Zelizer Reading Response #2

I find Zelizer’s article connects back to our class as it examines the narrative behind the economic. It provides the social part on why people categorize their money a certain way (the narrative part) rather than just how people spend their money (the economic part). It connects together the human element that controls the economy, much like our class focuses on the connections between writing and economics. It also introduces psychology: the part that caught my attention the most was when the article interviewed a hairdresser, who also worked in prostitution, who said she categorizes her “dirty money” (Zelizer 491) from her socially-approved earnings from her barber work. This story to me highlights one of the main points of the article, and one that I agree with, that not all economic choices are impartial and logical. This judgement connects back to the other examples of Christmas bonuses made earlier in the article. Zelizer explains that one part of our economy is comes from gifting. I find the gift economy example to contradict Zelizer’s conclusion, where he talks about how the economy is advancing. The part of gifting reminds me of the past time period where a bartering system was used in the economy. Objects with monetary value were used instead of cash. To me, Zelizer’s point that a gift economy makes up today’s economy is valid, but he contradicts his point that our economy is moving forwards. This comment shows regression, whereas other points he made about the new Internet currencies (I assume he was referring to Bitcoin) show forward movement.