What is in a bag? Doing and becoming subjectivity

Introduction: What is in a bag?

#What-is-in-my-schoolbag? Is a trending social media prompt for which students post short videos (on platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, etc.) presenting their school bags and the items they carry: notebooks, pencils, mobile phones, earplugs, lip balms, other make-up material, clothing… However, as we set out to show personal items like bags carry much more, bags carry, essentially, carry out our selves.

Worn around bodies, carried along throughout the day, bags have been central to humans’ daily lives and value exchange for thousands of years. Today, unaffected by the digitalisation of the consumer market, this close relationship to everyday practices and human bodies persists; around the world most individuals and almost every school child carries a bag daily. Despite their close affinity with human lives, rather than in ergonomics and medical literature examining effects of heavy backpacks on lumbar health, interestingly, bags have found little interest in social studies, perhaps due to their mundane ubiquity or at the opposite end an extreme fetishism associated with branded singular bags of clothes fashion.

Indeed, the relationship between humans and their personal items like bags are complex. Surely, bags are treated as fashion items expressing identity, style, lifestyle and thoughts, in preferences of colours, textures, materials, and forms. They for sure circulate social lives as symbolic intermediaries of distinction (Bourdieu, 1984; Douglas and Isherwood, 2002; Simmel, 1957). However, fashion items are not simply about expression of people’s identity, and their connection to individuals is much more than a representational relationship (Miller and Woodward, 2011:19). These items are worn or carried in close relationship to human bodies. Recent approaches to fashion conceptualise dressing as ‘a situated bodily practice’ emphasizing the embodied nature of our relationship to fashion items (Entwistle, 2023). Similarly, bags have a very close relationship to one’s body, worn or carried around everywhere the self goes, embodied and situated in daily life practices. Consequently, bags are also used in and useful for daily practices, due to their physicality enabling and limiting action (Shove et al., 2007), they are mundane everyday objects stuffed, zipped, tossed around. However, this practicality is about “much more than a mundane and useful container,” as MacKenzie’s ethnography focusing on crafting of and use of the bilum bag by Telefol people demonstrates the bilum mediates and manifests complex and ambiguous gender relations (MacKenzie, 1991: 1). Similarly, the everyday use and materiality of Sari means that the Sari worn around the body becomes central to expressions of womanhood and motherhood for Indian women (Banerjee and Miller, 2003). Everyday use, related practices and the very materiality of objects like bags connect them to aspects of self.

Although it was the online digital popularity that drew our attention to bags it was the sheer physicality of the bags that stroke us within an increasingly digitalised consumer market. We started our research with social media harvesting (Liang and Zhu, 2017) that revealed a vast online content over the very material qualities of bags: millions of posts displaying bags and their contents, but also practices of modifying bags, such as decorating the bags with badges and personal items, drawing and colouring bags, patching or sewing additions, etc., that directed us back to following high schoolers to accessories shops and to observations on daily lives. 23 high school students in West Turkey, ranging from freshmen to seniors were interviewed. The students were invited to share how they use their bag, why they chose their bag, and were encouraged to elaborate on the stories of their modifications. Bags and modification practices present a physical route of customisation in a continuously digitalising consumer market, where ‘action with materials’ and its relationship to personhood is relevant for design (Fisher et al., 2022) and management professionals, as well as consumption studies.

The results of the field study, unsurprisingly, do not point to shared aspirations related to bags and bag modifications nor attachment styles, given the diverse daily life practices and demographics of the students, nor do we create a create a complete image of the ways humans relate to their bags. However, the findings highlight the intricate connections between humans and their personal belongings, implicating at the ways in which they are profoundly connected to selfhood – a self-order or inner self, and other selves Just as early humans relied on their bags for survival, bags today are as important for individuals to organise their daily lives and to accomplish themselves, and configure self-order.

