When decluttering expert Marie Kondo published her ground-breaking book, The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up, hordes of grateful, stuff-encumbered readers around the world seized particularly on her question “Does it spark joy?”
That was the criterion Kondo proposed for deciding whether to keep something. Does an item in your possession give you a little thrill when you hold it in your hands? If so, hang on to it. If not, then So long, mustard-colored cardigan with the leather buttons.
Suddenly, it seemed like everyone who was flirting with the notion of decluttering their homes began talking about joy-sparks. Surely, in Kondo’s simple question was the razor to slice through indecision about what to keep and what to toss when pursuing a simpler lifestyle.
End of story. Or is it?
Let me begin by saying that, to me, any voice calling us to own fewer possessions is a welcome voice.
In America, we consume twice as many material goods as we used to 50 years ago. Over the same period, the size of the average American home has nearly tripled, and today that average home contains about 300,000 items.
Most homes contain more televisions than people. About 25 percent of two-car garages don’t have room to park even one car inside them, and still one out of every 11 American households rents off-site storage—the fastest-growing segment of the commercial real estate industry over the past four decades. Meanwhile, home organization, trying to find places for all our excess belongings, is now an $8 billion industry.
We’re at material overload and it isn’t fun like it looks in the commercials.
We live in a society where families are chronically stressed, tired, and rushed, with our excessive possessions compounding (if not creating) the problems. IKEA chief Steve Howard may have let a secret slip when he said that in the western world we’ve reached “peak home furnishings.”
The de-clutter, de-own movement is rapidly catching on, as evidenced, for example, by the popularity of Tiny Houses and the growth of organizations such as the National Association of Professional Organizers and the National Association of Senior Move Managers.
My family became converts to minimalism in 2008 after I wasted a beautiful Saturday morning cleaning out my garage, and a neighbor, seeing my frustration, made the casual comment “Maybe you don’t need to own all that stuff.” As I surveyed the heap of dusty things piled up in my driveway, out of the corner of my eye I noticed my son playing alone on the swing set in the backyard. And right then I had a life-changing realization:
Excess possessions do not bring extra happiness into life; even worse, they distract us from the things that do!
Today we live in a smaller house with only a third of the possessions we used to have. And we couldn’t be happier now that we have more money, more time, and more energy for the things that matter most.
Along the way, I’ve seen how Kondo’s trademark filter has prompted significant decluttering efforts both here and abroad. I’m thankful for that. Yet I can’t help but bristle at the phrasing because the question “Does it spark joy?” may actually rob tidying up of its fullest potential in our lives.
Specifically, we get three things wrong when we evaluate our possessions only by asking whether they spark joy or not.
1. We place our own happiness above everything else and continue to define it in terms of our possessions. Unfortunately, when the predominant question in our mind is “Does this make me happy?” we routinely fall short of actually realizing our happiness. In fact, recent research points to the biological fact that the best way to discover happiness is to help bring it about in someone else’s life.
2. Kondo’s suggested focus does not cull our consumeristic tendencies. Owning less is great, but wanting less is even better. Once we overcome the pull of consumption in our lives, we are free to pursue other passions. Unfortunately, the question “Does it spark joy?” does little to rewire our thinking in that regard. After all, when we’re standing in the department store, many things we pick up spark joy. That’s why we leave with so many of them in our shopping carts.
3. The filter may improve the peacefulness of our surroundings, but it does little to bend the trajectory of our lives. It rarely causes us to evaluate the motivations within that caused the clutter to build in the first place. And when we do not diagnose the cause of our clutter problem, we are bound to repeat it.
So let me propose an alternative question for us to ask ourselves when we’re making the hold/release call on any particular item in our possession. Rather than asking, “Does it spark joy?” let’s begin asking:
Does it help me fulfill a greater purpose with my life?
As I see it, we should be thinking about not just what we own but why we want to own it. What is our goal in life, anyway? What are we hoping to accomplish?
Sure, some people may only be interested in the pursuit of personal pleasure by acquiring as much stuff as possible, but I believe they represent a small minority. Instead, most of us desire to make a selfless contribution of some kind to a world that’s swelling with needs.
Two years ago, my wife, Kim, and I created a nonprofit called The Hope Effect that is changing orphan care by providing solutions that mimic the family. We would never have pursued this interest of ours if minimalism hadn’t freed up the time and money to do it. I’d still be spending my Saturdays cleaning and organizing. But today our lives are permanently different, and so are the lives of a growing number of parentless children around the world.
