The dilemma of frugality and consumption in British women's magazines 1940–1955

Abstract

The present paper is based upon a corpus of texts drawn from women's magazines published whilst a policy of rationing was in effect in Britain. It problematises the way in which some debates about the significance of frugality and consumption at that time have been constructed Á in an either/or manner. As an alternative, it advocates a more dilemmatic, and messier, approach that can better grasp the nuanced ways in which frugality was also used as a resource to incite consumption of specific items. The paper maps some of the ways in which food adverts positioned the product depicted in relation to rationing and war, and explores their rhetorical construction in more detail, demonstrating the ways in which categorising adverts as frugality-orientated or consumption-orientated is insufficient to understand the claims offered about the product. Attention is also directed towards adverts for products explicitly identified as unavailable, and in particular the approach adopted by Stork Margarine in this regard Á substituting their product with a ''cookery service'' to assist the ''housewife'' with the difficulties of rationing.

“Don’t blame the shopkeeper!!”

“…This paper is based on a close reading and interpretation of food, drink and confectionery brands advertisements from the Daily Express and Daily Mirror newspapers across the Second World War. Building on the work by Burridge (2008), it explores different message strategies used by brands in response to shortages, zoning and pooling.…”

“…Many of these early advertisements, featured positioning strategies, i.e., attempts to influence how consumers perceived the brand, and messages for the brands which would be repeated throughout the war. The idea that different positioning strategies might be used was proposed by Burridge (2008) who identified seven strategies in advertisements in women's magazines across the whole period of rationing (Table I) 1940-1955(Burridge, 2008 Overall Burridge's (2008) typology is a very useful beginning to exploring the nature of advertising in the Second World War. However, by failing to differentiate the impact of rationing (designed to ensure equal shares of a limited supply by limiting demand) from the impact of the measures that controlled supply, a good deal of nuance is lost.…”

“…Other brands used the approach of positioning themselves as alternatives to products in short supply, similar to Burridge's (2008) first positioning strategy, throughout the war, for example Weetabix (Figure 7) and Kellogg's Corn Flakes, positioned themselves as a way to save both fuel and bacon, since they could replace the traditional British breakfast choice of bacon and eggs (Clampin, 2014, citing the Statistical Review of Press Advertising). Also Clampin (2014 p. 83, citing the Statistical Review of Press Advertising) indicates that Kellogg's Corn Flakes had the biggest increase in advertising spend in late 1939, "from £15 in October to £3,009 in November 1939", in response to the announcement of the rationing of bacon on 1 November 1939.…”

“…For example, Edgerton (2011) in his re-examination of Britain’s strength during the war mentions concentration in relation to slaughterhouses and cheese. Burridge (2008, p. 397) refers to a “voluntary de-branding” in the margarine industry; however, he frames it as an aspect of rationing. Brayley and McGregor’s (2005) short popular history of the home front mentions the zoning of chocolate and confectionery.…”

“…The examination of newspaper advertising, contemporary government documents and the historical literature indicates that zoning and pooling were widespread across British industry. Throughout the paper, different positioning strategies used by advertisers in response to shortages or absences will be discussed and tabulated, building on and extending the work done by Burridge (2008). Finally, these strategies will be tabulated to highlight how these issues impacted on advertising.…”