Accordingly in the rest of the article, we provide a diluted review that is shaped through understandings that allow us an inclusion of material objects in configuration of selfhood, and set the ground for our conceptualisation of selfhood as a doing and so becoming subjectivity. Then we detail ‘doings’ with the bags where bags prove to be essential ‘companions’ in organising and accomplishing daily life practices, consequently the self. In the following sections we move on to becomings with bags, the ways bags carry out aspects of selfhood: Firstly, in terms of the intrasubjective self, detailing how bags and modifications relate to aspects of selfhood. Secondly, in terms of the intersubjective self, showing the ways in which bag modifications sustain, nurture and build relationships and initiate communal practices with other selves. To conclude, bags are crucial companions in configuring our selfhood in terms of our relationship to ourselves, and to other selves; bags carry out our selves.

Selfhood and material objects: A becoming subjectivity

Our close bodily relationships with bags, their involvement in self-expression, but also their use aspects and involvement in everyday life practices means that our conceptualisation of self must include diverse perspectives. As perspectives on self are interdisciplinary and are radically different in meaning (Zahavi, 2008), explaining self with a special inclination towards its material engagements is no straightforward task. Below we undertake a tricky task of reflecting on a selection of ideas from historical, phenomenological, constructivist and materialist approaches, arriving at a conceptualisation of self as a doing and so becoming subjectivity.

We start by clarifying that our concept of self must include a unique subjectivity. Wahrman (2004: xii) distinguishes between identity as “a common denominator that places an individual within a group” what he calls “identicality” and self as “the unique individuality of a person […] the essence of difference” corresponding to the emergence of the post-modern self, the self-aware and self-conscious consumer. Participants of our study all have a common identity – being a student – but through their bags and modifications they present and configure their unique subjectivity.

Accounts of self can be categorised in caricature as the thinking self and the experiencing self. The thinking self derives from a cartesian dualism of mind and body, where the self arrives at its position as a self-aware subject through cognitive reasoning, hence Descartes’ cogito ergo sum. This existentialist subjectivity, the reflexive position of the self has many critiques as illusionary, or as a necessary condition of language, but for our purposes here, most of all it collects all subjectivity in human minds, and so excludes material objects. Merleau Pontian phenomenology foregrounding situatedness of bodies and the embodied nature of human experience in the world allows us to both follow on from and contest body-mind standpoint, but also to include material participation in perception and self-awareness. A subject that becomes itself in mutual relationships with its material environment preconditions the material environment and the elements in it for perception (and self-awareness).

Although embodied experiences open the material dimension it seems to close off the social and cultural aspect of self as accounts of emobdiment are criticised to disregard explanations of subjects as a social and cultural construct, where social construction is taken to the extend that how we define ourselves are bound with ‘concepts derived from tradition and theory that will vary widely from one historical period to the next and across social class and culture’ (Zahavi, 2008). Entwistle (2023) proposes that thinking through embodiment with Bourdieu’s concept of habitus allows us to combine embodied action with social construction, as she explains ‘the way we come to live in our bodies is structured by our social position in the world, but these structures are only reproduced through the embodied actions of individuals.’ This view places embodied action at the core of social construction; we live and act through embodied structures of our society, and as we act, we act embodied, and as we live and act we experience, it is unique and situated and bodily but informed through social structure. Phenomenological thinking “decentre(s) the subject/object divide” explaining that objects are perceived from within our situated place in the world, “Bourdieu moves this perspective beyond simply an outline of habit by linking it to forms of power and the wider structures of society” (Garrat, 2015: 80).