Orphan care is not everybody’s passion. But whatever others feel they were put on the planet to do, some of their possessions are either directly or indirectly helping them accomplish it, while others are holding them back. It makes the best sense to keep what aligns with their goal in life and get rid of the rest.
So when you’re holding one of your possessions in your hands, ask yourself, Does it help me fulfill my purpose? Does it help me craft a lifestyle in which I am able to build relationships and care for others, or might I be able to use my time, money, and energy in better ways?
Clear away obstacles one by one. Then advance toward your goal.
There’s a big difference between tidying up your home and freeing up your life. Instead of merely sparking some joy within yourself, light a fire in the world.
About Joshua Becker
I read both Marie’s and Joshua’s book. In my perspective Marie’s philosophy making much more sense and deep meaning for the “purpose of my life” for me.
I am saying this, because nobody has a right to decide which is better than other. Taking “minimalism as the only truth” for better life is wrong and going too far.
In this article, I observe two things:
1. Joshua thinks his way is better than Marie’s and argues as like it is a fact, not his personal opinion. This is kind of arrogant approach. For example, from my personal perspective it is vice versa (Marie’s philosophy is much more deeper than Joshua’s)
2. Joshua didnt really understand what Marie is trying to say about in her book. I would recommend him to read the book again, maybe several times, without a background judgement mechanism which compares methodologies.
Making such kind of comparison only lower the values of both methodologies in an unnecesaary way.
I agree with the message in this post. I don’t perceive this as a personal attack on Marie Kondo. People who do see it that way may need to ask themselves why this post has really upset them. “Sparking joy” may help you trash items you don’t want anymore, but if that becomes your only criteria for what comes and goes from your life, you may find yourself down a wasteful and selfish path.
“Does this spark joy?” is just a starting point for some. You cannot judge the people who read this book that they’re not minimalist enough just because they don’t happen to apply your own methodologies. It’s such an easy almost trivial question that anyone can easily disregard or flag as “wrong” which is why people who find themselves daunted by even the thought of decluttering their houses never get to start doing so.
There are a lot of techniques out there and neither are right or wrong. It just so happens that Marie phrased it so well and easy that it feels like anyone can do it so. It’s a shame that some people would have to pit on others just to make themselves appear better, like what other comments here say.
You’re only confusing people because Marie’s not even trying to push minimalism on people. Her main point is surrounding yourself with only what sparks joy.
From reading this article and the comments, it seems like most people did not read either of Marie Kondo’s books. If you read them, you will understand the question , “Does this spark joy?” better. Otherwise, you have just a trite understanding of a catch phrase.
Also, she never says that that question will help you become a minimalist. So, why would you use that question to become a minimalist? There’s a big difference between decluttering and minimalism.
My beginning step of becoming a minimalist began with reading Josh’s blog and his many articles. Then I found “Be More with Less”. Courtney gave me the idea of 333 for my cluttered clothes closets. Wonderful idea!
Their frequent personal emails/blogs about how and why to get rid of clutter have encouraged me greatly. I also read some of Marie Kondo’s articles and have enjoyed how to make my dresser/clothes look neater. Having said that, I find that everyone has helped me in one way or another. I didn’t agree with everything they said and just picked out what I could relate to. I am confidant I will achieve what I want because I have slowly but surely continue with this process with their help. There are more people/blogs to discover to keep encouraging me with whatever info they have to share.
I think Joshua has gone further in his minimalist mindset than most others who are entering into the whole “decluttering” craze for the first time. It’s good to be reminded that we need to go deeper and think about values, but when you are just starting out, the simplicity of “Does it spark joy?” is an excellent catalyst for change. And, once you have achieved a simplified, organized home, it is much easier to then go deeper. After all, I doubt Joshua was thinking along these deep lines when he first started out.
I don’t want to shrill for my own blog, but I wrote an article that addresses this question from a similar angle, asking if minimalism and Marie Kondo’s method (KonMari) were the same thing. If you’re interested in comparing the two, you might find it of interest (link via my username).
To summarize though, I think the two share much in common but have a couple of notable differences.
Minimalism and KonMari differ in their approach. Minimalism asks you to say goodbye to everything except that which is essential. In contrast, the KonMari Method asks you to identify what you love – what sparks joy. It may seem like a minor difference but it shapes the way you look at your belongings. For Minimalism, stuff is a necessary evil. For KonMari, what you keep, which could be a lot or a little, is celebrated.
