Sunday, May 16, 2010
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Buying Your Identity
At the end of the movie Helvetica, Rick Poynor observes that through modern technology we've begun to express ourselves graphically through, for example, the layouts of our blogs and social media sites and that is an extension of other ways we express our identities like buying certain clothes or buying certain furniture and decorations for our living spaces. It reminded me of some large ads that adorned a local upscale outdoor shopping mall. The ads had a picture of a made up and bejeweled woman, and across the picture in big, bold letters it read "DEFINE YOU."
I was always repulsed by that ad.
There's the obvious repulsiveness of the idea of defining yourself by purchases in the mall, but there's more. The very idea seems like such an obvious individual and societal ill that having it used in an advertisement printed twenty feet high made it seem like the designer was throwing it in one's face. "This is who you are. You are seduced wholly by consumerism. It devours you. Now go and serve it." Or that, perhaps, the designer of the ad didn't see anything wrong with the idea.
Why have we accepted that clothing and interior design is an expression of identity? Not just part, but for many, its principal expression. Now some people see assembling an outfit or decorating a room as an art and a means to express themselves, and that is one thing, but how did these particular forms of expression become the default and expected?
What if a person wasn't interested in expressing himself that way? What if he didn't have any interest in clothes or decor? What could he wear that would indicate, "Look not here to find me"? How could he decorate his house to say, "I'm not trying to say anything about myself through this"?
One might say that many men do this. They can wear plain clothes, and they can simply leave their homes undecorated. But what about women? There's a much greater expectation on them to use dress and decor as primary modes of expression. So how does a woman indicate that those aren't her expressive avenues? How do you wear something that says nothing? I submit that if a woman attempts this, people will really think she is trying to say something!
And when we do buy things to express ourselves, are we really expressing ourselves or are we attracted to certain things, say through advertisements, that we buy and then, without thinking about it, we mold our self-conceptions to fit those things? Also how many things do we buy that are aspirational? "That mixer isn't me now, but I want to the sort of person that people would identify with this mixer."
Do we want to be defined that way? Do we want to be wandering a store thinking, "No, that clothes hamper isn't me. I'll go to that other store. It might have a hamper that I can really identify with."? Do we want to have these intense, self-defining relationships with objects?
That's not a rhetorical question. I'm interested in your answers.
ADDED: Suggested in the comments. I love this.
I was always repulsed by that ad.
There's the obvious repulsiveness of the idea of defining yourself by purchases in the mall, but there's more. The very idea seems like such an obvious individual and societal ill that having it used in an advertisement printed twenty feet high made it seem like the designer was throwing it in one's face. "This is who you are. You are seduced wholly by consumerism. It devours you. Now go and serve it." Or that, perhaps, the designer of the ad didn't see anything wrong with the idea.
Why have we accepted that clothing and interior design is an expression of identity? Not just part, but for many, its principal expression. Now some people see assembling an outfit or decorating a room as an art and a means to express themselves, and that is one thing, but how did these particular forms of expression become the default and expected?
What if a person wasn't interested in expressing himself that way? What if he didn't have any interest in clothes or decor? What could he wear that would indicate, "Look not here to find me"? How could he decorate his house to say, "I'm not trying to say anything about myself through this"?
One might say that many men do this. They can wear plain clothes, and they can simply leave their homes undecorated. But what about women? There's a much greater expectation on them to use dress and decor as primary modes of expression. So how does a woman indicate that those aren't her expressive avenues? How do you wear something that says nothing? I submit that if a woman attempts this, people will really think she is trying to say something!
And when we do buy things to express ourselves, are we really expressing ourselves or are we attracted to certain things, say through advertisements, that we buy and then, without thinking about it, we mold our self-conceptions to fit those things? Also how many things do we buy that are aspirational? "That mixer isn't me now, but I want to the sort of person that people would identify with this mixer."
Do we want to be defined that way? Do we want to be wandering a store thinking, "No, that clothes hamper isn't me. I'll go to that other store. It might have a hamper that I can really identify with."? Do we want to have these intense, self-defining relationships with objects?
That's not a rhetorical question. I'm interested in your answers.
ADDED: Suggested in the comments. I love this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
