evile

from a FB discussion on the new Dune 2 movie, of all things.

Ethan Kincaid

I hadn't thought of that. Interesting take!

My thoughts on the stark, austere look of the Harkonnen's was more towards the socio-economic. I associate minimalism with wealth. Only rich people can afford lots of empty space. Let me explain.

Growing up poor, my home and the homes of most of my friends were cluttered, small, and full of cobbled-together solutions to everyday problems. Mismatched storage containers, chairs, and dishes. Inadequate storage in general. Broken items patched and made to serve again. Closets bursting with clothing. All-in-all, storage was a perpetual issue.

Clutter and poverty go hand in hand for a number of reasons. One is that we could not afford good quality. A strategy to cope with this involved buying many different cheap clothing, accessories, and the like in order to spread out the wear and tear of everyday use across multiple items of the same type, making them last longer. Wearing a particular shirt less often causes less damage to it over time. Unfortunately, due to space constraints, storage is a problem.

Another reason for the clutter is retail therapy. Buying a desired item typically causes a release of dopamine. Poor people also experience this feeling of enjoyment and seek it out to give themselves a little boost. Finding a shirt on sale that is still in fashion is a great score on a Saturday afternoon. Of course, while the wealthy may have walk-in closets and spacious wardrobes, the prohibitive cost of large houses and stylish storage solutions means that all those Saturday afternoon sales pile up, literally.

Branching off from the previous issue is sentimental attachment. When we were poor, obtaining items that we wanted was much, much harder. We had to work harder and save for longer to get that new game system or a decent pair of boots. Any unforeseen expense was a setback and we had to wait longer, sometimes to the point where the thing we wanted was not in stock anymore by the time we had the money to purchase it. We could mitigate this problem by buying on credit or using a layaway program but this really only resulted in us being shackled to the items we bought until they could be paid off, usually at a greater expense than it would have been if we could have purchased it outright from the beginning. Consider holding fees and interest payments.

Poor people often have a much greater attachment to their belongings than rich people because it is much harder for a poor person to replace those items. It is no surprise that throwing away old items is a contentious issue. Tossing an item in the trash after working and saving for months or even years to obtain it comes with a kind of emotional discomfort that leads to hording. Asking a child from a family hovering around the poverty line to part with an old toy, even if it is broken, is like pulling teeth. So the items remain even when there is no space for them.

Lastly, getting rid of old items can be a problem for poor people. Consider the expense of hauling away large objects like furniture and car parts. When purchasing everyday necessities is difficult, spending money on literal garbage with nothing to show for it in the end seems like terrible waste to a struggling family. If it can't be tossed in the conventional trash and placed on the curbside for pickup, it often doesn't get thrown out. Dilapidated couches migrate from living room to garage to front porch or back deck. The rusted barbeque is pushed to the back of the shed behind the new one. It will be dealt with later. Maybe. Eventually.

The Harkonnens don't have clutter. They have singular items of surpassing quality and expense in the exact place they want them, unobstructed by anything else, and cleaned by servants who do not have other day jobs taking up all their time. If something is broken or unwanted, it is whisked away and disposed of without a second thought. It was obtained at a whim and is gone just as easily to be replaced by the next interesting thing.

Entire estates can be dedicated to storage, never mind closet space. Everything has a place specifically designed for it. The necessities of operating the House are sensibly and conveniently located for maximum efficiency and convenience. There are no empty margarine containers repurposed for accessories and small items.

The robe that the Baron wore last month? If he even still has it, he absolutely does not remember where he bought it or how much it cost. He cannot recommend you a good deal on where to get one or something similar to it that is less expensive. Does Baron Harkonnen have any sentimental objects left from his childhood or perhaps his first love? Movie ticket stubs in his old jacket that he keeps for the memories? Unlikely.

The Baron has none of the problems I mentioned above and probably wouldn't comprehend any of them. As many inconsiderate affluent people do, he likely looks over ghettos and simply thinks of them as trashy simply because "trash begets more trash." That is, if he ever has to see poverty at all. What he wants appears and what he does not want disappears at the snap of the fingers.

And he is left with a lovely, minimalist space upon which nothing extraneous intrudes. Perhaps you know some people like that.