Blue banana
'Blue Banana is about not giving a sh*t about what other people think, and dressing the way you feel. Whether you are a Goth, Punk or Emo, you will love Blue Banana.'
Drop dead
Clothing label started by band member of Bring me the horizon...
Sponsors/worn by many many bands...so fans that look up to them will wear it - expanding their audience.
Sponsors/worn by many many bands...so fans that look up to them will wear it - expanding their audience.
Atticus
'Atticus is the bridge between the fans and the artists they look up to.'
Pseudo-individualisation?
Pseudo-individualisation?
Iron Fist
'They wanted to return to the energy and brand attitude of the rebellious years, when skateboarders lived on the streets and mohicans would get you kicked out of Disneyland...
Iron Fist is impulsive, raw and unapologetic. Within our clothing you will find outbursts of obnoxious color mixed with raw and dirty tattoo inspired street art.'
Want to stand out/look like the outsider?
Iron Fist is impulsive, raw and unapologetic. Within our clothing you will find outbursts of obnoxious color mixed with raw and dirty tattoo inspired street art.'
Want to stand out/look like the outsider?
Attitude clothing
Lots of black!
'Attitude Clothing Co. is the UK’s original mail order & online retailer of men's & women's alternative clothing, streetwear and footwear. Fuelled by a love of Metal, Punk and heavy rock music we’ve been at the front line of the alternative clothing scene for over 14 years bringing you the best designs in Emo, Gothic, Punk and Rockabilly clothes, footwear and accessories first along with the coolest tees, hoodies and skate shoes from the world’s hottest brands.'
'Attitude Clothing Co. is the UK’s original mail order & online retailer of men's & women's alternative clothing, streetwear and footwear. Fuelled by a love of Metal, Punk and heavy rock music we’ve been at the front line of the alternative clothing scene for over 14 years bringing you the best designs in Emo, Gothic, Punk and Rockabilly clothes, footwear and accessories first along with the coolest tees, hoodies and skate shoes from the world’s hottest brands.'
Grindstore.com
'The UK's finest range of emo, rock, metal and punk t-shirts, band-wear and clothing.'
'Grindstore's team are 'into' the type of stuff we sell - between us we've worked for underground record labels, rock magazines, been in bands, deejayed at metal nights and generally been involved in the alternative music scene.'
'Grindstore's team are 'into' the type of stuff we sell - between us we've worked for underground record labels, rock magazines, been in bands, deejayed at metal nights and generally been involved in the alternative music scene.'
Task 5
Triangulation - First things First.
Ken Garlands original ‘First things First’ manifesto written in 1964 was a ‘plea for a shift in designers priorities away from the ‘high pitched scream of consumer selling’ into worthier forms of activity’. At the time it got some attention but didn’t necessarily get the publicity it aimed to get, so in 2000 Adbuster’s resurrected and rewrote it to make it more relevant to today’s society and design culture, titled First things First 2000 Manifesto.
Rick Poyner, whose signature was on the ‘First things First 2000 Manifesto’, wrote ‘A brief history’ of the manifesto. Before the audience even starts reading the piece, the fact that the author is Poyner, they can assume that however critical the view may be, it will ultimately be positive towards the manifesto. Throughout the ‘brief history’ Poyner gives a deeper insight into the reasons behind the manifesto and what it aims to do; ‘The critical distinction drawn by the manifesto was between design as communication and design as persuasion’, obviously reinforcing that persuasion is a negative form of design. Poyner closes his article with the line; ‘The escalating commercial takeover of everyday life make democratic resistance more vital than ever’, it is evident throughout the piece that he regards commercial design as a waste of time and effort and fully believes that designers should put their efforts into fighting against this.