Referring back to phenomenology of Zahavi (2008), he states that the self does not exist apart from the experience and places the self as a precondition of experience terming it as “subjectivity of experience” to emphasize the ipseity – the uniqueness – of experiential phenomena. This view proposes a perceiving self-aware or conscious self as in phenomenology, but an interacting, experiencing situated selfhood. This ties into the concept of Praktik in practice theory that is developed on a Bourdieuan approach. For practice theory, a practice is “a ‘type’ of behaving and understanding that appears at different locales and at different points of time and is carried out by different body/minds’ (Reckwitz, 2002: 250). A practice is “a routinized way in which bodies are moved, objects are handled, subjects are treated, things are described and the world is understood (Reckwitz, 2002: 250). Combining views on subjectivity of experience and practices we add to our unique individual the property of a doer, the self is a doing subjectivity, doing things with stuff.

The idea on practices and experiences that implicate doings with things joins neatly into materialist accounts of subjectivity. In her materialist accounts of subjectivity, Orlie (2010:134) discusses Nietzsche’s views on creative subjectivity contemplating on will to power, to conclude ‘we have always existed as impersonal matter’, meaning that subjects are material – as physical bodies – and this material is impersonal in that it is not subjective but construed externally. Miller’s theory of materiality offers us a perspective. Miller makes use of Hegelian dialectics to outline a theory of materiality for material culture studies (Miller, 2005) and calls us to be ‘concerned with how objects make people as with how people make objects’ (Miller and Woodward, 2011:19). Borgerson (2005:6) summarises Miller’s approach as follows: ‘values and social relations are not prior to cultural forms they take but are created in the act by which cultural forms come into being’ explaining that Miller’s theory of materiality assigns agency of subjects and objects to their correlation, where agency is not a quality of either subjects or objects.

This relational view, cramped up into a slight word choice of materiality over materials, implies a re-production of materiality that Miller (2005) outlines as objectification. There is no beginning or starting point in the relationship of objects and subjects, just like our co-evolution with the bags. In her explanation of objects and subjects Borgerson (2005:11) emphasises ‘interactions’: ‘Interactions become sites of agency, as well as identity constitution – especially in the sense of accomplishing certain purposes, undertaking certain activities, and relating to certain objects/others; or not.’ She takes identity as relationships to others, to objects, and to practices. So we can extend that self does not entail a simple social distinction with material codes, it is a unique agent, actively involved and practicing, it is in becoming as the subject interacts as the subject does things.

In the diverse literature covered here one thing is common in understandings of self: that self is an ongoing process, that changes with culture, with environmental elements, with interactions, with material substances. Self is dynamic, “an open-ended construction that is under constant revision” (Zahavi, 2008), “a kind of ongoing project” (Jopling 2000, 83). So the sense of becoming in our proposal includes in it this ‘ongoing’ process, it implies both an active doing, accomplishment by the subject, but also an unresolved search or an unfixed reflection. Self is in a way performed, be it in actions of narration, embodied perception, contemplative thinking, or practices; it is doings with things, which we can generalise as a becoming as doing.

In working through phenomenology and constructivism, we developed an understanding of subjectivity as constructed materially. But most accounts here place the self as an agent of social order, not a self-narrative from a first person perspective as Zahavi (2008) distinguishes. In the remainder of the article, we work through our conceptualisation of doing and becoming subjectivity, to understand not only social order, but inner order, self-order, inner relationships of self, a selfhood. We use selfhood to imply an inward agency, not relationships to broader social order or cosmos. We claim that the question related to the person, or selfhood, the first-person: Who am I? Can be answered by a conceptualisation of self as a doing and thereby becoming subjectivity. Within this guidance, in the remainder of the article we detail the relationships between material objects and selfhood we explore doings and becomings with bags. We take self both in terms of a practising so doing unique subjectivity and a subjectivity in relation to itself and objects, and to other subjects.

