Second homes as sites for the consumption of luxury

Luxury

The first writings on luxury came from the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and were followed by those of Roman philosophers and moralists such as Cato the Elder (234 BC–149 BC) and Pliny the Elder (23–79 AD) (Aristotle, 1992; Kragelund, 2000; Plato, 1930; Sekora, 1977). Many more have written about luxury over the course of two thousand years, yet there has been little consensus as to what luxury is and, indeed, the slippery nature of luxury has often led to heated debate about how to define it (Baldwin, 1899; Berry, 1994; Brewer, 1998; Cautela et al., 2007; Dubois et al., 2005; Jennings, 2007; Orr et al., 2008; Wiedmann et al., 2009). Nevertheless, there are some commonalities in the conceptualisation of luxury. First, that luxury is fluid in nature, and it can and does change over time (Baldwin, 1899; Berry, 1994; Goody, 2006). Second, that luxury is highly subjective and what one person or society views as luxury, another may view as necessity (Baldwin, 1899; Christodoulides et al., 2009; Csaba, 2008; Mortelmans, 2005). Third, luxury is generally associated with pleasure and enjoyment, be it physical or sensory (Berry, 1994). Finally, luxury goods are usually exclusive objects of desire that are rich in meaning (Berry, 1994; Orr et al., 2008; Twitchell, 2002).

These commonalities highlight not only that the concept of luxury is socially constructed but also that luxury has an association with necessity; indeed, it is difficult to discuss what luxury means without reference to necessity. Luxury has often been defined, somewhat glibly, as anything that is not necessary for life (Berry, 1994; Christodoulides et al., 2009; Csaba, 2008; Dubois and Czellar, 2002; Mortelmans, 2005; Twitchell, 2002). Political economists Bernard Mandeville (in his infamous Fable of the Bees) and Adam Smith (in his treatise Wealth of Nations) in the UK in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, respectively, grappled extensively and provocatively with the luxury-necessity dichotomy (Mandeville, 1724; Smith, n.d.). Both referenced the relationship between luxury and desire, and the importance of social and cultural norms in defining both luxury and necessity.

These discussions of luxury and necessity have generally referred to the tangible, physical (or material) aspects of luxury, in areas such as clothing, housing or foodstuffs (Smith, n.d.; Twitchell, 2002). However, there are also intangible, metaphysical aspects of luxury that are multi-hued and nuanced. By way of illustration, these two forms of luxury may be represented in the context of second homes as follows:

The physical or material nature of luxury: may be represented as expensive, rare, unique, exclusive, foreign (imported), large, ornate, modern, up-to-date and/or excessive;

The metaphysical or immaterial nature of luxury: may be represented as sumptuous, comfortable, soft, opulent, tasteful, pleasurable, rich, warm, desirable and/or indulgent.

It is important to note here that both forms of luxury are subjective and are specific to the period, society and culture to which they belong. By its very nature then, luxury cannot be viewed as black and white but rather, must be viewed as a technicolour phenomenon. This research reflects and makes visible a nuanced understanding of both the physical and metaphysical luxury to be found in second homes.

Consumption of luxury at the second home

In many countries (such as Canada, Australia, Denmark and the UK), second homes and their associated consumption practices were traditionally the preserve of the social elite (Coppock, 1977; Selwood and Tonts, 2004; Tress, 2002; Wolfe, 1951). In New Zealand, however, the popular media has discursively constructed second homes as rooted in working class origins and traditionally representative of an ‘egalitarian’ society (Barber, 2005; Cox, 1995). In a somewhat nostalgic and romantic media discourse, the archetypal New Zealand second home of the 1950s and 1960s is often remembered as being filled with furniture oddments, with a basic kitchen, a bunkroom for the children and entertainment for inclement weather that consisted of cards, board games and old paperback books (see, for example, Cox, 1995; Grigor, 2008; Male, 2001). They tended to have a simple, lean-to form with a sloping single-pitch roof, and large picture windows in the lounge to appreciate the sea or beach view (Collins and Kearns, 2008; Mitchell and Chaplin, 1984; Peart, 2009). The archetypal second home in New Zealand has also been represented in the (albeit somewhat limited) academic literature as ‘modest, low-cost’ (Collins and Kearns, 2008: 2916), ‘authentic’ (Collins and Kearns, 2010: 443) and ‘the preserve of average New Zealanders’ (Freeman and Cheyne, 2008: 44).