Taking a slightly more critical approach is Matt Soar’s piece; ‘First things first: now more than ever’. He doesn’t particularly look at it negatively, however he does question it and raisse some issues with the manifesto for example he looks at the designers whose signatures are declared on it; as they are all ‘some of the most familiar names in design’, they can be seen as upper-class who are ‘speaking above the heads of, or merely down to, the rank and file’, provoking a ‘that’s-easy-for-them-to-say’ kind of response. Another opinion that it discusses is that of Richard Wilde, the chair of advertising and design departments at the School of Visual Arts who sees the manifesto as ‘totally idealistic’ and ‘unmanageable’ because they’re claiming that designers shouldn’t use their skills to promote unethical, commercial products but ‘virtually any product is unethical’ so if this was proven there would be nothing left to design for. Keeping a neutral stance, he states that the ‘First Things First 2000 deserves to be remembered - and sustained’ so regardless of how many things may be seen wrong in it, it shouldn’t be ignored.
The most in depth, critical look at the manifesto comes from Michael Bierut who almost dissect the rewritten manifesto and analyses lines from it. Interestingly, Bierut who is a graphic designer, wasn’t asked to sign the First Things First 2000 Manifesto and he states that cynics ‘might dismiss the impact of the manifesto as no more than that of witnessing a group of eunuchs take a vow of chastity’; these designers are simply signing a manifesto that they already follow apart from Milton Glaser, who ‘sticks out like a sore thumb’ but interestingly has made millions from ‘I Love New York’ graphics and can technically pick and choose his future work so may have just signed the manifesto to have his name on something that looks good. In the 2000 manifesto it proclaims that ‘to an extent we (graphic designers etc.) are all helping draft a reductive and immeasurably harmful code of public discourse’ but as Bieruts analysis explains, in todays society economic affluence allows people seek pleasure in the form of holidays etc. New York is a popular city break and Times Square is infamous for its bright lights and high billboards; people go their to experience this, not to be educated or see lots of information graphics as the manifesto is asking for. Lastly, he expresses his disappointment in realising that ‘this revolution is aimed at replacing mass manipulation for commercial ends with mass manipulation for cultural and political ends’. Bierut never states directly that the manifesto is wrong or ‘bad’ but he does pose questions and give facts that would make the audience think before completely agreeing with everything the manifesto asks for.
Taking into account all opinions presented, I largely agree with Wilde; I do think the manifesto is rather idealistic. Although it would be nice to think that every single graphic designer could produce work that communicates as apposed to persuading; work that contributes to education and a ‘better world’ but realistically, I don’t think this can happen and I don’t think there would ever be enough jobs. However, I don’t think this is a negative thing; similar to a question Bierut asks, If we need food to live, and that food is nicely packaged, what makes the packaging of that food any less important than a nicely designed museum catalogue?
Ken Garlands original ‘First things First’ manifesto written in 1964 was a ‘plea for a shift in designers priorities away from the ‘high pitched scream of consumer selling’ into worthier forms of activity’. At the time it got some attention but didn’t necessarily get the publicity it aimed to get, so in 2000 Adbuster’s resurrected and rewrote it to make it more relevant to today’s society and design culture, titled First things First 2000 Manifesto.
Rick Poyner, whose signature was on the ‘First things First 2000 Manifesto’, wrote ‘A brief history’ of the manifesto. Before the audience even starts reading the piece, the fact that the author is Poyner, they can assume that however critical the view may be, it will ultimately be positive towards the manifesto. Throughout the ‘brief history’ Poyner gives a deeper insight into the reasons behind the manifesto and what it aims to do; ‘The critical distinction drawn by the manifesto was between design as communication and design as persuasion’, obviously reinforcing that persuasion is a negative form of design. Poyner closes his article with the line; ‘The escalating commercial takeover of everyday life make democratic resistance more vital than ever’, it is evident throughout the piece that he regards commercial design as a waste of time and effort and fully believes that designers should put their efforts into fighting against this.