Here are a couple of quotes that I see as representing the different starting points.
Minimalism
“Truthfully, though, most organizing is nothing more than well-planned hoarding.”
― Joshua Fields Millburn, Everything That Remains: A Memoir by The Minimalists
“The things you own end up owning you.”
― Joshua Fields Millburn, Everything That Remains: A Memoir by The Minimalists
KonMari Method
“Discarding is not the point; what matters is keeping those things that bring you joy. If you discard everything until you have nothing left but an empty house, I don’t think you’ll be happy living there.”
― Marie Kondo, Spark Joy: An Illustrated Master Class on the Art of Organizing and Tidying Up
“The important thing in tidying is not deciding what to discard but rather what you want to keep in your life.”
― Marie Kondo, Spark Joy: An Illustrated Master Class on the Art of Organizing and Tidying Up
I actually started the decluttering of my home as a response to all the books and articles on minimalism and how they really spoke to me. I thought I had done all I could until Kondo’s book came out and was so highly praised I decided to read it. It opened my eyes to how much more I could do, as well as how I could use that question to control impulse buys. If the thought of an object living in my home every day did not spark enough joy, I didn’t buy it! Now I am perfectly comfortable picking up an object in a store, holding it in my hands and admiring it’s beauty in the moment, then setting it back down and walking out because though it is beautiful in that moment, I know that its beauty will not endure in my home. I will grow used to it and eventually lose my love for it. Better to enjoy it in that moment, then walk away, than to spend my hard-earned money on something that will eventually wear out its welcome and be discarded down the road.
Also, her book goes into a lot of detail into how to treat those items that you need or that spark joy. Her method of folding clothes, for instance, seemed odd and silly at first, but after trying it, I realized how much more sense it made and how much less room it took in my drawers. It made choosing what to wear in the morning easier, and I was able to downsize my furniture even further just by folding my clothes differently! Of course, none of that has much to do with values except that when you get to that point of minimalism that is your personal “sweet spot”, you are far more free to focus on the values in your life.
I have mixed feeling from this post.
I disagree with the critics of Marie Kondo principle. If to take the question “does it spark joy?” from context and ignore peculiarity of Japanese culture you can think that such question just persue us in our possession to own things. In fact if to read Marie entire book you will find that “spark joy” means things which are important for us and which we use often. This is about things which make us feel comfortable, confident etc. And the true is that really not so many things makes us feel this way and usually we use the same things all the time. The rest we don’t need. And overall things at home are usually for every day routine: what we dress, with what we clean, cook, relax etc. For such things question about helping to fulfill big aim is not relevant but this things have to bring us pleasure every day as TRUE LIFE AND HAPPINESS IN EACH MOMENT. And if we have favorite cup for morning coffee why it’s bad? It just makes a nice ritual for ourself which helps to set up mood for the whole day.
Question “does it help me to fulfill greater purpose with my life” is really interesting and motivating but in my view more suitable for our actions.
This article brings me joy!
I have spent alot time (years) decluttering my overflowing space, losing precious time that I craved for. Packing unpacking repacking moving boxes and containers around rarely making headway.
Then I found Kon Mari I am grateful for the help and change of thought I received from Kon Mari suggestions. I have made headway in that her book relieved my mind of “keep everything in case you NEED IT” and “DON’T WASTE ; it’s still good”. Etc.
I was brought up with parents who lived through the depression. Possessions were valued and used.
Although I am making progress I am also having difficulty with the joy question. For example my clothes bring me joy that’s why I bought them; and I wear them. But still there are too many for the space I have. ( seven winter coats). I wear them but I don’t need seven. And I enjoy wearing each one.
I was in need of more help when I read this minimalist article. It has brought to the forefront of my mind what I have been trying to achieve. It made me realize again what I desperately need and want : free space to breathe. Free space to walk and move through my home. Free my mind from clutter. Free space to create. To be able to do what gives me purpose and joy.
Questions I ask now are: 1. Does it bring me joy? 2. Will it help fulfill my purposeful need?
So thank you Kon Mari and thank you Minimalist.
I happened to stumble a shared post from an FB friend and starts reading your article. I was amazed and so touched because as of the moment, my family is building a smaller home just for the 4 of us, my 5 year old little girl and my parents. Now I know that we are on the right path of simply “Living a Simple Life”.
