That thing that fulfills our needs and wants, provides the image we want to project, becomes us - don't we just have to have it? The definition of what we wear/utilise/purchase becomes the definition of ourselves, the item we consume a tell-tale sign of our identity. Is that really true? Should we really believe a brand of an automobile makes the driver a suave, sophisticated gentleman/woman, when all it might indicate in reality is $$ (which might imply sophistication - it is not inherent along with wealth), or falling COE prices? That a washing liquid can strengthen the bonds within families? That a type of hoop-cereal encircles strong emotional ties between youth and age?
In this light I find myself rolling my eyes. yeah right it's true. And go on consuming branded goods.
That's what branding is all about. No, not 'selling', some over-the-counter influential speech that results in the presentation of paper wads which magically transform by immutable law into a product, a good (this noun even has dual identities- it is also an adjective that adorns the buyer). It's the 21st century baby, and branding is it. A perpetual blinding of the consumer.
What spurred the above was a link on Esper's blog, which I followed today: 'The Persuaders'.
It might actually peel back the veil. Have a look, see what you think.
Naomi Klein's (author of No Logo) comment was most impressive: "When you listen to brand managers talk you can get quite carried away in this idea that they are fulfilling these needs for community and narrative and transcendence. But in the end it is a laptop and a pair of running shoes and they might be great but they're not actually going to fulfil those needs; which serves them very well because that means you have to go shopping again." (Chapter 2: Emotional Branding)
Another interesting read on the topic is Roland Barthes Mythologies, an argument that de-mystifies the glossy cover of advertisment and media. The way he describes the covert strategies is so fluent and fabulous you can't help laughing at one's foolish self in the culture of consumption.
What spurred the above was a link on Esper's blog, which I followed today: 'The Persuaders'.
It might actually peel back the veil. Have a look, see what you think.
Naomi Klein's (author of No Logo) comment was most impressive: "When you listen to brand managers talk you can get quite carried away in this idea that they are fulfilling these needs for community and narrative and transcendence. But in the end it is a laptop and a pair of running shoes and they might be great but they're not actually going to fulfil those needs; which serves them very well because that means you have to go shopping again." (Chapter 2: Emotional Branding)
Another interesting read on the topic is Roland Barthes Mythologies, an argument that de-mystifies the glossy cover of advertisment and media. The way he describes the covert strategies is so fluent and fabulous you can't help laughing at one's foolish self in the culture of consumption.
No comments:
Post a Comment