3 ms·

Anchoring your identity to brands is tragically uncool no matter how you slice it.

by devin 2mo ago

zer00eyz 2mo ago
This comment feels like it's from the early 90's when people were being critical of bands for selling out.
- BaseBaal 2mo ago
  Reminds me of Tool's reaction to that trend, "Hooker with a Penis" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooker_with_a_Penis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooker_with_a_Penis
- antonvs 2mo ago
  That's a very different situation. An individual "anchoring their identity" to a brand isn't doing so to earn money, which is why bands "sell out". It's just a choice they make about who they are, and I have to agree with GP that that seems tragically uncool.
- BoingBoomTschak 2mo ago
  Is there something wrong with being critical of bands for selling out, though?
  - bryanrasmussen 2mo ago
    the concept of selling out often seems seriously under-specified, and thus, like many things in our society, it becomes a tool for one set of people to improve their own status by attacking another set of people. It is in the end a moral stance on what are the proper aesthetics, which is the kind of thing that manages to make both morality and aesthetics extremely suspect.
    - 3636yey 2mo ago
      how can someone say morality is suspect and expect to be treated like a human being
    - HashHishBang 2mo ago
      Nah, the aesthetics argument is a distraction. Engaging with art is engaging with another human being. Finding out that the other human being is, in fact, a corporation in a trenchcoat sucks. I would go so far as to label it a feeling of betrayal that leaks into everything else the artist touches. Does anyone think The Rock has anything of substance to say about anything anymore? Do we think Post Malone isn't just trying to make a few more bucks after selling out entire genres? Seeing Iggy fucking Pop shill insurance is genuinely painful.
      - ompogUe 1mo ago
        Hear, hear! Cadillac using Led Zeppelin broke something in me. I'm on the fence with the Beastie Boys getting used in movie fight scenes. They said they'd never do ads. Elevates the scenes, but it also elevates the IP of Disney and Paramount.
    - harimau777 2mo ago
      I think that is because it is a social value. It isn't meant to be a rigid rule; it's meant to be a guideline that can adapt to the needs of the situation. There has to be nuance in social values.
  - zer00eyz 2mo ago
    No, It was a rare magical moment where consumerism receded - flannels were never about brands. Your band had to be "authentic" (and I hate that word) and anti corporate. It's the point in time where we all started hating ticket master. It was replaced by GAP sweatshirts and Britney Spears, and you can draw a straight line to people waiting on lines for iPhones, your C suite in fleece vests and Taylor Swift.
    - Barrin92 2mo ago
      it didn't recede, this kind of rebellion was what made it thrive (see the book The Rebel Sell, Why Culture can't be Jammed) or Deleuze: “The death of a social machine has never been heralded by a disharmony or a dysfunction; on the contrary, social machines make a habit of feeding on the contradictions they give rise to, on the crises they provoke, on the anxieties they engender, and on the infernal operations they regenerate. Capitalism has learned this, and has ceased doubting itself [...] No one has ever died from contradictions. And the more it breaks down, the more it schizophrenizes, the better it works, the American way. It wasn't a coicindence or betrayal that punk bands 'sold out', the punk part is exactly what made them sell out. Demand for authenticity, difference and individualism is what drives consumerism. The heart of consumerism is counter-culture.
- thwarted 2mo ago
  Except this is being critical of the popularity and fans, not the band.
- InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
  AKA the good old times when it wasn't as culturally accepted to be openly evil if it made money.
ArekDymalski 1mo ago
But it wasn't in the early cyberpunk works. When you consume them you can notice how important was the concept of "style", that characters were excited by the specific brands (implants, weapons, shaders, venues), associated them with social status etc. It was the 90s that brought contempt for brands to (paradoxically) mainstream.

Anchoring your identity to brands is tragically uncool no matter how you slice it.

by devin 2mo ago

Anchoring your identity to brands is tragically uncool no matter how you slice it.

zer00eyz 2mo ago

This comment feels like it's from the early 90's when people were being critical of bands for selling out.

BaseBaal 2mo ago
Reminds me of Tool's reaction to that trend, "Hooker with a Penis" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooker_with_a_Penis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooker_with_a_Penis
antonvs 2mo ago
That's a very different situation. An individual "anchoring their identity" to a brand isn't doing so to earn money, which is why bands "sell out". It's just a choice they make about who they are, and I have to agree with GP that that seems tragically uncool.
BoingBoomTschak 2mo ago
Is there something wrong with being critical of bands for selling out, though?
- bryanrasmussen 2mo ago
  the concept of selling out often seems seriously under-specified, and thus, like many things in our society, it becomes a tool for one set of people to improve their own status by attacking another set of people. It is in the end a moral stance on what are the proper aesthetics, which is the kind of thing that manages to make both morality and aesthetics extremely suspect.
  - 3636yey 2mo ago
    how can someone say morality is suspect and expect to be treated like a human being
  - HashHishBang 2mo ago
    Nah, the aesthetics argument is a distraction. Engaging with art is engaging with another human being. Finding out that the other human being is, in fact, a corporation in a trenchcoat sucks. I would go so far as to label it a feeling of betrayal that leaks into everything else the artist touches. Does anyone think The Rock has anything of substance to say about anything anymore? Do we think Post Malone isn't just trying to make a few more bucks after selling out entire genres? Seeing Iggy fucking Pop shill insurance is genuinely painful.
    - ompogUe 1mo ago
      Hear, hear! Cadillac using Led Zeppelin broke something in me. I'm on the fence with the Beastie Boys getting used in movie fight scenes. They said they'd never do ads. Elevates the scenes, but it also elevates the IP of Disney and Paramount.
  - harimau777 2mo ago
    I think that is because it is a social value. It isn't meant to be a rigid rule; it's meant to be a guideline that can adapt to the needs of the situation. There has to be nuance in social values.
- zer00eyz 2mo ago
  No, It was a rare magical moment where consumerism receded - flannels were never about brands. Your band had to be "authentic" (and I hate that word) and anti corporate. It's the point in time where we all started hating ticket master. It was replaced by GAP sweatshirts and Britney Spears, and you can draw a straight line to people waiting on lines for iPhones, your C suite in fleece vests and Taylor Swift.
  - Barrin92 2mo ago
    it didn't recede, this kind of rebellion was what made it thrive (see the book The Rebel Sell, Why Culture can't be Jammed) or Deleuze: “The death of a social machine has never been heralded by a disharmony or a dysfunction; on the contrary, social machines make a habit of feeding on the contradictions they give rise to, on the crises they provoke, on the anxieties they engender, and on the infernal operations they regenerate. Capitalism has learned this, and has ceased doubting itself [...] No one has ever died from contradictions. And the more it breaks down, the more it schizophrenizes, the better it works, the American way. It wasn't a coicindence or betrayal that punk bands 'sold out', the punk part is exactly what made them sell out. Demand for authenticity, difference and individualism is what drives consumerism. The heart of consumerism is counter-culture.
thwarted 2mo ago
Except this is being critical of the popularity and fans, not the band.
InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
AKA the good old times when it wasn't as culturally accepted to be openly evil if it made money.

ArekDymalski 1mo ago

But it wasn't in the early cyberpunk works. When you consume them you can notice how important was the concept of "style", that characters were excited by the specific brands (implants, weapons, shaders, venues), associated them with social status etc. It was the 90s that brought contempt for brands to (paradoxically) mainstream.