreon
  • Premium Membership
  • Services

Natural History

by Scottie Westfall

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« A mystery canid they should be looking for
For your enjoyment »

Veblen’s theory and Chinese dogs

March 25, 2010 by SWestfall3

Thorstein Veblen, American economist (1857-1929).

Dogs have  always been used as symbols.  It seem one of the perversions of the relationship.

 Dogs exist not just for the jobs the perform or the companionship they provide. They exist because of what they say about us. It’s disconcerting. I know.

Thorstein Veblen, a somewhat unorthodox American economist, understood the power of this symbolism perfectly. He noted that as agriculture became more efficient to have a class of people who did not have farm, the non-farming class began to use possessions as symbols to represent their class. Veblen called them the leisure class. It is somewhat similar to Marx’s ownership class, but it is not exactly the same. In industrial and mercantile societies, the leisure class includes the rising middle classes.

In this system, people buy things they can’t use to prove their status. Veblen argues that this comes from ancient and Medieval societies, where hunting and warfare were generally the realm of the nobility (the leisure class of their time period). Owning hunting dogs and weapons that one may never use was a sign of one’s status. In industrial societies, the rising middle classes also took to using possessions to signal status. People buy things to show that they are on the way up in the world, not because they are useful. It’s why people buy brand name clothes. It’s why people buy sports cars. It’s called conspicuous consumption. The term is Veblen’s own invention, although it is almost never attributed to him.

It’s also why people buy “useless” dogs. It is no coincidence that the rise of purebred dogs and the mass production of family pets happens just as the industrial revolution begins to take off. In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the dog everyone had to have was a Newfoundland. The dogs had a romantic history as working dogs on their native island. There were many stories of these dogs saving people from drowing, and how wonderful they were as ship’s dogs.

The Industrial Revolution began in Britain.  At the same time, Britain was putting together the world’s largest navy, and the nation’s maritime tradition was already developing itsplace in the popular imagination.  Anything associated with ships would have fascinated the British public. Those ships were their space shuttles. They were their connection to both national prestige and to the outside world.

Newfoundland dogs probably became popular simply because they were common on ships. If you owned a Newfoundland, it was like being connected to these ships. You could signal your patriotism by owning one. It also helped that the dogs were gentle, very intelligent, and excellent family dogs.

Those traits also played to another sign of rising social status, one could care about the children. One didn’t have to sell them into indenture just to make a living. One didn’t have to make the children work long hours on the farm. People with status can afford to buy pets for their children, and what could be better than an heroic Newfoundland dog?

These issues play out today almost exactly as they did then. It’s just now the fads often don’t last as long as they did back then. Only a handful of dog breeds have been popular for nearly a century. As far as I can tell, only the German shepherd, the poodle, and the beagle have been in the AKC top ten for registrations for over 70 years. I might be wrong about this, but the retrievers have only been popular for a relatively short time.

We also have different species for people to buy. African hedgehogs are now replacing Chihuahuas as the pet to carry around in a purse. Pot-bellied pigs were a big deal in the early 90’s, but now there is an even tinier breed of swine that is being offered.

Fad pets fit perfectly with Veblen’s conspicuous consumption. The  mass production is one of the things that drives a lot of welfare  problems in companion animals. Puppy mills are but one of the concerns connected to mass production. Narrowing gene pools to produce exotic colors is another, but this one often goes unmentioned.

But this problem is hardly confined to Western societies.

Conspicuous consumption has started to appear among the rising middle class in China.

To look like you’re rich in China, you have to get a Tibetan mastiff.

I don’t know whether the breed they buy is the recreated dog that has been a source of intrigue in the dog fancy for many decades or the actual livestock guardian mastiffs that are found in Central Asia

You can’t get better symbol of relative wealth in Chinese society. Meat consumption is on the rise, but most of the Chinese diet is plant matter. To own a carnivorous pet shows real changes Dog ownership is very strictly regulated, and in many areas, people are allowed only one dog. If you rely on your dog for anything, you have to choose one that is economical in size and broadly applicable in its utility. The dogs that are close relatives of the Western chow chow have to be good watch dogs and livestock guardians. They also have to have good pelts and produce nice carcasses to butcher.

