So I graduated, that was fun. Graduation itself was pretty anticlimactic; although I got weepy in the beginning (at the mention of parents), it sort of just ended after BA candidates were announced with the president telling us to take our chairs to the edge of the tent on the way out.
It feels good though. I'm working three days a week at Demos, applying for jobs, going on interviews, reading books I like, wandering around the city and hanging out with people I haven't seen in a while. I'm generally hopeful right now, but at the same time I fear once the summer ends, I'll fall into a slump when I see other people gearing up to go back to school. We shall see.
I'm reading No Logo by Naomi Klein, and I gotta say, it's pretty great. It feels weird going into malls, to think about how we have so few public spaces that aren't corporately owned (so in a way, corporations own our social interactions). I was walking through the Westchester (an unusually swanky mall located in White Plains) while dropping off my computer for repair, and I realized (as I do so frequently now) how many families were out, and how many little children there were. It is crazy to think that we are socialized to behave as consumers from the day we are conscious of ourselves and can express our needs and wants. I happened upon Anthropologie (why that store is called that, I will NEVER know) and drifted in while on the phone, and every time I've been in that place I'm amazed at how expensive things are; how the labor is probably so cheap, yet they can sell a pair of jeans for $210. How much profit must they be making!? It's absurd! Anthropolgie is a high-end off-shoot of Urban Outfitters I think, they're likely owned by the same parent company. Both sell a lifestyle though. Anthropologie also sells frilly, shabby-chic type of housewares; from dishes to rugs and bedding. It's a brand that's been made into a lifestyle.
Maybe it's not so ridiculous to some, but when you deconstruct it (even a little) it's pathetic.
From Klein:
"What these companies [referring to Nike, Microsoft, Tommy Hilfiger, etc.] produced primarily were not things, they said, but images of their brands. Their real work lay not in manufacturing but in marketing"
She goes on to talk about how in the beginning of the 20th century, there were so many inventions coming out that were innovative, and that were going to change the way people lived. As time worn on though, this psychological prompt in buying new products evolved into lifestyle choices (rather than necessities) in consuming products marketed to the masses.
Why are there offensive Miller Lite ads with women being objectified on the NYC subways? Why are there cheap-looking Lava Life ads selling a heteronormative dating lifestyle on the subway?
Why are we being told to buy this? Why do we measure ourselves against these images?
Why are more people not awake?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Hello, this is me.
- Riffo
- New York, New York, United States
2 comments:
Being a part of the marketing industry, I have to say that we sell it beacuse people buy it. *shrug* It's as simple as that. I don't think buying something because you like the image of it necessarily makes you unaware; I think people just have to be careful about buying brands that don't do the cheap labor, and whose parent companies really contribute to society through some major philanthropic endeavor. Really, in the end, it's not about the companies, it's about the people buying their items just being aware. If personally, you have that balance, I don't see anything wrong with decent corporations. But then, like I said, you're talking to someone in marketing, and I generally have a different outlook on these things than others. However, I do think that getting frustrated with people for relating to those images and buying whatever is that image will be a constant, because we as humans are visual creatures who will buy what we find attractive. It's only natural.
People should read this.
Post a Comment