The introduction of the neoliberal economic regime in 1984 was influential in ushering in a new phase of second home development in New Zealand. Many of the newly wealthy could now afford, both financially and socially, to build larger more expensive second homes than had existed in the past – and they did (McIntyre and Pavlovich, 2006; Thompson, 1985). Significantly for this paper, over the last decade, the consumption of luxury in the context of the New Zealand second home has been constructed in both the media and the academic literature as a new phenomenon, especially associated with architect-designed second homes:

Fabulous million dollar holiday homes have hit Auckland’s Hauraki Gulf like a tidal wave. Ageing weekend [second homes] with [outside toilets] out back have been swept away by swank architect-designed mansions with Italian porcelain toilets … The luxury New Zealand bach ¹ now is commonplace. (‘Bach gives way to seaside opulence’, 1999)

 … it is proposed that the bach is characterised by deprivation and lack. This has been somewhat contradicted by its recent [architect designed] manifestations. (Austin, 2006: 5)

Freeman and Cheyne (2008: 34) have called this change in second home consumption practice ‘arguably one of the most significant social and economic shifts in New Zealand’s coastal landscape’, yet academia in New Zealand has generally remained silent on the issue. Through discourses such as those discussed above, second homes have therefore been valorised as symbols of egalitarianism and sites for the non-consumption of luxury, and in direct contrast to the modern architect-designed luxury second home. The argument that ownership of even a modest second home is in itself a luxury – which has drawn heated comment in the UK (Monbiot, 1999, 2006; Shucksmith, 1983) – seems to have been largely overlooked in New Zealand. This paper uses a thematic analysis of media representations of luxury from 1936 to 2012 to challenge the popular perception of second homes as anti-consumerist and assess whether ‘luxury’ second homes are indeed only a recent phenomenon.

Architectural design features

Spaciousness was an important architectural design feature that contributed to the theme of luxury in the second home and was mentioned from the very first article: ‘The main feature of the house is its spacious living-room with large open fireplace and chimney’ (‘Planning for leisure’, 1937: 31).

Certainly this seemed to contrast with the second homes of the working classes on Rangitoto Island near Auckland in the 1920s and 1930s, which often started as cramped, single room buildings which were only extended as finances allowed (Yoffe, 2000).

During Second World War, legislation was introduced which prohibited the construction of second homes in New Zealand. In 1949, these restrictions were lifted, allowing second homes up to a maximum floor area of 400 square feet (37.1 square metres) to be built. At this point, the luxury of spaciousness and its association with comfort was particularly evident in the discourse:

Next – and here is room for the controversy – it was considered advisable to have a large and comfortable living space and to economise on sleeping accommodation. This allows for entertaining and for comfortable relaxation during the greatest heat of the day or in bad weather. (‘A 400-foot holiday cottage’, 1949: 53)

Here, we see an explicit reference to comfort along with an implicit reference to indulgence, which speak of metaphysical luxury as discussed earlier in the introductory section of the paper. Furthermore, spaciousness was also constructed in the discourse as part of the attractiveness and allure of the second home: ‘Its appeal lies in its spacious interior’ (‘A country retreat’, 1962: 48).

In some cases, the dimensions of second homes and rooms were given, highlighting the luxurious size of the space. Likewise, representations of spaciousness in the accompanying images were enhanced by the lack of clutter.

Ironically, however, in recent years there has been something of a trend towards showcasing small second homes in Home New Zealand with nearly one-third of second homes (where the floor area was stated) since 2004 having a floor area of 75 square metres or less ² :

The house itself measures just 75 square metres, but the design creates an impression of a far bigger area. (Daniell, 2004/2005: 119)

For a building that measures only 50 square metres, it boasts a remarkable variety of spatial experiences, giving the impression that is a far larger house. (Hansen, 2012: 27)

While not everyone would view such a small second home as a luxury, there was a sense that the ability to choose to live in a smaller space than would be the case at the primary home, albeit for just a short period of time while on holiday, was itself a luxury.