This article does not spark joy.
“Does this item spark joy/ make me happy?” has helped
in letting go of a lot of things I used to hold on to. It also helps in preventing buying unnecessary items by asking the same question before you buy things. Because of this method, I can go to the mall and look at a lot of items and go home with only the very items that I know will have a purpose. I no longer buy things just because it’s on sale. This helps me value the things I have for their ability to spark joy ( through purpose).
Also, isn’t “helping others in need” a little selfish too when it brings you personal “happiness” by feeling that you served others?
I get the feeling that you didn’t actually read the book.
In the book she addresses all these things in depth, and much more besides. She absolutely encourages you to consider your ideal lifestyle as well as to consider value certain objects may or may not have within that ideal life. That is actually the first step.
Also, there’s actually a big difference between desire (such as consumerist desire for more stuff) and real genuine joy. That’s actually what I think is so brilliant about her method. When done correctly it can teach you to differentiate the difference. It can make you proof against snake oil.
I’m sorry, this post just reeks of arrogance. Marie Kondo and Josh Becker are preaching very similar messages. You can promote your philosophies without attacking and belittling others. I think “sparking joy” has a meaning that is much deeper than Josh’s interpretation of it, which is due to our American culture and ignorance of other cultures. And Josh, it really comes across like you’re saying you are a better person than Marie because of the non-profit that you started that Marie did not. That somehow your life is more meaningful and valuable than Marie’s because of some man-made metric. That is the epitome of what the Pharisees were all about (boasting in their works) and what Christ came to rescue this world from. I think both Josh and Marie preach a message that this world needs to hear. It would be better accompanied with some humility, kindness, and compassion… rather than just some mud-slinging.
I agree! I may even start talking to my socks–if I can find a pair! :-)
I found her suggestion about rolling versus folding items both cuts time when putting away laundry AND it is great for packing a bag to go somewhere!
I tend to keep things for sentimental reasons; so I took her question to heart. I was “fond” of some things but they did not “spark joy”, which is a very intense event, So I did find this a good way to start my paring down of my stuff.
Don’t agree that Marie Kondo’s approach isn’t also leading someone (me)to make decisions about the reason I have something,my values driven lifestyle & my service to others.This article proposes that asking ourselves “only” Does It Spark Joy,won’t lead us to the very same questions/points this writer espouses.Kon Mari method DID help me get in touch with what energy something gave me (and do I want that energy around me),helped me get off the memory train and live in the now,helped me to surround myself with things,people ,experiences,ways of spending my time that I truly wanted/needed.Also it was so rewarding to donate items that I may have/still value (eg my grown children’s toys,games,sports equipment) to others that appreciate them eg charities like Boys and girls club.It warmed my heart.Think this writer missed the boat in understanding marie condo.Perhaps the Question Does it apark joy?& the the title of Tidying” is misleading as to what she is intending
EXCELLENT!!!!
I never liked that question but couldn´t explain exactly why…
What I understood from the book regarding that idea is that, in the long term, everyone ends up owning a lot of things: Some of them are there because of what we think we should be (like the girl who owned a huge collection of professional books and papers), and others are there because of what we really want ourselves to be (i don’t know, maybe a set of gardening tools).
When decluttering, you’re exposed to a lot of raw data about yourself, so it’s a great opportunity to realize what you really value and what you can live without.
In the end, I’ve never considered the book a ‘minimalism’ or ‘decluttering’ one, but more a self help one, so the question is quite valid from my point of view.
I agree. Totally a self help book that helped me a great deal.
This was an amazing perspective. I was on the “does it spark joy?” bandwagon after reading the book, and I believe I was able to discern what I should keep and not keep; however, this question adds bite to the process. If an object fulfills a greater purpose in my life then it makes my decision to keep it very clear.
Also, people who have not made the mindshift out of consumerism need your question as a clearer guideline. Love this. Thank you.
Your friend in minimalism, Shadé
I wonder if the saying “Does it spark Joy” loses its meaning in translation? I interpreted it to mean will the item improve your life thus giving you joy.
Me too.Hate to say,but I dont agree with this article’s premise
The first thing I thought of when I read this (which is excellent) was the roll of duct tape in my hall closet. It doesn’t spark joy or help me fulfill my greater purpose.
It does however help me fix things or tape things that need to be stuck together. I think we forgot that sometimes there are things we own that should fall in a “generally useful” category. Toilet brushes, screwdrivers, washing machines – some things help us get a job done so we can focus on fulfilling our greater purpose or finding joy.