Taking a slightly more critical approach is Matt Soar’s piece; ‘First things first: now more than ever’. He doesn’t particularly look at it negatively, however he does question it and raisse some issues with the manifesto for example he looks at the designers whose signatures are declared on it; as they are all ‘some of the most familiar names in design’, they can be seen as upper-class who are ‘speaking above the heads of, or merely down to, the rank and file’, provoking a ‘that’s-easy-for-them-to-say’ kind of response. Another opinion that it discusses is that of Richard Wilde, the chair of advertising and design departments at the School of Visual Arts who sees the manifesto as ‘totally idealistic’ and ‘unmanageable’ because they’re claiming that designers shouldn’t use their skills to promote unethical, commercial products but ‘virtually any product is unethical’ so if this was proven there would be nothing left to design for. Keeping a neutral stance, he states that the ‘First Things First 2000 deserves to be remembered - and sustained’ so regardless of how many things may be seen wrong in it, it shouldn’t be ignored.
The most in depth, critical look at the manifesto comes from Michael Bierut who almost dissect the rewritten manifesto and analyses lines from it. Interestingly, Bierut who is a graphic designer, wasn’t asked to sign the First Things First 2000 Manifesto and he states that cynics ‘might dismiss the impact of the manifesto as no more than that of witnessing a group of eunuchs take a vow of chastity’; these designers are simply signing a manifesto that they already follow apart from Milton Glaser, who ‘sticks out like a sore thumb’ but interestingly has made millions from ‘I Love New York’ graphics and can technically pick and choose his future work so may have just signed the manifesto to have his name on something that looks good. In the 2000 manifesto it proclaims that ‘to an extent we (graphic designers etc.) are all helping draft a reductive and immeasurably harmful code of public discourse’ but as Bieruts analysis explains, in todays society economic affluence allows people seek pleasure in the form of holidays etc. New York is a popular city break and Times Square is infamous for its bright lights and high billboards; people go their to experience this, not to be educated or see lots of information graphics as the manifesto is asking for. Lastly, he expresses his disappointment in realising that ‘this revolution is aimed at replacing mass manipulation for commercial ends with mass manipulation for cultural and political ends’. Bierut never states directly that the manifesto is wrong or ‘bad’ but he does pose questions and give facts that would make the audience think before completely agreeing with everything the manifesto asks for.
Taking into account all opinions presented, I largely agree with Wilde; I do think the manifesto is rather idealistic. Although it would be nice to think that every single graphic designer could produce work that communicates as apposed to persuading; work that contributes to education and a ‘better world’ but realistically, I don’t think this can happen and I don’t think there would ever be enough jobs. However, I don’t think this is a negative thing; similar to a question Bierut asks, If we need food to live, and that food is nicely packaged, what makes the packaging of that food any less important than a nicely designed museum catalogue?
Task 3 - (Essay Proposal)
A proposed essay title or topic
Subcultures and Pseudo-indivdualisation
The main issues addressed by your argument (in bullet points)
- Looking at how some subcultures are defined by music.
- The ‘look’ of subcultures - specifically the ‘emo’ or ‘scene’ culture.
- How the album cover, t-shirt graphics etc. of certain bands conform to the nature of the particular ‘subculture’ that they are labelled with.
Any visual material that you will look at (include hyperlinks if possible)
- Music videos
- Band merchandise - i.e. www.grindstore.com sells a variety of band merchandise.
What theoretical approach / methodology will you use? e.g. marxism, the gaze, psychoanalysis etc.
- Critical theory, Marxism, pseudo-individualisation, cultural theory and popular culture etc.
Which specific theorists / writers will you refer to?
- Hebdige, Adorno (possibly more)
At least 5 books / articles / resources already located (referenced using Harvard)
- Gunster, Shame (2005) Capitalizing on culture: critical theory for cultural studies, Canada, University of Toronto Press.
- Story, John (2009) Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction, Harlow, University of Georgia Press.
- Hebdige, Dick (1979) Subculture: the meaning of style, London, Methuen Publishing.