Now what could better  tell the world that you’re up and coming than to own a dog that really has no purpose in an urban environment. The dogs look like lions, which are a symbol of luck in Chinese culture.

The dogs evolved on the Tibetan plateau and lived as livestock guardians for thousands of years. Some dog experts claim that they are the original mastiffs, although I’m somewhat skeptical.

So like the Newfoundland, these dogs have a romantic connection to the traditions and lore of the society in which they are found. One cannot make the case that these dogs have much economic utility to urban dwelling young professionals. They could have a chow-type dog as a watch dog, and it wouldn’t cost that much to purchase or feed.

The dog is valuable for what it is, not for what it does. To buy one is the perfect example of conspicuous consumption.

***

I should note here that Veblen hated dogs. All dogs– although he did respect those dogs that actually worked.

This is something that he shared with Chairman Mao Zedong. Dogs were persecuted by the Communist Party from 1949 until 1976, when Mao died. During the Cultural Revolution, the Red Guards went on dog killing sprees throughout China’s cities. In a country that experienced a lot of famines, keeping animals that had little economic utility was seen as taking food away from starving children.

So the dogs got shot.

Since Mao died, his successors have liberalized restrictions dog ownership. They first allowed small dogs. Then they allowed big ones.

And now they have a burgeoning dog market (and not just for food).

One wonders what pit falls the Tibetan mastiff will experience from its newfound status in China.

The breeder featured in this piece appears to be running a high priced puppy mill.

And we all know where that leads.

China is trying to get into the FCI, and my guess is they are going to try to adopt the entire Western model  of the dog fancy.

The contours are already there. It just needs a little push for the infrastructure to appear.

And if it does, it might hamper the kennel club reform movement in this country.

The newly open Chinese market for inbred show dogs will distort any attempts to increase genetic diversity and deal with health problems here.

One can only hope that they don’t adopt the Western model.

But I’m not holding my breath.

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Print
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email

Like this:

Like Loading...

Posted in dog breeding, dog health, domestic animals | Tagged Chinese dogs, Chinese Kennel Club, conspicuous consumption, dog culture, Thorstein Veblen, Tibetan mastiff | 11 Comments

11 Responses

  1. on March 25, 2010 at 4:33 pm cyborgsuzy

    I don’t know about ‘useless’, but dogs as luxury items for the rich have been around for much longer than the industrial revolution.

    Gaston Phébus certainly didn’t keep his huge kennel of hunting dogs because he needed the meat.


    • on March 25, 2010 at 4:40 pm retrieverman

      What Veblen is saying is that in earlier societies, the people who had wealth could afford to keep “useless animals.”

      With the Industrial Revolution, you have a rise of the Middle Class, who keep useless animals to make themselves look rich.


  2. on March 25, 2010 at 7:51 pm Peggy Richter

    “rise of the middle class” is a bit of a misnomer. The Industrial revolution changed things drastically, true, but before that there was a “merchant class”. In the medieval period, one had peasants (the very poor), the “noble class” (mostly rich) and merchants/artisans. Clothing and jewelry were primary means of displaying wealth, but in several period paintings of merchants/artisans are those little “pet dogs” that were there to ape the nobility. In Roman times, it was fashionable to have a “mastiff” from Britian — or even better, an “Irish mastiff”. Archeological finds of Neanderthal jewelry (pierced shells) show that this is a habit that probably dates to before the domestication of dogs. Dogs, as property, are simply part of the “display of wealth”. It’s probably similar to the same urge that Chimps have to do display by dragging branches, etc — “look at me! I have social status! I’m important!”. Very few people like being the low man on the totem pole. Since it’s probably not too likely we will change a fairly “hard-wired” characteristic, the trick would be that status was only conferred on owning a dog that was exemplary for good health, temperament as well as whatever rare looks, breed status or cost to keep. There’s not much need for Tibetian Mastiffs to guard Tibetian sheep, so filling the role of “desired pet” may be a good thing for this breed — as long as it’s preserved as a “rolex” and not a “cheap knock off”. It’s not having a dog as status symbol that’s the problem, it’s getting a cheap knock off and presenting it as the “real deal”.
    Peggy Richter


    • on March 25, 2010 at 8:13 pm retrieverman

      The Industrial Revolution created this class I’m talking about. Only when wealth was created at such a high level could that many people afford to buy useless things. Yes, the merchant class and capitalism precede industrialization, and if you want to know how we got both read E.P. Thompson– fascinating stuff.