I suspect that from a Japanese point of view, “sparking joy” may very well incorporate the idea of fitting into one’s life’s greater purpose.
Totally agree.her book was so helpful for me
Thank you SO much for this. I read Marie Kondo’s books over a year ago and they motivated me to make a good start. But the Becoming Minimalist community is giving me renewed motivation and methods that I am confident will help me be victorious. The question, “does this (item) fit into my life’s greater purpose?” is huge for me; as well as the related question, “what IS my life’s greater purpose?”
I think the “spark joy” question can be the first, or starter question. For some, it is a beginning – a way into deeper, more meaningful ways of being. Thanks for providing us ways to go deeper.
I found the questions ‘Does it spark joy?’ very useful. It has helped me give up things I was clinging on to for the ‘just in case I need it’ moment. But I still need many articles to complete my book research – I must get on with writing it now!
This is how it worked for me. In the first section of the book, she has you write out and visualize a life and space you want. It’s a nice framework for getting rid of stuff and focusing your life. My bullet points were a kind, creative, active, and bright. It really helped me cut out items that cause distraction and now I am doing more for the environment and animals as well as creative projects. I still look at my statement I wrote when I started Kondo’s book when I need to remember who I want to be and the type of environment that encourages that. I have amended the specifics here and there but my bullet points remain. I have other problems with some of her methods, but overall I think it is a useful launchpad into minimalism (even though it is not a minimalist book) and limiting consumption. I also find it an entertaining read.
Interesting article. I did find the “spark joy” question helpful to me because practical questions like Do I use this? Etc I am creative and can always find an answer for them so it was hard to minimize that way. After the initial aha moment from reading the “spark joy” question though I had a hard time decluttering like I wanted to because her technique of emptying an entire space and putting back what sparks joy is somewhat difficult to do in a busy life with kids. I was able to keep clothes neater and downsize but I did find as I went through your decluttering course huge strides being made. I have a clean kitchen almost daily for the first time in years, etc. I gave up a great deal more clothes because I was thinking about what I wanted my personal and my clothes purpose to be. I think you really get how being a parent and family life really is and how to integrate decluttering into that which I am very grateful for! I think too your purpose is more about giving up things and living your life, while Kondo’s is more about organizing what you have and beautifying your home. For example, I followed her advice about folding clothes and it did make my drawers look pretty, but now that I follow the 33 clothing project or 31? I have made plans to give my dresser away because everything now fits in my closet!
I enjoyed this article very much. It is helpful to me.
I thought you had some worthy points to make, but it’s sad and it discredits your mission that you needed to trivalize the good and decent work of another to do it. I just used Marie’s method to move out of my bathroom and went through every item to see if it syncronized with my mission of a more effecient space to support me and help to mobilize quick get-aways while I care for my ailing husband and travel for the needs of aging parents. Thank you Marie.
I feel the same way about this post.
Interesting question (makes you think), but like some people have pointed out spark joy works for a lot of people too. There isn’t a right or wrong with both questions, it’s just “what works best for you?” Or “which question to ask for this particular thing?”
I feel we should highlight ours without having to diminish others’. Thank you!
Awesome post Joshua. Thank you!
ADDENDUM: Given the aforementioned, minimalism needs a new conversation. How about we leave the discussion of quantities and strategies (the world of objects) and we prioritize qualities (the world of values)? I suggest a new, actual philosophy of minimalism which I’m calling value-driven minimalism. What we know of minimalism today, the old guard, object-driven minimalism, is more of a method/strategy for dealing with objects directly, while the new philosophy is a method for values which determine objects last (as a consequence of a process of self-re-examination). In this sense, VDM is truly about the REJECTION of, or DISTANCING from, objects VIA a process of initial valuation, while ODM is about the (paradoxical) FETISHIZATION of objects (through their negative/absence) AS a process of valuation and goal-achieving.
Both are in pursuit of specific goals in their own ways but again VDM establishes an operating framework for individual values first (initial confrontation with internalities) which objects are later filtered through, while ODM in essence imposes an operating system for objects first and considers the steps to take towards values in the aftermath (the idea being that when everything is cleared away first then we can supposedly act, or act better in order to achieve a goal, which is process that requires too much friction with things / confrontation with externalities up front). In order for VDM to work, it has to be debated. Here is a brief comparison between the avant-garde VDM and the arriere-guard ODM.