Subcultures and Pseudo-indivdualisation
The main issues addressed by your argument (in bullet points)
- Looking at how some subcultures are defined by music.
- The ‘look’ of subcultures - specifically the ‘emo’ or ‘scene’ culture.
- How the album cover, t-shirt graphics etc. of certain bands conform to the nature of the particular ‘subculture’ that they are labelled with.
Any visual material that you will look at (include hyperlinks if possible)
- Music videos
- Band merchandise - i.e. www.grindstore.com sells a variety of band merchandise.
What theoretical approach / methodology will you use? e.g. marxism, the gaze, psychoanalysis etc.
- Critical theory, Marxism, pseudo-individualisation, cultural theory and popular culture etc.
Which specific theorists / writers will you refer to?
- Hebdige, Adorno (possibly more)
At least 5 books / articles / resources already located (referenced using Harvard)
- Thornton, Sarah. and Gelder, Ken (eds) (1997) The Subcultures Reader, London and New York, Routledge.
- Borden, Iain (2001) Skateboarding, space and the city: architecture and the body, Oxford and New York, Berg Publishers- Gunster, Shame (2005) Capitalizing on culture: critical theory for cultural studies, Canada, University of Toronto Press.
- Story, John (2009) Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction, Harlow, University of Georgia Press.
- Hebdige, Dick (1979) Subculture: the meaning of style, London, Methuen Publishing.
Essay ideas.
I am currently undecided between 2 vague ideas:
1) The Gaze - Feminism and Psychoanalysis
- 'The power of looking'
- The role of women in media.
Books:
2) Subcultures and Pseudo-indivdualisation.
- Taken from Adorno's essay on popular culture.
- Look at different aspects of subcultures defined by music taste i.e. album covers, t-shirt graphics etc.
Books:
1) The Gaze - Feminism and Psychoanalysis
- 'The power of looking'
- The role of women in media.
Books:
- Visual and other pleasures - Laura Mulvey - looking at 'the male gaze' and the fact that women are only in film to be looked at.
- Femmes fatales: feminism, film theory, psychoanalysis. - Mary Ann Doana - analyses the 'femme fatales' character in films.
- The monstrous-feminine: film, feminism, psychoanalysis. - Barbara Creed - Looks at the 'mostrous-feminine' in horror films such as 'Carrie'.
2) Subcultures and Pseudo-indivdualisation.
- Taken from Adorno's essay on popular culture.
- Look at different aspects of subcultures defined by music taste i.e. album covers, t-shirt graphics etc.
Books:
- Subculture: the meaning of style - Dick Hebdige (1979)
- Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction. - John Storey (ed. 2009) - discusses Marxism and looks at and analyses Adorno's essay on popular music.
- Capitalizing on culture: critical theory for cultural studies. - Shane Gunster (2005) - Discusses pseudo-individualisation
Task 2.
Adorno on popular music.
Adorno believes that in music there are 'two spheres to music'; serious music such as Bach and Beethoven and popular 'pop' music; presumably from his seperation of the two, he is implying that this is not serious. The first compotent that he believes is completely apparent in all popular music is standardisation; 'The whole structure of popular music is standardized, even where the attempt is made to circumvent standardization' (Adorno, 2002 p 438). By this he means that everything we listen to is pre-accepted; we as the audience know what to expect from popular music and we want what are taught to expect; there is not attention to detail. For example, we expect there to be a chorus in a song, the emphasis placed on that section, the placement of it in the song and repetition of it makes it the most recognisable part but in serious music, the song only works as a whole.
Another area that he considers is pseudo-individualisation. 'By pseudo-individualization we mean endowing cultural mass production with the halo of free choice or open market on the basis of standardization itself...for its part, it keeps them in line by making them forget that what they listen to is already listened to for them, or 'pre-digested'' (Adorno, 2002 p445); when people think they are expressing their indivduality by listening to a certain artist, you're infact just imitating the artist and their other followers therefore not being individual at all.