Doings with bags: Bags as daily companions

In this section we focus on doings with bags, and we show that doing is not a mere experience or simply an accomplishment of a task but as the subjects do things with bags they accomplish themselves, they become their selves. In order to perform a common daily task, both objects and subjects part-take and cooperate creating an ‘arrangement of hybrids’ where (Latour, 1993:73), where bags are used and are present with their very materiality and what their materiality limits or enables (Reckwitz, 2002). As for the participants of this study these tasks are not only related to formal schooling, limited to carrying study material, rather the daily practices that the bags enable are beyond the uniform school lives. Each student has a different day routine and associated practices, where bags enable them to accomplish and organise their varied and unique lives, essentially accomplishing themselves. For example, consider the case of Ted, one such busy student, whose daily schedule and activity in social groups depend on the capacity of his bag:

‘My bag looks like a mountaineering bag! Sometimes people even ask me where I’m headed to with that large a bag. Since I also go to volleyball practices, I cram pretty heavy stuff into it. That's why I needed a bag specifically designed for carrying heavy items.’ (Ted)

He continues explaining his other doings and the place of his bag in it:

‘I’m also quite involved in school, serving as the president of our school newspaper club. As I’m carrying a lot of notebooks and other stuff, having a large bag comes in handy.’ (Ted)

His bag enables Ted to accomplish these practices, literally by bearing the weight of heavy sports gear and offering the volumetric capacity to accommodate extra paperwork. But this is not simply about enabling a task, arguably the bag also enables him to accomplish himself, by enabling practices that he identifies himself with, being a volleyball player, being the leader of the school newspaper. He becomes his self as he does stuff with his bag. As well, he purports his singularity as he does things with his bag, he becomes the subject, the selfhood he configures – a doing and so becoming subjectivity.

The personal daily schedule of participants meant that school bags were part of a nexus of practices, including extracurricular activities and formal schooling. It was typical for the students interviewed for this research to participate in extracurricular activities, and their bags often accompany them to these practices. Our research reveals that subjects relationship to bags is formulated through doings and one’s relationship to bags is one of ‘companionship’ as Abigail promptly expresses: ‘I love that my bag accompanies me throughout the day!’ Being companions in activities other than the school, such as sports, recreation, book reading clubs, private classes or personal interests, it was revealed that the physicality of the bags and so practices the bag enables or joins are central to the organisation of daily lives and vice versa the practical organisation of daily life informs their school bags. Participants in the study are already adept at identifying and anticipating potential challenges in their daily lives, and a bag is a versatile companion for various purposes, locations, and habits.

To cope with the challenges of daily life schedules participants orchestrate a repertoire of bags. Quite a few participants carried two separate bags throughout the day, or they alternated their bags according to their daily schedule and the requirements and value of the practices. For example, Jane takes both of her bags when leaving the house, she explains that she has a school bag for her in-class necessities and another bag for her sports practice. Joseph, similarly, carries a duffel bag to his basketball practice and a separate backpack for his school:

‘I have basketball practice three days a week. I take both my school bag and that duffel bag. The gym bag has these three large compartments and then two little compartments. To carry clean clothes, deodorants, perfume and stuff, I needed quite a sizable bag. So, I bought that one.’ (Joseph)

As we can see from this quote Joseph’s bag is specifically tailored to his unique self, a neat and tidy basketball player that he becomes through his doings with his bag. As a conjunction of different practices (Reckwitz, 2002) individuals’ daily lives are complex. School bags are humble companions of becoming subjects; by carrying and organising stuff of mobile lives, bags literally enable the participants to accomplish their selves. Accompanied by the right type of bag for the right activity, through their everyday lives and struggles, companions that help with the accomplishment of practices, therefore of selfhood. Bags accompany the self to be the doing subjectivity that is in becoming.

Becomings with bags: Modifying bags - configuring selfhood

In this section we focus on the ways in which materiality of bags and modifications connect to inner self, self-order, aspects of selfhood. We realised that students modified their bags to relate to who they are, to facilitate personal motivation, such as their life goals and ambitions, to enhance their mood, how they feel; consequently as subjects modified their bags they constructed a self of a kind, as they modified they became of a certain sort of self.

