yeah cuz you see Van Buuren come up on the number 2 spot this week in TRL right after Kanye West...I dunno what you're talking about dude. Armin is not pop/teen culture.

Maybe it's just me, but a culture is something you partake in. It's something you contribute to, and add to its growing aesthete. A culture embodies a living lifestyle of a group of people. It goes beyond just an inane special interest. A culture is a way of life. It is music, yes. But it is also language and dialect. It is clothing, it is style, it is a core group of moral values, interests, and views about life and social living that you can express, raise a family and hold a meaningful occupation under. A culture is what you feel, who you are, and what means the most to you. And more than anything, a culture is how you live your life.

A culture is not something you purchase. You can't buy culture, though the hi-jacking of the term by consumer magnates to convince us that it is possible through the gross obsession over their products would like to tell you otherwise. Don't be deceived. Culture is not defined by commercial interests. It is defined by life and how one lives it.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur A culture is not something you purchase

I disagree.

The capitalist, consumer culture is alive and well. Maybe it is not a "culture" in the traditional sense of the word, but it certainly exists.

Many people base their identity on what they wear, where they shop, what music they listen to, what brand of coffee or beer they drink and what they eat.

A culture of "owning things" and 'belonging' to a tribe of people exists. Whether it's goths, punks, teenyboppers. trance ravers, househeads, hippies, baby boomers, jocks, nerds or any number of different groups that people like to categorise themselves in, it seems like all of these groups have all been commercialised, marketed and neatly packaged for the next disconnected individual to gobble up. It could be argued that culture is for sale.


The "brand as personality" that was pioneered by the famous marketer David Ogilvy has grown to be one of the most important ideas in marketing, if not business, today. Many companies no longer have the goal of "producing things". Major companies like Nike, Tommy Hilfiger and Wal Mart barely produce anything at all these days. Instead, they contract out their labour and manufacturing to cheap, third-world markets and the core value of the companies lies in brand equity.

These companies are focused on cultivating and growing a brand - an ideal, a lifestyle, a view. (a culture? :eek Not only do they seek to create a powerful "superbrand" with its own personality and culture, like the Malboro Cowboy, or the Tommy Hilfiger hip hop style. Increasingly, these companies are integrating popular culture into their brands, but even more than that, many of them are trying to influence and subvert culture itself.

Consider this:

When a kid in Nepal is eating McDonalds, or a teenager in the jungles of Brazil is drinking Coca Cola, or a grandmother in China is reading the latest Harry Potter book, is this not the spread of global "culture" (cringe) ????? As sad as it may be, I feel that brands, products and the latest Simpsons episode dubbed into Tagalog are just as much a part of culture as the music, language, moral values etc that you have cited.

You list the following prerequisites for culture (which i agree with):

* Something you partake in
* Something you contribute to
* A Way of life
* Music, language, dialect, clothing, style, food, religion, customs, moral values, laws, interests, views.......
* "what you feel, who you are, and what means the most to you"

Is it not true that people participate in and contrubute to this 'consumer culture'?

Last edited by A.J. on Nov-29-2005 at 02:59

The Basque are a culture. The Etruscans were a culture. Tolkien's Yanyar, Noldar and Teleri tribes are cultures.

Playing Everquest 24 hours a day and associating yourself with other people who play Everquest 24 hours a day is not a culture.

Because some marketer thought up the idea to brandish it alongside pop consumerism as a way to sell more junk does not divorce you from the history, linguistics, art, laws, productivity and moral values of the culture you already partake in.

But what you are talking about is not culture, but rather subcultural social tribes. The reason, however, that to be part of a culture entails contribution rather than consumption is because a culture based on consumerism can not last. It will devour itself due to stagnation.

Consumers aren't producers. You typically do not consume and produce at the same time. The avowed mandate of consumer behavior is to be a (often mindless) devourer of the means of production. Your role is to swallow culture, not create it. To be a spectator of your own life, not a participant. Consumer "culture" is a "culture" of passivity, of under-achievement, of purchasing the hollow shell of the ideal lifestyle (As Seen on TV), not working towards achieving it. Where every flavour of creativity, ambition, originality and diversity is mashed into the omnipresent control of market uniformity.

Personality is defined not as who you are or what you do or even what you can achieve, but by what you can acquire; by what you can accumulate; what you can possess. You rely on things to define you. You rely on others to think for you. Ultimately, within our lifetimes, this will make the domain of free thought, free expression and free will literally impossible. Not through force, as totalitarian regimes have done in the past, but through applied docility, through conscious negligence--the populace will do it willfully, discarding it as deftly as taking out the garbage and treating it as such. Identifying yourself with consumer "culture" is akin to avoiding someone murdering you by committing suicide.