Along with spaciousness as a luxurious architectural design feature, there seemed to be an underlying luxury in the notion of simplicity of architectural design:

The pair’s preference for classic styling (Billy’s other great love is France) shows through in the graceful proportions of the rooms and their uncluttered simplicity. (Millar, 1999: 108)

The joy of this holiday home is its no-frills architectural simplicity. (McCall, 2008/2009: 102)

At first glance, this seemed to be self-explanatory; simple and simplicity were related to a structure or design that was plain, uncluttered, unadorned and basic. Nevertheless, a closer examination of the images associated with these articles suggested that ‘simple’ did not mean basic as in inexpensive, nor did it necessarily mean a lack of luxury. Rather, the notion of simplicity was constructed in the discourse as synonymous with taste and style: ‘Basic but with taste and design nous, for sure’ (Interview with Editor B, June 2013).

The financial and cultural capital of the second home owner was evident in the ideal of simplicity associated with exclusive, high-quality designer products (Leonard et al., 2004). For example, designer lightshades, an upper-end dishwasher and an espresso machine were featured in the photographs associated with an article about a simple second home.

As with spaciousness, these findings suggested that the luxury inherent in simplicity was related to the second home owners’ freedom of choice. This in turn was related to the level of both financial and cultural capital that afforded them the freedom and ability to choose simplicity. Indeed, both Chaplin (1999) and Williams and Kaltenborn (1999) noted that where modern facilities at the second home were lacking, this was as a result of a choice made by second home owners rather than born of necessity. One Home New Zealand editor stated:

I think that’s probably quite a strong movement we’ve seen in New Zealand, particularly probably over the last 10-20 years, where you know, the definition of luxury has changed, umm, and it’s more … luxury is actually simplicity and luxury is more about the environment around you … (Interview with Editor A, March 2013)

And referring to an article published in the magazine in 2012 which featured a 40-square metre second home, Editor C stated:

The fact that the owners of that were like, yeah fine, we can live like that on our holidays, is amazing I think, and, and that that is their definition of luxury, when they could have possibly used the same amount [of money] to get a much larger home that would have had a lot more stuff. (Interview with Editor C, March 2013)

So the owners had deliberately chosen simplicity over ‘stuff’, and to live in a restricted space for short periods while on holiday, where they would not choose to live like this permanently. In addition, note the reference to the expense involved in achieving such simplicity. Editor C coined the phrase the ‘luxury of deprivation’ to describe this recent trend towards choosing simplicity over convenience and comfort. All three of the editors interviewed believed that this move towards chosen simplicity and a more considered form of consumption at the second home was a luxury that could only be afforded by the wealthier sectors of society. This type of simplicity was perceived to be very different to that lived by others who, through circumstance, may have to live a permanently simple lifestyle forsaking modern conveniences through necessity rather than choice.

The longitudinal analysis resulted in the identification of three subtle but distinct phases in the discursive treatment of architectural features in the magazine, illustrating devolution in status from luxury item to convenience to necessity. When first introduced (the ‘luxury’ phase), architectural features were highlighted as special or unusual and were accompanied by some degree of explanation or definition. When more common (the ‘convenience’ phase), they were mentioned in the text only in passing. Finally, when very common (the ‘necessity’ phase), it seemed they were only drawn to the reader’s attention if there was something different or unique about them. These phases were especially evident in the discourse surrounding garaging (from a time when having one car was a luxury and a single garage was symbolic of that, to when having two cars was so common that double garaging was no longer commented on) and bathrooms (from when an indoor bathroom in a second home was a luxury, to when multiple bathrooms and ensuites were common practice).