One of latter points he examines, is the concept of 'recognition and acceptance'. 'Popular music...The basic principle behind it is that one need only repeat something until it is recognised in order to make it accepted' (Adorno, 2002 p452), when it is written clearly it becomes quite an obvious point; if you repeat something so many times, eventually people will start recognising it resulting in it becoming an accepted piece of music; if this is the forumla to create a successful hit, there is no need for music companies to try something completely different. Recognition of the framework in popular music therefore destroys any chance for there to be something 'new' in the songs; if you recognise a piece of serious music, its because it has presented something new.
It is clearly evident throughout the essay that Adorno is by no means a fan of popular music, he believes to be just another product of mass culture and it doesn't appreciate the true art of music.
'On Popular Music' in Adorno, T., Leppert, R. and Gillespie, S. (2002), Essays on Music/Theodor W.Adorno; selected, with introduction, commentary and notes by Richard Leppert; new translations by Susan H. Gillespie, California, University of California Press
My Chemical Romance - Welcome to the Black Parade
I chose this video after reading more into 'psuedo-individualization'. Fans of My Chemical Romance, largely teenagers, seem to make it a way of life; they immitate most aspects of the bands appearance and the band members become their heroes; it got to the point where you could look at a person and preempt that they were a fan of this band just from the way that they looked, presumably they do this to express their individuality yet by doing it, they are simply imitating the artist and their millions of other followers concluding in them being far from individual.
Adorno believes that in music there are 'two spheres to music'; serious music such as Bach and Beethoven and popular 'pop' music; presumably from his seperation of the two, he is implying that this is not serious. The first compotent that he believes is completely apparent in all popular music is standardisation; 'The whole structure of popular music is standardized, even where the attempt is made to circumvent standardization' (Adorno, 2002 p 438). By this he means that everything we listen to is pre-accepted; we as the audience know what to expect from popular music and we want what are taught to expect; there is not attention to detail. For example, we expect there to be a chorus in a song, the emphasis placed on that section, the placement of it in the song and repetition of it makes it the most recognisable part but in serious music, the song only works as a whole.
Another area that he considers is pseudo-individualisation. 'By pseudo-individualization we mean endowing cultural mass production with the halo of free choice or open market on the basis of standardization itself...for its part, it keeps them in line by making them forget that what they listen to is already listened to for them, or 'pre-digested'' (Adorno, 2002 p445); when people think they are expressing their indivduality by listening to a certain artist, you're infact just imitating the artist and their other followers therefore not being individual at all.
One of latter points he examines, is the concept of 'recognition and acceptance'. 'Popular music...The basic principle behind it is that one need only repeat something until it is recognised in order to make it accepted' (Adorno, 2002 p452), when it is written clearly it becomes quite an obvious point; if you repeat something so many times, eventually people will start recognising it resulting in it becoming an accepted piece of music; if this is the forumla to create a successful hit, there is no need for music companies to try something completely different. Recognition of the framework in popular music therefore destroys any chance for there to be something 'new' in the songs; if you recognise a piece of serious music, its because it has presented something new.
It is clearly evident throughout the essay that Adorno is by no means a fan of popular music, he believes to be just another product of mass culture and it doesn't appreciate the true art of music.
'On Popular Music' in Adorno, T., Leppert, R. and Gillespie, S. (2002), Essays on Music/Theodor W.Adorno; selected, with introduction, commentary and notes by Richard Leppert; new translations by Susan H. Gillespie, California, University of California Press
My Chemical Romance - Welcome to the Black Parade
I chose this video after reading more into 'psuedo-individualization'. Fans of My Chemical Romance, largely teenagers, seem to make it a way of life; they immitate most aspects of the bands appearance and the band members become their heroes; it got to the point where you could look at a person and preempt that they were a fan of this band just from the way that they looked, presumably they do this to express their individuality yet by doing it, they are simply imitating the artist and their millions of other followers concluding in them being far from individual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)