I won't say anymore, because there's a big section in my book about subcultural social tribes....

quote:

Originally posted by Zombie0915 pop/teen culture

Shortest post I think you've ever written dude!

AJ: I question your assertion of a 'global culture'. When kids in Asia are scarfing down McBurgers, they're being influenced by exported aspects of American culture. I don't think you could have a global culture, by definition.

Ishkur: You ought to reference that excellent cartoon you posted on your site with the one-eyed granddad. Captures your views nicely. (funny too)

Interesting thread....

___________________
Charly says always tell your mommy before you go off somewhere.

OK, I read over my first post again and realised that I wasn't making myself clear. Please let me clarify.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Playing Everquest 24 hours a day and associating yourself with other people who play Everquest 24 hours a day is not a culture.

Technology, entertainment, rituals. Aren't these things a part of culture? I'm not saying that playing "everquest" (whatever that is ) is a culture in itself, because obviously it is not. I'm not disputing that point. Rather, I propose that these things are part of culture.

Similarly, fashion, food, entertainment, trance music, techno, house....whatever....these things are part of culture. In turn, the brands/companies that represent and influence these things could be seen to be a part of culture. Is an ipod just a product, a functional item to listen to music, or has it become a part of popular culture? If you limit your definition of "culture", and exclude the blatent consumerism and marketing frenzy that is our world today, then you are limiting your depth of understanding and analysis of culture.

I'm interested to know.....do you consider Tommy Hilfiger urban hip hop wear that is worn by millions in America and around the world to be less a part of culture than traditional African dress worn by tribes in the Kalahari? Do you consider the Starbucks coffee that is consumed by millions in America and around the world every morning to be less a part of culture than the baguette that features on breakfast tables in France every day, or the Soup that is consumed in Japan? Brands and advertising are pervasive in modern life. The fact that something or someone is branded should not mean that it is immediately excluded from a definition of culture.

quote:

Because some marketer thought up the idea to brandish it alongside pop consumerism as a way to sell more junk does not divorce you from the history, linguistics, art, laws, productivity and moral values of the culture you already partake in.

I'm sorry, but I really don't think that you can create a clear separation between consumerism (and products) with "the culture you already partake in". Consumerism is a part of our culture.

What do farmers in Calgary do?
What does McDonalds on Ambleside do?
What does the Trout Farm on the Capilano River do?
What does an accounting firm do?
What does GM Place do?

They provide or facilitate the provision of products and services for us to CONSUME.

These things are part of everyday life. Every day, when you walk down the street, you will see franchises, brands, signs, advertising. You can eat at some random fast food chain, you can go buy CDs at the Future Shop or whatever it is they have in Vancouver, you can go shop at any number of shopping malls...Park Royal in West Van is probably the one I'm most familiar with. I'll say it again: these things are a part of the way of life, and they are part of culture.

quote:

But what you are talking about is not culture, but rather subcultural social tribes. The reason, however, that to be part of a culture entails contribution rather than consumption is because a culture based on consumerism can not last. It will devour itself due to stagnation.

I guess I got a bit sidetracked by those subcultural tribes and they were secondary to my main argument . However, I don't believe that culture ONLY entails contribution. The food you eat, the clothes you wear and the music you listen to are part of the culture that you are living in. Where is the contribution? The only thing you have contributed is money to purchase these things. All I'm saying is that you don't only have contribution to culture. How would that work? I think it is better to say that we are all involved with culture - we are living and experiencing it - and people can both contribute and consume those things that make up culture.

quote:

Consumers aren't producers. You typically do not consume and produce at the same time.

How so?

If we are living in a culture and experiencing it, then we can consume and produce things simultaneously. One of the fundamental properties of a service is that it is often produced and consumed at the same time. A haircut, a massage, a physical checkup by a doctor or the table service in a restaurant...all of these things at the same time. And just to prove that I learnt something this semester - developed countries such as Canada or Australia typically have an economy where 70-80% of the GDP comes from services.

quote:

The avowed mandate of consumer behavior is to be a (often mindless) devourer of the means of production.

The avowed mandate of consumer behaviour is to satisfy our need and wants.

quote:

Your role is to swallow culture, not create it. To be a spectator of your own life, not a participant. Consumer "culture" is a "culture" of passivity, of under-achievement, of purchasing the hollow shell of the ideal lifestyle (As Seen on TV), not working towards achieving it. Where every flavour of creativity, ambition, originality and diversity is mashed into the omnipresent control of market uniformity.

