The essay “False Connections” by Alex Kotlowitz published in
1999 was an introduction to what wasn’t an off the wall concept then and has
really become commonplace and the norm within the last 10 years in regards to
the Hip-hop economy (Business Library). Kotlowitz’s piece touches on several
important aspects urban consumption; trend-setting, buying power and the “romanticization
of urban poverty by some white teens”. (p.256) First he points out the fact
that some of today’s fashions have originated in urban areas. Thru pop culture
and aggressive marketing, high profile brands such as Hilfiger, Nike, Lauren
and Coach are able to present products as desirable to wider audiences than
they would normally reach. He also makes note of how the limited resources of
black youths in urban areas did not deter them from using those resources to
buy items that gave them a connection with their suburban counterparts and thus
as consumers, “claim membership to the larger community”. (p.257). Additionally,
he states that “the life of the ghetto kids is edgy, gutsy, risky-all that
adolescents crave”. (p.257).
In plain terms what is being communicated, is that inner city
teens, whose normal dress code has a certain allure to their suburban white
counterparts, and alternately what is considered the norm for the suburban
teens drives to some extent purchases of the urban teens has create a cross
exchange of supposed cultures but not a true one because the only common
denominator is clothing. Lifestyles and living conditions still remain the
same. This is detailed in the book, Everything
But The Burden by Greg Tate. The style, fashion and dress for the Generation
X and Y’ers have blended and connected the young adults in America in such a way that
race and color have less of a bearing on who is wearing what now. The
beneficiary of all this are the clothing companies that are able to reap the
profits of the sale of the clothing being purchased by both groups. Again, clever
marketing thru music, print and TV have made a mostly American experience a
worldwide arena for consumption.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1994/05/16/79288/index.htm
Antoine Meredith Section 80
Nice perspective Antione. I totally agree that the primary beneficiary of what some call “cross culture integration” are the corporations that are taking advantage of the trickle up effect. Don’t believe the hype! When it turns, and it will because fashion is cyclical, the poverty and struggle that are associated with chic style will undoubtedly be swept under the rug. Then as most sociological alrms that are ignored of deferred reemerge violently. This sentiment is captured poignantly by peot, Langston Hues in A Dream Deferred:
ReplyDeleteWhat happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
This all being said, what can be done to change our consumption habits? Is it possible to redirect our emotional attachment to consumption and invest it in community? Over the past few weeks I have been finding a lot of fault with the corporate system, but the real communities that can initiate change are the masses. The Affluenza text gives a good example in Al Norman. I believe with the right set of circustances we can initiate a movement to reject the current consumption driven socioeconomic system and implement a conservation based system, but what those “circustances” are, I am working to figure out.
Is it possible to redirect our emotional attachment to consumption and invest it in community?
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting question. I believe that in this day and age, it has happened but it will not stay. When the economy tanked, it was clear that people were working with their neighbors and lending more items and people cared about the community in a new way. They wanted to make sure that their community was okay and that they would be safe. However, as the economy grows and people are once again shopping, I think that we will return to our obsession over the iphone 4s and all the other relatively useless gadgets that consume us.
When I was a child we had a community day once a year every year and It was filled with people walking in the main streets with businesses having booths available and there was plenty of free give aways. It was fun and spectacular. Recently, the amount of free stuff is virtually nothing and the businesses are simply looking for pure profit. As a result, the community has not shown up. It is even being discussed to cancel the event since it garners no community support anymore. This is a truly sad observation.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm really glad you brought up redirecting consumption motivites into community building efforts, as this has also been greatly on my mind. My primary thought is that a breaking away from consumerism cannot occur by consumerism, because you will it will be just as easy for people to exit the consumerist label as enter it.
ReplyDeleteI think there needs to be a challenge from an extneral framework of thought. On that note, looking at Mario's comments, there are two major players in consumption and community. You have the vanguard who lead programs and developments, and then you have those who follow and support with their numbers such developments. I think to solve this problem, you need to develop a solution from the very roots of what our goals as humans are, and then argue how that platform is better in ways that are relevant to both groups. As you showed, these groups you target will vary dramatically in culture depending on a many variables, requiring you to test your framework for all of society.
The advertisers and stores know that people are looking for something and have this emptiness. They are taking advantage of teens who are already so easily influenced and trying to figure out who they are. They try to convey that by wearing there clothes they can look a certain way or be a whole different person. Just like in the picture above if you wear those jeans you will not be worried and can be burden free. They lead people to believe that clothes really define who you are or how you will be.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, he states that “the life of the ghetto kids is edgy, gutsy, risky-all that adolescents crave”. (p.257).
ReplyDeleteThis quote I think is very interesting in the fact that throughout the class, especially in learning about early American consumption, what you owned and wore was as symbol of the wealth and prestige you had. If you could buy your own clothes as oppose to making them people know you had money. Yet now, as this article brings up, adolsecents have taken the style of inner city kids who are less well off than them. In stead of turning away from a style that was started or made popular by those less fortunate, the more fortunate have embraced it and suburban kids have assimulated this style into their own. I think its very interesting that there is a drastic shift from early American clothes consumeption to this point in this article.
I never could understand why some suburban kids would wear clothes that would make them look like they were from the “ghetto”. I see that as offensive; a gang would look at you and hurt you severely. Fashions lie those are giving the suburban kids wrong messages. Companies like Nike, Ralph Lauren and Hilfiger would care less; all that they would care about is getting from kids who still don’t get the negative stereotypes of some of the clothes have on them.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Rizzo section 80