Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[star21]

I in some ways disagree. I believe we are increasingly adopting postmodern identities. Postmodern consumers as Gabriel and Lang argue, 'suffer from no such self delusions. They do not demand that product images should be authentic, integrated or wholesome. They are sophisticated enough to recognize that these images are only fleeting mirages, spawned in the imaginations of clever image-makers who want to sell them things'. Would anyone also agree? I personally believe that the majority of consumers are aware they are specifically being marketed to but if the products purchased as past comments mention, are seen as desirable by the consumer then surely this is okay? 

[mwilliams]

Money can certainly pave the way for an easier more pleasurable life. The ongoing debate as to whether or not it can is yet to be rectified. However, with the obsission of identity in todays culture, having the ability to create the perfect self with money surely means that a life with money is a happy one?

[AndreaLo]

I found Gabriel and Lang's ideas of identity, the ego-ideal and the narcissism interesting, especially the idea that we construct our identity based upon the material possessions we own and also echoing Pierre Bourdieu's theory that we strive to culturally better ourselves through a variety of medium, one of which includes, again, the acquisition of material things.

Also, there is one thing in particular that might seem quite trivial which I picked up from the reading - Gabriel and Lang recount the story of Narcissus and assert that, when he had seen his own reflection and fallen in love with it, he had assumed for that reflection to be someone else entirely rather than himself. So whilst the term Narcissistic is used today to widely describe vanity and being overtly occupied with oneself, it is interesting to note that here it is interpreted differently by the writers.

[Budgie]

It's quite alarming actually how much of ourselves is constructed by for example, clothes brands,  and certain perceptions and ideas beyond those brands. Much like a model, a brand can claim to own the vision of you by wearing their products and society from there can also place labels on you just from others observing you aesthetically. I think authenticity has vastly faded, and of course, you could say that only your forensic identity really, truly, defines who you are in this day and age, in the text book sense. Thinking about Narcissus, it definitely resonates as more of an endless journey of bricolage, with no ultimate satisfaction in sight.

[missrager]

I found this reading particularly insightful as it picked up on key elements of western life as a result of popular culture integrating wider society. I know people probably don't like to think of themselves as consumers however, it is undeniable in this day age and environment that we do actively pick and choose variables in order to construct our identities; even if this is through attempting to reject consumerism. The choices we make do actively reflect our personas.

[Sian]

I find Gabriel and Lang's (2006) insight that the group identity it just as fraught with problems as the individual quite interesting, not only does our identity derive from the forensic but the psychological which we constantly 'rewrite' and strive to better construct which is subject to certain pressures resulting in the ongoing 'project' of achieving continuity with one's self.

White and Dahl (2006) raise the really interesting perspective of dissociative groups where we use 'in-groups and out-groups' as a tool to determine who we are and who we are not. It's interesting to think about the 'ownership' or identification of products via certain products and how we avoid such products as much to disassociate as associate our selves with others. Does this depend on how 'self preserving' we are being at the time though? Are we happy to use certain products as long as the significant 'reference group'  doesn't know about it and does this add to the difficulty we face in achieving continuity? For example, is it ok to use a product at home that you wouldn't be caught dead with in uni?

[jaffacake]

Identity- what is it? How do we precisely define it? Each individual might respond in a specific manner;  it can simply be someone’s nationality? Religion? Race? Gender? Or in a more complex level, it can also be the experiences one has gone through. It can describe an individual to his/her adherence to a group (professional, political and so forth) . It can define someone according to their sexual preference or social status in society. There is no definite response t such a question! Then we also have the consumer, seeking an identity through material desires in a post modern, capitalistic society. This reminds me of the ‘public sphere’ by Habermas and the Frankfurt School, highly critical of such capitalistic trends in the twentieth century. A further piece by Benedict Anderson’s’ Imagined communities’ comes to mind, where he believes that a nation is a community socially constructed and imagined by the people perceiving themselves as part of it.

[adubz]

I dont know if anyone managed to have a look at Sassatelli - Consumer Culture. I found it really interesting specifically when she discusses the way people consume in order to oppose the mainstream. usually done through subculture practices the way consumers and their commodities subversivly reject the dominant prractice of consumer culture.
The way these groups are an interesting topic as they was the chosen consumer objects actually create an alternative identity and use that as a expressive tool.
We could also have a look at Postmodern Art in this respect too because the point of it is to reuse old styles, items and themes in a modern context so Tracey Emin - Messy Bed has used elements of society to create an artisitic expression. It is some perspectives represents a consumer culture of excess. The freedom one has to live life the way she was explaining allows for many different interpretations but in my opinion I found it expressed the way one can only make something 'something' when it relational to something else. So clothing etc is a relational concept only when we wear it.
Going into the realms of Postmodern consumption :)