Like I said before, I think that consumerism is part of our culture, not the be-all-to-end-all. I don't think that there are cultures here, there and everywhere - a consumer culture, a trance culture, a fashion culture und so weiter. Culture to me is an all-encompassing term, the sum of its parts.

quote:

Personality is defined not as who you are or what you do or even what you can achieve, but by what you can acquire; by what you can accumulate; what you can possess. You rely on things to define you. You rely on others to think for you. Ultimately, within our lifetimes, this will make the domain of free thought, free expression and free will literally impossible.

This is quite a horrifying thought, isn't it? The sad thing is, there are people like this who judge other and themselves according to brands, logos, and the acquisition of 'things'. How many people do you know that go through life seeking a better car, a bigger house, a more expensive wardrobe?

I think you said it best when you said creativity, ambition, originality and diversity - that is what the true culture is about. I see where you are going, and I think I am beginning to understand your point of view.

I just think that consumerism, and all that entails, has sadly become a part of our culture. It really isn't a move for the better, but that is the way that I see things.

quote:

creativity, ambition, originality and diversity

^ ^ ^

That is what culture SHOULD be about.

quote:

mashed into the omnipresent control of market uniformity

^ ^ ^

That is what I'm afraid of.

Sadly, we seem to be experiencing the homogenisation of the world's culture in many respects. This is fueled in part by the spread of globalisation and the rise of global powerhouses like Nike, Coca Cola, Wal Mart and Microsoft.



Hopefully that has made my point of view a little bit clearer

Last edited by A.J. on Nov-29-2005 at 05:11

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Playing Everquest 24 hours a day and associating yourself with other people who play Everquest 24 hours a day is not a culture. But what you are talking about is not culture, but rather subcultural social tribes. The reason, however, that to be part of a culture entails contribution rather than consumption is because a culture based on consumerism can not last. It will devour itself due to stagnation.

According to my Anthropology professor, a culture doesn't need people to contribute back anything. A culture doesn't even need religion, music, government, and that crap. The simple defenition of a culture is "shared knowledge people use to generate behavior and interpret experience." Simple enough. A subculture IS a culture! So when you say that playing Everquest with your Everquest buddies isn't a culture, you're mistaken! They have their own shared knowledge and even language as to how they play the game. Same goes with rave culture. We've got our same taste in music so that when I say the breakdown of this progressive trance song is amazing (for example), ONLY other people who know trance will know what I'm talking about. THere's a Beginner's Guide to Trance at this site. This is your source of knowledge! To say that people going to rave do not share something in common is naive. They do! They have the same taste in music. That's all that culture needs. So that little consumer piece about wearing particular kinds of clothes or whatever just adds to the shared knowledge that we all have. Culture is just something that seperates a group of people from another in the way they behave.

Everyquest has their subculture, but subculture is just a culture in proportion to a larger culture. In the world of consumers, marketing creating a culture that will last is their biggest goal! It doesn't matter if it lasts or not. How many of you have an ipod? All those ipod users know about the white head buds and the scroll thingy on the thing. This is culture. We know it and we share it and we enjoy it. Same thing with trance.

Agree or disagree, when people go to see Tiesto or whatever EDM show they want, the people go because they share something that separates themselves from others. They all share music. And when the DJ (or "God"), plays the music that the crowd wants to here, the culture strengthens and it becomes richer.

quote:

yeah cuz you see Van Buuren come up on the number 2 spot this week in TRL right after Kanye West...I dunno what you're talking about dude. Armin is not pop/teen culture.

lets clarify then if its not pop/teen culture ...mmm mainstream culture.

___________________
[img]http://x11.putfile.com/12/34902035365.jpg[/mg]
Please see sig rules thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by A.J. a part of culture

stop right there. You said "part of culture". Yes. Sure. But a culture in and of itself? No. That's silly. It makes no sense. Saying trance is a culture is as nonsensical as saying your hand is still alive if you cut if off from your wrist.

quote:

Originally posted by A.J. I'm sorry, but I really don't think that you can create a clear separation between consumerism (and products) with "the culture you already partake in".

You're misunderstanding. Again. You don't know what consumerism is, and you're mistaking it for the common practice of buying, selling, and using things. That's not consumerism. Consumerism != consuming. Everyone consumes. That's how we live.

Consumerism is the overlying 'ism' that spoke of the relatively recent aim in marketing that seeks to replace the ends with the means. Consumerism had existed as far back as the 1890s and it enjoyed wild success with the rise of the "leisure class" in the 1920s, only to totally evaporate when the Depression hit. But in the post-war period it returned on a mass level never seen before.

