The idea of simple living was both widely promoted and discouraged from the arrival of the earliest Puritan colonists in 1630 to the extensive industrial growth of the middle 1800s. Many groups and societies aimed to resurrect the simple life and promote it among the masses.
Yet each of these revivals were either stopped or drastically slowed down by the American majority’s desire for wealth. A small percentage of Americans consistently lived interpretations of the simple life but they were frequently viewed as outsiders. The support for simple living amongst the people as a whole could never fully survive the growth of the nation. The supporters of the simple life faced many obstacles and challenges throughout their fight against lavishness. …show more content…
The introduction of an international trading network into the Massachusetts Bay allowed merchants to thrive. It became a place ruled by a merchant oligarchy where there was an endless amount of commercial activity and opportunity and theological liberalism flourished. Salem, New Haven, and other New England ports also enjoyed this high-living merchant aristocracy. The preaching of leaders of simplicity continued even though their stance became more and more unpopular among the majority. The Puritans, as well as the later generations of simple livers, faced the problem of children being less inclined to live simply. For many of the younger generations growing up in relative comfort and stability, there was no real need for simplicity. The Puritans also faced the problems of growth in population and complexity. This along with urbanization, commercialism, and cosmopolitanism were leading the introduction of diversity into a relatively homogeneous social order (19). The constant flow of ships coming into ports brought new goods, ideas, and people. During this time of social change, the Puritan ethic became the minority. The appeal for the public to practice simplicity was seen by many as a “rhetorical cloak employed by those enjoying elevated status and material wealth to hide their covert selfish interests (19).” The attempt of the Great Awakening to bring back the traditional way of living …show more content…
Penn and the governing authorities monitored the settlers through a degree of authoritarianism and sumptuary legislation. “Vain, needless objects were to be avoided, and sobriety, simplicity, and modesty cultivated (33).” Yet, overtime, many of the Quakers gradually departed from piety and simplicity. An influx in the populations of German and Scot-Irish settlers into the Delaware Valley eventually led to the Quaker majority becoming a waning minority. The colonial population by 1750 consisted of twenty-five percent Quakers. Many early Quaker colonists, realizing the benefits of their access to fertile lands and trade, quickly crossed the threshold of wealth. As Quaker merchants, artisans, and farmers largely benefited from this growth in wealth, they “adopted the worldly attitudes and trappings that their faith explicitly rejected (34).” Like the Puritans, the Quakers also failed to promote simplicity (along with their religious zeal and social ethic) among their children. The younger Quakers did not have the same attachment and allegiance to the Society’s ideals that their parents had. With the emergence of worldly activities and values continued, many Quakers rebelled against the restrictions in place. Some of the wealthiest Friends denounced their Quaker ties altogether and joined the more publicly attractive Anglican church. Penn,
Yet each of these revivals were either stopped or drastically slowed down by the American majority’s desire for wealth. A small percentage of Americans consistently lived interpretations of the simple life but they were frequently viewed as outsiders. The support for simple living amongst the people as a whole could never fully survive the growth of the nation. The supporters of the simple life faced many obstacles and challenges throughout their fight against lavishness. …show more content…
The introduction of an international trading network into the Massachusetts Bay allowed merchants to thrive. It became a place ruled by a merchant oligarchy where there was an endless amount of commercial activity and opportunity and theological liberalism flourished. Salem, New Haven, and other New England ports also enjoyed this high-living merchant aristocracy. The preaching of leaders of simplicity continued even though their stance became more and more unpopular among the majority. The Puritans, as well as the later generations of simple livers, faced the problem of children being less inclined to live simply. For many of the younger generations growing up in relative comfort and stability, there was no real need for simplicity. The Puritans also faced the problems of growth in population and complexity. This along with urbanization, commercialism, and cosmopolitanism were leading the introduction of diversity into a relatively homogeneous social order (19). The constant flow of ships coming into ports brought new goods, ideas, and people. During this time of social change, the Puritan ethic became the minority. The appeal for the public to practice simplicity was seen by many as a “rhetorical cloak employed by those enjoying elevated status and material wealth to hide their covert selfish interests (19).” The attempt of the Great Awakening to bring back the traditional way of living …show more content…
Penn and the governing authorities monitored the settlers through a degree of authoritarianism and sumptuary legislation. “Vain, needless objects were to be avoided, and sobriety, simplicity, and modesty cultivated (33).” Yet, overtime, many of the Quakers gradually departed from piety and simplicity. An influx in the populations of German and Scot-Irish settlers into the Delaware Valley eventually led to the Quaker majority becoming a waning minority. The colonial population by 1750 consisted of twenty-five percent Quakers. Many early Quaker colonists, realizing the benefits of their access to fertile lands and trade, quickly crossed the threshold of wealth. As Quaker merchants, artisans, and farmers largely benefited from this growth in wealth, they “adopted the worldly attitudes and trappings that their faith explicitly rejected (34).” Like the Puritans, the Quakers also failed to promote simplicity (along with their religious zeal and social ethic) among their children. The younger Quakers did not have the same attachment and allegiance to the Society’s ideals that their parents had. With the emergence of worldly activities and values continued, many Quakers rebelled against the restrictions in place. Some of the wealthiest Friends denounced their Quaker ties altogether and joined the more publicly attractive Anglican church. Penn,