Despite luxuries becoming necessities over time (Berry, 1994), there were always new luxuries appearing, with the latest in building materials and techniques, technology and domestic and international architectural trends being incorporated in the second home. For example, luxury building materials introduced over the years include external cladding products such as Fibrolite, ³ schist (a type of stone found in New Zealand only in the Central Otago district and in vogue from the 1990s), and monolithic cladding (a new building material in the early years of the 21st century). Furthermore, it contrasted with much of the literature, which held that second homes were mostly devoid of the modern materials and technology common in the primary home, at least until recently (Ellingsen and Hidle, 2013; Perkins and Thorns, 2006; Williams and Van Patten, 2006).

The adoption of the latest technology was also prevalent in the kitchen. From the 1980s, progressively more physical luxury features were noticeable in both the written and visual discourse about the kitchen, along with more subtle underlying representations of the metaphysical nature of luxury. Commonly encountered in the magazine discourse were explicit references to size, exclusivity, expense and implicit notions of taste that spoke of luxury:

The German kitchen was an extravagance. (Copland, 1989: 120)

The owners requested comprehensive cooking and entertaining space, so a 6.5-m-long concrete and fibreglass bench and a wall of cupboards provide all they need in the kitchen. (McBride, 2006/2007: 67)

The luxury apparent in the second home kitchens in the magazine again contrasted markedly with the academic literature. For example, Vittersø (2007) reported that while preparing food and eating together were important and enjoyable leisure activities for the Norwegian second home owners in his study, most lacked modern kitchen facilities – many cooked outdoors and without electricity and were happy to do so as part of what they considered to be an authentic second home experience.

Interior decoration

The interior decoration of the second home portrayed in the written and visual magazine discourse provided ample evidence of second homes as sites for the consumption of luxury in a variety of forms. There were abundant representations of physical luxury as expensive, unique, exclusive and imported, and of metaphysical luxury as tasteful and desirable. While present from the early 1950s, representations of luxury were more prevalent from the mid-1980s as the home (and by extension the second home) became increasingly commoditised as a site for consumption in New Zealand, as overseas (Brailsford, 2007; Gram-Hanssen and Bech-Danielsen, 2004; Paris, 2011).

Rather than the purchase of mass-produced items, the owners of second homes featured in the magazine seemed to prefer distinctive furnishings and accessories. Many had items specially designed, imported, brought back from overseas travels or sourced from exclusive designers:

The actual colour of the leather furniture [in the lounge] was achieved by having a batch of leather especially dyed. It is aqua sea green and accurately reflects the colours outside … Pieces of art have been chosen carefully. A Zena Abbott tapestry commissioned especially. Door handles were imported from England and imported taps chosen for their function and because they remind [the owner] of birds. (McCarthy, 1986: 11, 13)

Owner Jack Cooper reads in a Philippe Starck Costes chair, under [an artwork by] Delicia Sampero. Jack bought the zebra skin rug in South Africa. (Lewis, 2001/2002: 82)

A sense of luxury, exclusivity and social status was communicated to the reader through these extracts. In addition, the reader was encouraged to aspire to such luxury and status, especially through the introduction in the late 1990s of a single page section titled ‘Style File’ at the end of some articles. This column detailed how to achieve the same ‘look’ and provided the details of stockists for the same or similar consumer items as photographed in the home. Prices were often quoted as ‘POA’ (price on application) which was certainly suggestive of both the level of financial capital required and of luxuriousness. Even where prices were given, they served to further reinforce the financial capital required of the readership – in terms of who was able to afford such items, and who was not. For example, in the August/September 2000 issue, one Style File featured a desk lamp priced at NZ$849 and a kitchen sink mixer tap priced at NZ$1150 (p. 58) which equated to NZ$1175 and NZ$1590 in 2012 prices, respectively (Reserve Bank of New Zealand, 2013). To put this in context, the cost of the items relative to the average weekly household income before tax was calculated for the years 2000 and 2012 (Table 4). The lamp cost the equivalent of at least 75% of a household’s weekly income, while the tap cost more than one week’s household income.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Cost of items as a percentage of average weekly household income (before tax) in 2000 and 2012.

Item	Price (2000)	Average weekly household income before tax (2000) a	Price as percentage of income	Adjusted price (2012) b	Average weekly household income before tax (2012)	Price as percentage of income
Desk lamp	$849	$953	89.1%	$1171	$1550	75.5%
Kitchen sink mixer tap	$1150	$953	120.7%	$1586	$1550	102.3%

While the luxury in interior decoration was generally implicit and relied on the reading and interpretation of various symbols in both the written and visual discourse, on occasion it was explicitly pointed out to the reader: ‘Caption: Robyn’s choice of ultimate luxury – an Agape Spoon bath – drinks in the expansive rural views from the master bedroom. A Vola spout, Paini Cox mixer and Agape storage ladder finish off the look’ (Berryman, 2005: 114).

Again the magazine discourse provided readers with a sense of what constituted luxury and also how to achieve a similar look in their own home or second home.

In the 1980s, the reader’s attention was drawn to art and sculpture in second home interior decoration:

Inside chipboard wall linings create a neutral background for the clients numerous pieces of art. (‘Retreat at Seaforth’s Peninsula’, Issue 1, 1983: 40)

For their interior décor, [they] opted for pieces that were spare, modern and fitted well with the architecture … They had in mind various art and objects they had collected and wanted to bring to the house including, in the kitchen … an artwork by Pat Hanly … and a painting by Gretchen Albrecht in the bedroom. (Hansen, 2011: 80)

More often than not, the artists and sculptors were named; they were frequently well known and recognised New Zealand names that (today at least) commanded high prices for their work. While it cannot be certain that prices were high when the pieces were purchased, the naming of the artists and sculptors seemed to suggest that at the very least it was the case when the article was written. Alternatively, the naming of the artists implied that the reader should have known the artists even if they were not (yet) well known or expensive, thereby delineating the cultural capital of the reader.

Outdoor elements

The final theme contributing to the representation of second homes as sites for the consumption of luxury was that of outdoor elements. Many were related to specific recreation and leisure pursuits, which may in themselves have been deemed luxuries (see Walters, 2014), but some also carried with them a substantial requirement for space – for example, the inclusion of a tennis court or swimming pool in the grounds of the second home. Indeed, one of the first articles featured a second home with both a tennis court and a swimming pool (‘Planning for leisure’, 1937: 32).

It was not just the requirement for space that afforded swimming pools the impression of luxury; two of the 14 second homes that featured swimming pools were located on the beachfront. The element of luxury inherent in these pools did not necessarily lie in the idea of excess; that their beachfront location made them somewhat redundant (although it could be argued that this was the case). Rather, the swimming pool provided the second home owners with the ability to swim in private and to control their own sanitised swimming environment. In this manner, the second home owners were able to enjoy the luxury of a level of physical and psychological comfort that was not available to others who lacked a swimming pool. In addition, it afforded the owner the luxury of choice of where to swim.

Other outdoor luxury items over the years included outdoor fireplaces, boat sheds, roof terraces, barbecues, jetties, pizza ovens and spa pools. The interpretation of luxury relied heavily on understanding both the New Zealand context at the time of writing and the type of language used. For example: ‘Considering the enjoyment any family would get from [a portable barbecue] the cash outlay would be well justified. Barbecue “tools” are an asset too’ (Hoby, 1956: 15).

In mid-1950s, New Zealand the portable barbecue was a new consumer item, and in having one the second home owner was represented as an early adopter, implying the luxury of being up-to-date as discussed earlier with regards to architectural design features. A more subtle underlying message of luxury here was in the representation of being ‘cool’, of being a trend-setter. The need to justify the expense further emphasised that a barbecue was a luxury item at the time.

Landscaping was the final outdoor element that contributed to the representation of physical luxury in this theme. In the few Home New Zealand articles on archetypal second homes, the images generally depicted unkempt lawns and few plants and in this way mirrored the representations in the literature (Kearns and Collins, 2006; Mitchell and Chaplin, 1984). This was contrasted markedly with the images of architect-designed second homes in Home New Zealand magazine where the landscaping was portrayed as tasteful and often extensive. In addition, they were frequently specially designed to ensure a low-maintenance space and the work was carried out by professionals. Indeed, the very term ‘landscaping’ was suggestive of exclusivity. In this way, it spoke of the luxury of professional design and execution (Leonard et al., 2004) and was a language not seen in the articles about archetypal second homes.