It is not about need or about necessities. It is about wantonness. It is about selfish desire. It is about impulses, greed, gluttony, and lipsmacking, spoonfeeding me-ism. It is a drug that hijacks the compulsive drive for material conformity. It is the state where you buy for the sake of buying. Where the purpose of buying something is so that you have bought it. There is no sustenance or self-enrichment to gain from it.

Capitalism actually hates consumerism. The system champions productivity and the role of deontological obligation (either to yourself or the system), which is the antithesis of consumerism.

quote:

Originally posted by A.J. How so?

Who here consumes the exact products of their labour?

Can you grow food as you eat it? Can a pop song make it to #1 as you're recording it?

quote:

Originally posted by A.J. The avowed mandate of consumer behaviour is to satisfy our need and wants.

If you didn't need the product before you knew it existed, why all of a sudden do you feel your life is incomplete unless you have it now? .....what's changed?

quote:

Originally posted by A.J. How many people do you know that go through life seeking a better car, a bigger house, a more expensive wardrobe?

I choose not to know these people, for a very conscientious reason.

quote:

Originally posted by avstar According to my Anthropology professor

ha ha ha ha ha.

Culture is a way of life undergoing constant redefining. And because of this redefining is why there are so many disagreements in this thread. The problem here is that there is no true definition for culture because we are all right. All of us have different views on what culture is, but the bigger picture here is that culture is what we make and define it to be. The only thing we know for sure is that in order for a culture to survive is that it must have a loyal following or a community willing to continue its traditions. Otherwise consider it dead. Some off the wall examples could be the short lived disco era or the long lived Roman Empire.

I used the word "culture" in my first post when perhaps I shouldn't have. I view a culture as an all-encompassing term, a way of life, and a sum of its respective parts. I didn't mean to give the impression that i judged trance or consumerism or anything else as a separate culture in itself.

It seems that we are arguing about different things.....you argueing that trance, Everquest or any other "tribe" is not a culture in its itself, while I argue that brands, consumerism etc have a place as part of culture. Culture is a very broad term, and I would usually associate it with the country or region where one lives.

Essentially, I agree with you though! There is no way that trance or house or consumerism or skateboarding is a separate culture. That is clearly an innapropriate term to use.

Moving on.....

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur stop right there. You said "part of culture". Yes. Sure. But a culture in and of itself? No. That's silly. It makes no sense. Saying trance is a culture is as nonsensical as saying your hand is still alive if you cut if off from your wrist.

No disagreement here.

quote:

You're misunderstanding. Again. You don't know what consumerism is, and you're mistaking it for the common practice of buying, selling, and using things. That's not consumerism. Consumerism != consuming. Everyone consumes. That's how we live.

I'm well aware of consumerism thank you very much, and I can clearly make the distinction between buying & selling and consumerism. Perhaps I should have mentioned materialism as well, since that was where I was trying to lead my argument. Consumerism can have a similar meaning to materialism - "Attachment to materialistic values or possessions: he deplored the rampant consumerism of contemporary society." and that was the particular meaning that I was actually referring to.

quote:

It is not about need or about necessities. It is about wantonness. It is about selfish desire. It is about impulses, greed, gluttony, and lipsmacking, spoonfeeding me-ism. It is a drug that hijacks the compulsive drive for material conformity. It is the state where you buy for the sake of buying. Where the purpose of buying something is so that you have bought it. There is no sustenance or self-enrichment to gain from it.

Agreed

quote:

Capitalism actually hates consumerism. The system champions productivity and the role of deontological obligation (either to yourself or the system), which is the antithesis of consumerism.

Once again, it depends which definition of consumerism you take. The definition that sees it as a consumer movement that protects and informs consumers through standards and regulations - power to the buyer - would definitely not bode well with capitalist ideals. However, if you take the meaning that sees consumerism as attachment to material goods, and buying 'things'for selfish purposes, then a capitalist would rub their hands together at the prospect of all those extra purchases.

quote:

Who here consumes the exact products of their labour? Can you grow food as you eat it? Can a pop song make it to #1 as you're recording it?

I thought I made a clear distinction between goods and services. Obviously, you can't consume a product as you are making it. However, in many cases, a service is consumed as it is produced. The consumer can actually be a part of the production process. Like I said before, a haircut, a massage or a doctor's checkup are all services that can be consumed as they are produced. And since we both live in countries where the economies are now predominantly service-based, there is a lot of this "consumption-as-it's-produced" going on.

quote:

If you didn't need the product before you knew it existed, why all of a sudden do you feel your life is incomplete unless you have it now? .....what's changed?

"First you get the need/want, then you get the product, then you get the the power"