|
Post by throwthestone on Nov 29, 2005 23:34:50 GMT -5
ok so i'm reading alot of books on the topic of corporate marketing of 'culture' and how corporations like to hijack pure cultures and rape them to make a profit. examples: Seattle grunge, 70's punk, rave culture, hip hop and so forth. nowadays it seems that multinationals are the ones defining culture and there is barely anything authentic left. i guess I'm just looking for opinions and thoughts. do you think the devote diy culture can overcome such strong opposition, and fend off unwanted commercialization?
|
|
|
Post by Brendan on Nov 29, 2005 23:49:46 GMT -5
You should read the book Ishmael. It is all about Culture.
Really if people get informed and have a strong enough desire it would be easy to overcome the oppostion.
|
|
|
Post by josh on Nov 29, 2005 23:51:36 GMT -5
i think culture is definitely being raped and destroyed by corporations and media stereotypes. this is easy to see. basically all of the alternative / Generation x marketing in the 90s came from punk and the metal subcultures and was exploited to the max, many times by using bands from those areas for a cash profit (ie. what drove nirvana to destruction).
i think diy culture keeps the integrity intact in whatever culture it permeates and needs to be kept explicitly diy to do so. however, in doing that, the messages that many people (i'm thinking mainly music and zines) will not reach a new crowd, and will only "preach to the choir". this is where a lot of bands come into conflict. can they reach a new audience which needs to hear their audience without compromising their ethics? it's sketchy.
diy can keep things pure, but it might lose its impact in doing so, i think.
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Nov 30, 2005 7:03:01 GMT -5
i have feeling this might turn into a two way conversation that could and has been done over aim.
anyways. yes. pure diy definitely has less impact on the amount of people that see the finished product. but there are exceptions. crass never went commercial and they sold thousands of copies of their albums a week just through shock-value cover art and word of mouth. and their name even came up in parliament during the Falkland war period. impressive.
|
|
|
Post by Brendan on Nov 30, 2005 10:26:10 GMT -5
Yes, Crass has sold thousands of copies of their albums, but how much of it gets into the hands of people who aren't already a part of the sub culture? Even if the average person goes out and buys "feeding the 5000" they will most likly listen to part of the first couple of songs before they never listen to it again. Yes they can reach out to a lot of people over a long period of time, but they will only appeal to a minority.
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Nov 30, 2005 18:46:29 GMT -5
yeah true. 'no logo' had a section on culture jamming and how big marketing firms even used the art form that was trying to devalue their ads to sell more. ok, yeah. there is no point to saying that.
|
|
uraniumrock
still doesn't get it
it doesnt matter what the outcome is, just do it.
Posts: 29
|
Post by uraniumrock on Nov 30, 2005 21:28:04 GMT -5
i think culture is definitely being raped and destroyed by corporations and media stereotypes. this is easy to see. basically all of the alternative / Generation x marketing in the 90s came from punk and the metal subcultures and was exploited to the max, many times by using bands from those areas for a cash profit (ie. what drove nirvana to destruction). i think diy culture keeps the integrity intact in whatever culture it permeates and needs to be kept explicitly diy to do so. however, in doing that, the messages that many people (i'm thinking mainly music and zines) will not reach a new crowd, and will only "preach to the choir". this is where a lot of bands come into conflict. can they reach a new audience which needs to hear their audience without compromising their ethics? it's sketchy. diy can keep things pure, but it might lose its impact in doing so, i think. i hadnt read this defore, and its really weird because tonight at a Bible study, i basically said that same thing. i dont think that we can say there is a set culture, anymore.
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Nov 30, 2005 22:16:18 GMT -5
there is some authenticity left. and then there is brand based marketed culture. that has no intrinsic value.
|
|
|
Post by nightmare on Dec 1, 2005 14:32:43 GMT -5
the other day I realized if more people convert to orthodoxy there will be orthodox t-shirts, keychains, shoes, hbumper stickers, etc....
I don't much care for that thought.
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Dec 1, 2005 15:42:17 GMT -5
i went to a christian contemporary music festival and i was so disgusted at how aggressive 'christian' fashion was marketed. a saw a shirt that said 'they will know we are christians by our t-shirts'
|
|
|
Post by nightmare on Dec 1, 2005 15:52:09 GMT -5
I like that shirt
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Dec 1, 2005 15:57:55 GMT -5
why?
|
|
|
Post by nightmare on Dec 1, 2005 16:01:35 GMT -5
because it makes fun of christians wearing christian t-shirts
|
|
|
Post by throwthestone on Dec 1, 2005 16:11:51 GMT -5
oh. yes. wait. ok. months after seeing it, i get it. yes. i like it to.
|
|
|
Post by nightmare on Dec 1, 2005 16:18:31 GMT -5
best and brighest here. best and brightest.
|
|