Value-Driven Minimalism (VDM): the new minimalism
If you do x with values, then you get y via these objects.
Creation of a value system.
Objects are a fallout or side effect via their actual usefulness (this gives one actual appreciation of the object instead of an object-oriented appreciation – the object for its own sake as opposed to its tie to a value system), the object is the fallout of the creation of a value system, the value system determines what gets filtered (subtractive / additive)
bottom up
The individual / value system is foregrounded before she ever makes a move.
Achieving goals via VDM is an a priori value operation – everything is determined by taking action last – acting wisely by having constructed a real, genuine framework for acting.
Over-arching: ‘One-definition’ but individually definable
Analogy: A custom box with holes – whatever fits in it is defined as “minimal” after everything else falls through; i.e. doesn’t fit the individual’s value system. (Amusingly, this is about qualities)
Object-Driven Minimalism (ODM): the current minimalism
If you do x with objects, then you get y via these values.
Creation of a clearing operation.
Objects are a catalyst via their negative (absence) / blank-slating
Objects limited to functionalism and aesthetics
top down
The end goal is the fallout of the fetishization of the object (in its own weird, reductive way a paradoxical fetishization of the object via its negative (its absence).
The individual moves first, skipping to the end goal, before determining integral, embedded values.
Achieving goals via ODM is an a posteriori value operation – everything is determined by taking action first – acting prematurely without having constructed a real, genuine framework for acting.
Under-arching: ‘Multi-definition’ but wholly undefinable – can be defined by many and thereby nebulous and blobby as a whole
Analogy: A solid, standardized box – whatever can’t fit in it is defined as “minimal”. (This is about quantities.)
This is quite a rundown on what I think might be fairly complicated ideas that have emerged over the last day or so, but I might be on to something. The differences between the two are probably subtle, but I think that VDM becomes more effective in the long-run because it is no longer about methods and no longer about the individual “dealing” with objects. The middle-man aka the value system (which would be a deep and lengthy process in itself, TBD) is the entity determining what objects falls through and what don’t. Objects, in a sense, become truly “hand-off”.
By objects I don’t just mean things, but am using it as a general term for materiality, including the constituents of those things (like aesthetics and function) and what they also make up if they are part of a larger whole. In any case, the value framework that VDM constructs is what determines what objects are in support of that system.
And a final note… I suppose there are parallels with VDM and the psychological therapy provided to hoarders when they are first consulting. In other words, psychologists have to understand their clients and their history/background etc. in depth, before they can help them. The same is true for VDM except it deals first and foremost with everything (values, emotions, intangibles) emerging from the Self and is directed and determined by the individual (with guidelines), as opposed to the ODM initial object strategy (clearing operations, dealing with tangibles) that individuals have to first to act upon before any lengthy introspective process.
ADDENDUM TO ADDENDUM
Just trying to clear this up for myself by writing it out, and hopefully for you, though I know there’s still a lot that’s vague. It’s a work in progress.
ODM: Confrontation with objects directly by limiting engagement to aesthetics and functionalism (including sentimental/emotional notions) which comprise the current understanding of “necessities” and post-rationalizing a value system based on those objects afterwards.
VDM: Confrontation with objects indirectly by engagement with objects through value framework – the “hands-off” approach. The initial amplification/strengthening of value system becomes a more effective filter for the objects to be determined. What is left is defined as “minimal” or what is “needed”. Functionalism/aesthetics are byproducts of value system instead of its driver.
To put it very simplistically: you don’t think about or touch the objects at all at the start. You spend time determining a system of values and when finished or practicable, determine whether or not the object is in support of that system. This way, minimalism can be individually defined but does not fall apart as a “lifestyle philosophy” because it becomes about a system of values which is more malleable and adaptable (not just because it can be but out of respect for the individual) than a method of dealing with objects.
The white tank top that I wear because it’s so soft and useful, that fits perfectly…does not help me fulfill a greater purpose in my life. And it would not be a useful question to ask as I clean out my closet. And in the book, “sparking joy” was not the only criteria for keeping items. There wasn’t really a phrase for it, but keeping things you used often was quite acceptable. So my spatula, which doesn’t spark joy, and did help me fulfill the greater purpose of taking care of my family, would also be kept going along with Marie Kondo’s book. So I don’t think she’s wrong in that aspect. I do not however, talk to my socks.