ABSTRACT
The discussion on luxury or unnecessary consumption – consumption that goes beyond necessities – was particularly widespread in eighteenth-century England in analyses of social problems and efforts to understand their origins. The writer Smollet was one of the last and best-known representatives of this tradition (see Sekora 1977). The corrupting influence of luxury was enough to explain almost any social problem from highway robbery to work-shyness to mob violence. This was certainly not the first time that the corrupting influence of luxury was recognized. On the contrary, the idea dates back to the old traditions of Roman and Christian moral philosophy. But whereas it was earlier thought to concern only gentlefolk, whose peace of mind might be disturbed by unsatisfied needs, it was now increasingly seen to corrupt common people. It is unlikely that many people thought that the common people were rolling in luxury – rather, their behaviour had become improper in the sense of what were the proprieties of a particular social class or estate. The problem, therefore, was the fear that once liberated from their traditional restrictions, their needs could no longer be satisfied at all: once people got what they wanted, they would never cease to want more.
