20th Century American Culture Analysis

Throughout the 19th century, the increase in immigrants entering the United States created a diverse culture and American population. There was no singular consumption for the masses, and so, institutions such as live theater and local grocery stores were reflective of local culture and the communities in which they were located. At the turn of the 20th century, there was a push away from this towards a more homogeneous “American” culture. Thus, live action theaters diverse in their production style and the language they were performed in, were replaced by the motion picture which created a simple, universal, and visual way to stimulate any audience. The introduction of movies in the 20th century allowed for unity as all consumers could enjoy

By 1905, small storefront theaters called “nickelodeons” spread throughout Manhattan’s tenement districts. In only a few years, “nickel madness” had swept the city and by 1907, two hundred nickelodeons could be found in Manhattan alone with over one-third of these movie theaters located below 14th street, an area dominated by the immigrant class. By 1910, weekly attendance in the greater New York area was estimated at one-quarter of the city’s entire population which was around 1.5 million people, almost three-fourths of whom were working class although a substantial minority of white-collar workers attended as well. This movie fad, however, was not only in New York but rather country-wide. In a Bureau of Labor statistics survey on the cost of living of workingmen’s families in Chicago for example, Chicago workers were found to have spent more than half of their amusement budgets on movies. Movies became such a big part of America in general that in 1924, more than two-thirds of families receiving Mothers’ Aid Assistance in Chicago still managed to attend movies

Consumers, especially those in the working-class easily became dependent on credit. They had much to dread from the credit agencies and merchants, which both encouraged impulsive spending and heavy reliance on credit in the face of growing inequities in income and extracted payments, imposed liens on wages, and took laggards to court. Further, credit was not equally awarded to all customers and therefore further hindered the ability of the chain store to reach all classes. Credit managers used ideas of gender and class to discipline certain customer demographics. To credit managers, the middle-class man was the responsible shopper, earner, and manager of the household while the middle-class woman was an unreliable spender unaware how to budget. On the contrary, working-class men were classified as reckless, unreliable spenders who were unable to save money and working-class women were good budgeters and were responsible for controlling household spending. To credit managers, ordinary workers were even more precarious as if they lost their job, they lost everything including their ability to pay money back. While technically workers had the same access to luxury goods that wealthier citizens had, it was dependent on being able to make the payment. As they did not have control at work, they could not control their