Participants of our study revealed that the material qualities of the bags and modifications were used as a way to communicate aspects of self, and in return they made assumptions on others based on their bags. This potential is based on the ability of ‘non-verbal’ communication of mundane objects (Lemonnier, 2012). Emma explains how she thinks the practice of modifying her bag and the modifications on it express herself:

‘For example, the movies and series I watch… I love buying pins related to them. It can also be some cool lyrics or so - anything I find beautiful in general. I look at it, and if I think it looks good, I steal it like a goblin and put it in my bag. I love it. My bag looks like me, it is like myself. I think I can express myself perfectly well like this.’

In her explanation Emma explains that she uses her bag as an empty canvass to express things – experiences and doings – that make up herself. As she modifies her bag, she portrays herself as a certain type. She uses the fantasy character Goblin as a metaphor. Goblins are commonly portrayed as mischievous and cunning small creatures often associated with thievery, pranks, and causing trouble. Emma becomes a version of her selfhood with the act of adopting things, making them her own and displaying them on her bag. She explains this patchwork of a canvass as a materiality that portrays herself. We see that in her doings with her bag, so modifying the bag, she is becoming a certain selfhood, she constructs herself.

Some of the participants discussed how they would assess themselves from the third eye’s perspective if they glanced only at their bag. They went on to discuss what aspects of their character they are expressing. In addition, they conveyed a sense of how they would want others to approach them. As an example, Tracy remarked that she wants her peers to acknowledge that she is sophisticated and leads a busy life:

‘I like multi-pocketed bags more in general. You can put something in every compartment as if it shows to others that you are versatile. They might say, ‘Wow, this girl is pretty busy in her life’.’

In this case the materiality of the self is a metaphor for the doing subject. Participants take it as a baseline that they communicate themselves through the non-verbal medium of bags and they also make assumptions about others based on the material qualities and modifications on their bags. In the light of these statements, school bags are being used as a window into the self that they want to be and present. Subjects become the self they aspire to be through their doings and beings with bags. Emma considers what her peers might think of her bag based on its material qualities:

‘Since the bag is purple, I would say this person took their time with it; they must be fun to be around.’

It is not unexpected that students want to portray a self to the outside world through their personal items, but these items also help make visible and solidify so configure their self as a certain type, a unique subjectivity, thereby constructing the selfhood. For example, Beth identifies herself as affectionate and talkative, and constructs her character with the badge she hangs on her bag, that she believes will invite people to talk to her and see her genuine character, thereby solidifying her role as the affectionate and talkative self:

‘I hung a Gryffindor badge on my bag. Those who know me always say I give Gryffindor vibes since I’m very affectionate and talkative. I wanted those who saw it not to be afraid to come and talk once they see my bag.’ (Beth)

She tries to reflect the warm and lively characteristics of her personality with a well-recognised figure. It is both a way of expressing her personality and establishing her affectionate and talkative role in her peer group. In this way she does not only present herself as a certain type but also by solidifying her mission, her selfhood as an affectionate, caring, warm being, she constructs her selfhood, she is becoming her-self as she does things with her bag.

Ruth’s use of her bag and relationship to the materiality of the bag was very particular, her companion had a specific role in supporting her life goals:

‘You see, there is this diagonal zipper right in front of my bag. I take it to be a lifeline. There on the upper part I pin the things I accomplish in life. For example, there are the theatrical faces, these happy and sad masks. When my first theatre show came out, I pinned that badge there. There, on the upper part, I have cat and dog pins that look just like my pets. For instance, at the bottom part, I have a skateboard pin. I'll move that pin to the upper part the day I buy my skateboard. I'm organizing my accomplishments. It feels fantastic to move a pin to the upper part.’