      It was only with industrialization that a middle class had time and wealth to spend this kind of money on such things. Industrialization is the key to this kind of middle class.

      China would not have this kind of middle class without it.


  3. on March 25, 2010 at 8:25 pm Pai

    The one thing I will give the Chinese kennel clubs credit for, is advocating for the original ‘bone mouth’ Shar Pei (rather than the excessively wrinkled hippo-headed type that is purely a Western-made show dog).

    As always though, the breeders truly dedicated to the welfare of their breeds will be the minority, as it always has been. I don’t think that will ever change.


    • on March 25, 2010 at 9:46 pm retrieverman

      I have some hope.


  4. on March 26, 2010 at 2:32 pm icr

    If you can believe the blog, here are genuine indigenous Tibetan Mastiffs:
    http://kekexili.typepad.com/life_on_the_tibetan_plate/2006/11/tibetan_dogs.html#comments

    You’d think the nomads would have abandoned the herds and gone into the puppy business if
    they’re worth a fortune on the pet market.


    • on March 26, 2010 at 2:56 pm retrieverman

      Dogs of this type exist throughout Central Asia. I’ve seen photos of them in Mongolia. I refuse to call them Tibetan mastiffs.

      The Tibetan mastiff was a late nineteenth century obsession. It was believed to be the first mastiff. I don’t know how they can prove that. There are Assyrian and Babylonian depictions of mastiffs that are quite old.


  5. on November 9, 2010 at 11:15 am Reziac

    Before you repeat the mantra that “the peasants were the poor” you should read a well-researched little gem entitled “Life in a Medieval Village” by Frances and Joseph Gies. Turns out our modern perception is wrong; the peasants of that era were what we’d now call the middle class.


    • on November 9, 2010 at 11:20 am retrieverman

      Not a mantra at all– well-documented:

      In this one: http://www.amazon.com/Montaillou-Promised-Emmanuel-LeRoy-Ladurie/dp/0394729641

      And: http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520260009


  6. on November 22, 2011 at 6:02 pm Swedish Feist » Prick-Eared

    […] focus on owning specialized breeds for the sake of inflating one’s affluent status. [See Scottie Westfall's application of Thorstein Veblen's  Theory of the Leisure Class.] So, there is no reason a Swedish Vallhund […]



Comments are closed.

  • Like on Facebook

    The Retriever, Dog, and Wildlife Blog

    Promote Your Page Too
  • Blog Stats

    • 9,876,412 hits
  • Retrieverman’s Twitter

    • 2 people followed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com 3 weeks ago
    • one person followed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com 1 month ago
    • 2 people followed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com 1 month ago
    • one person followed me and one person unfollowed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com 2 months ago
    • one person followed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com 2 months ago
  • Google rank

    Check Google Page Rank
  • Archives

    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
  • Recent Comments

    The Evolving Natural… on So does the maned wolf break t…
    SWestfall3 on So does the maned wolf break t…
    Ole Possum on So does the maned wolf break t…
    kuymal on The Thylacine was more a marsu…
    Kerry Rogers on The Thylacine was more a marsu…
  • Meta

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.com
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,706 other subscribers
  • Pages

    • About
    • Contact
    • Patreon
    • Premium Membership
    • Services
  • Subscribe to Retrieverman's Weblog by Email
  • Revolver map

    Map

  • Top Posts

    • The Last Pair of St. John's Water Dogs
  • SiteCounter

    wordpress analytics
    View My Stats
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,706 other subscribers
  • Donate to this blog

  • Top 50 Northwest Dog Blogs

    top 50 dog blogs

Blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • Natural History
    • Join 629 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Natural History
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: