Marxist philosophy believes that society views the world through a completely economic lens. Marxism dictates that society be divided into two classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie uses ideology to repress the proletariat primarily by manipulating their perception of their own free will. An ideology that the upper class perpetuates in the working class is that of consumerism. Consumerism is the belief that the quality of the items purchased can increase their value. As Marxists believe, among all ideologies, consumerism is an unconscious belief so deeply rooted in society that it influences the decisions every human being makes. This belief creates the concept of commodity fetishism which describes how “[p]eople in a capitalist society thus begin to treat commodities as if value were inherent in the objects themselves, rather than in the amount of actual labor expended to produce the object ” (Modules on Marx: fetishism). By reducing the human experience to the pursuit of economic prosperity, the concept of commodification was created. Commodification takes the further step of reducing a person's value to their monetary value. These three concepts together have the power to dismantle nature's purest concepts such as love. “The Gift of the Magi” by O. Henry shows how consumerism, commodity fetishism and commodification can distort natural virtues such as personal identity and love. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Jim and Della, the protagonists of "The Gift of the Magi", base the measure of themselves and their mutual love on consumerist ideals. Mostly, the narrator sets the scene when he observes, “Now, when [Mr. James Dillingham Young] was only paid $20 a week, the name seemed too long and important...Mrs. James Dillingham Young embraced him warmly and called him 'Jim'” (Henry 2). The speaker explicitly and detailedly describes the extent of the couple's dilapidated living conditions, mentioning the faulty objects that clutter the house such as the faulty doorbell and the tiny mailbox. Consumerism believes that the high value of products owned is fair to their class status. The narrator supports this idea by highlighting the inadequacy of James' name for his social position. “James Dillingham Young” is about prestige and wealth, about a legacy of wealth passed down from generation to generation. It's a name given to him by accident, and the narrator says he doesn't deserve it. The reason is based solely on James' economic situation, rather than his character. This sentiment is further strengthened by the fact that James' wife refers to him as Jim. By consumerist standards, “Jim” is a much more appropriate name for the wage earner. Jim is a simple, clear name, the kind of name a man of such a low class deserves. Furthermore, Della allows this ideology to influence her judgment when she reflects, “Only $1.87 to buy a present for Jim… Something almost good enough. Something almost worth the honor of belonging to Jim” (2). The story takes great pains to establish the authentic and pure love that exists between James and Della. As strong as that devotion is, Della believes she can only demonstrate her love through monetary means. She sees Jim's "honor" as the richest object that can match his noble character. This perspective alters the healthy nature of love, transforming it into a competition of goods. Love existed before money, yet Della shows how money has grown to confine the ideals of love.Furthermore, the story solidifies its attitude towards consumerism when the narrator explains in detail: “The value [of the gold chain] lay in its rich and pure material. Because it was so clear and simple, you knew it was very valuable. All beautiful things are like this” (3). It is ironic that the words "simple" and "simple", usually used to describe the conditions of poor citizens, are now used to appreciate a high-end object. This is how the bourgeoisie uses ideology to control the working classes. Subconsciously, the upper class celebrates chastity and frugality in consumer goods, while outwardly punishing the lower classes for the same traits. This philosophy leads the poor to venerate austere but expensive objects even if the same value can be found in cheaper substitutes. The power of consumerism is undeniable as it pushes Della to drastic measures to obtain the watch chain. Commodity fetishism pushes the young couple to unimaginable lengths to validate their love. Initially, the narrator illustrates the lovers' deep reverence for material possessions when he explains, “The James Dillingham Youngs were very proud of two things they possessed. One thing was Jim's gold watch…Jim knew that no king had anything so precious” (2-3). The narrator states that the clock has been passed down to every generation of the Dillingham Young family. However, this is not what gives the watch its value. Gold or not, every watch has the same function. The object's value derives from its perceived luxury, as demonstrated by its comparison to a king's possession. But the perceived grandeur of the watch isn't enough to satisfy the couple. Herein lies the danger of commodity fetishism. Because Jim and Della have staked their mutual passion on material objects, the attainment of a glorious good only breeds the desire for more. Accordingly, Della exemplifies the impact of commodity fetishism when the speaker clarifies, "The other thing was Della's hair... Della knew that her hair was more beautiful than any queen's jewels and gifts" ( 2). Della's hair is another natural look in the world that was given to her without any consideration of her class status. Yet, her hair is reduced to nothing more than a bargaining chip that she must sell. She herself complains about it, exclaiming: “'But what could I do - oh! What could I do with a dollar and eighty-seven cents?'” (4). Since she has tied her love for James to physical objects, Della believes she has no choice but to sacrifice something as precious as her own hair. It never occurs to her that the strength of his affection is in itself an admirable gift. In his worldview, love has a limit that can only be circumvented through wealth. Commodification has the ability to pervert lovers' image of each other, but it can be reversed by a change in worldview. Initially, Della demonstrates her distorted view of her husband when she contemplates, “Peace of mind and value: Jim and the chain both had peace of mind and value. He paid twenty-one dollars for it” (3). Della frames her perception of her lover in such a way that it seems like James must strive to match the chain's perfection instead of the other way around. This image of James is further highlighted by the added detail of the cost of the gift. Since the connection between the item and Della's boyfriend has already been established, it appears that the story states that James' value also amounts to only twenty dollars. Instead of demonstrating the depth of Della's love, her perspective only shows the restrictive parameters of her passion. However, he begins to break down his deeply held ideologies when he proclaims, “'Perhaps one could count the, 1992.