Ruth has configured a very specific way of doing with her bag; a creative interpretation of the material quality of her bag, the diagonal zipper, was linked to her own life accomplishment line. She explained how ‘fantastic’ it feels to replace the pin as she accomplishes her goals, associating the object she carries along in her daily life with her broader life and uniting her doing with the bag with her becoming self. As can be understood, doing is not simply about accomplishing a task, but it is simply about doing and being involved with materiality, and creating meaning by relating to materiality. Ruth’s doing with her bag presents a great example of the doing and becoming subjectivity, where the selfhood is becoming as she is doing (with her bag). In this way as she is doing the modification she is realising her selfhood, constructing her being, and as she realises herself, she is doing modification on the materiality, connecting the materiality and the selfhood ever more intricately.

Chloe’s selfhood was linked to her bag yet in another way:

‘If I get bored or have enough, I change the accessories immediately.’

For Chloe, bag modification was a way of modifying herself. As the materiality of the bag was altered she was elevated to a happier place, to a happier selfhood. As she did alterations on her bag she became the desired self.

Relating to other selves: Modifying bags – building and nurturing relationships

Next to pertaining to bonds with the inner self, modifying bags presented aspects of relating to other subjects, in terms of keeping loved ones close, nurturing relationships, or building new relationships and communities through shared practices reproduced around bag modifications.

Modifying bags was inevitably about carrying loved ones close, turning bags into mobile personal temples that kept the participants supported and cared for. It was common that participants hung, attached, or pinned items gifted to them by their loved ones to feel that they are with them and to feel their support. Miller (2011:145) observes a similar feeling of proximity as women wear the jeans of their partners when they need to feel them close, where she defines in broader terms ‘material acts of wearing, donating and borrowing denim jeans, as a means through which relationships to others are negotiated.’ Bags are not worn intimately like the clothing items but they are carried out of the homes and brings the feeling and comfort of loved ones to the outside world. Beth explains the modifications on her bag as follows:

‘There I tied the bandana my teacher, Ms Annie, gave me. There is a key chain that my friend gifted me, her name is written on it. I hung it on my bag too. Then there is this frog my mother gave me, it also hangs down my bag. It's like becoming a totem to me. I love that little frog. [...] I believe it brings me good luck. Because these are the things gifted by the people I love, value and care about. I feel like the gifts let me keep their support with me. After all, I need mental strength while training.’

Beth explains that the modifications to her backpack provide her with good fortune and moral support during swimming practices. Similar to concept of ‘memory objects’ ‘precipitating memories and emotional attachment through routine usage and performative action,’ bags attain their meanings as they are used, as they get modified and their potential to hold loved ones close is elicited. Returning to our concept of selfhood, as we do things with materials we become, a selfhood that is defined as a doing and becoming subjectivity (Marschall, 2019:1).

Next to keeping the loved ones close, modifications on bags and practices associated with them are also ways of nourishing relationships. Beth, who is a swimmer explains how a practice based on exchanging accessories on their bags nurtured her relationship with her boyfriend by adding content and memories to their relationship:

‘I had a boyfriend who had a monkey pattern on his bag, and a monkey was hanging on the side of his bag. We exchanged my frog with his monkey. Then when we met again in another city, we got our original ones back. This way, our accessories also travel around the country. I like this idea.’

Beth is a swimmer who travels to different cities, and she and her boyfriend who lives in a different city travel for competition purposes and once in a while they meet in the same event. Although she focuses on clothing we can see similarities to Gibson’s (2015) term autobiographical tools, foregrounding people’s interactions with these possessions during different stages. In Beth’s and her boyfriend’s case the accessories they attach to their bags become autobiographical tools, acquiring their meaning temporally by being situated in practice and so nurturing their relationship.

Doings with bags kept other selves close or nurtured relationships with other selves, but as we show doings with bags created new relationships with other selves. Doings with bags were perceived as a way to initiate contact with other selves, and consequently it lead to creating new communities and practices.

The communicative capacity of the bags in terms of what it says about the person extends to more than simple symbolic communication to that of forming actual relationships through inviting others to communicate. Jane explained how the expressive capacity of bags for the self initiates conversation:

‘I think people […] those who are nice to talk to, those who decorate their bags with a music band or anything interesting, I feel like talking to them immediately. Those people seem more positive to me. Like if they put cute stuff on their bags or something.’

Edgar expressed a similar potential of bag modifications, and he was convinced about the impression that his bag will make on his peers in conveying the message that he is an interesting person and that people would talk to him:

‘For example, if I see someone with this bag and even if I do not know them, I would go and talk. Where did you get it? How is it to use it? I would ask. I would find this person interesting and amazing.’

In addition to these claims of materiality of bags initiating communication with other selves, our research showed that modifying bags can mobilise certain groups to create their own practices and ways of relating. Lewis (2018) explains gift giving and exchange results in constructing and sustaining communal ties. In our research, we have encountered similar instances among high school students where embellishments and alterations to their school bags have given rise to new ways of relating and practices among a certain group. Beth, the swimmer, explains as follow:

‘We go to a city, and my teammates and the opposing team sit as a group. We decorate our bags altogether. Everyone takes out their badges, and we display them, we even exchange them. Also it is something to do for us. I have grown very close to a few people in this way.’

Beth described how she and her peers created a new way of communication based on the practice of bag modifications, pointing out that other swimming groups around the nation have the same understanding of communication and have collectively developed a communication practice initiated by these modifications. They exchange badges, pins, and stuffed animals when interacting with other teams, and as she describes, this group connection through material objects encouraged her to form new close bonds with other selves.

What might seem like a simple exchange is actually much more. First of all, modifications are communication starters. Secondly and more interestingly, exchanging badges have formed communities, and this community culture is familiar with this practice - it is a way of coming together, a way of spending time in the competition intervals, a way of socialising with opponents in a friendly and genuine way. As participants modify their bags they build and sustain relationships by forming a group around the activity, developing its own practice, and by reproducing a way of sharing and bonding.

Bagging it up

In this study we explored the relationships between bags and selfhood. A review of the literature on self that brings material elements into conversation with subjects, conceptualises self a unique embodied and situated experiencing subjectivity. Building on this we developed our concept of self as a doing and becoming subjectivity. This conceptualisation of self and material objects, with an eye to customisation, is relevant for consumption studies as well as for design and management professionals.

Our participants had a common identity – being a student – but through their bags and modifications they present and configure their unique selves. In their doings with bags they were becoming their unique selves. Doing was shown to be not only about experiencing or accomplishing a daily task, but about what it means in terms of selfhood to be accomplishing a certain practice. We should also pay attention to the sense of doing, the first one is about doings with bags, where bags accompany daily lives, and the second is about doings to the bags, which are more about customisation, but they are nevertheless things done by the subjects with their bags. Being able to carry school newspaper paperwork, being able to carry sports and cosmetics as desired, accomplishing daily life as they wish meant that they actually accomplish their selves. As students did things with their bags they became certain selves. Resulting in our conceptualisation of the agency of bags as friendly supportive companionship in accomplishing selves. Moreover, we detailed the ways in which materiality of bags and modifications related to, instead of social order, a self-order, what these qualities and modifications meant in terms of selfhood, who one is and how one is. But this was not simply about expressing aspects of self but rather about configuring and solidifying selfhood. Such as the example of the Gryffindor badge that expressed the self as a certain type, but in doing so it also nurtured and solidified the selfhood as an affectionate one, clarified its position in the group and solidified the self as affectionate dictating how the self should be. Lastly, we elaborated on how bag modifications relate selves to other selves in terms of inter personal relationships, so not broader social order. We showed that bags are involved in initiating conversation and building relationships but also nurturing them. And in the example of swimmer group that comes together around bag modifications we see new practices and ways of relating with other selves are configured.

We conclude by revisiting our first claim on bags, it turns out that as we carry bags, bags carry out our very selves, in the sense of becoming, realising fulfilling selfhood, carrying it out. What we refer as selfhood is a doing and thereby becoming subject.