ATTENTION??!!

For my "PUT SOMETHING HERE" project I made a poster of myself and put a note on it with the following words: ATTENTION--- IF YOU SEE THIS STUDENT PLEASE TEXT US HIS LOCATION AT 201-680-8042". For the experiment I wore the same jacket I would place the poster somewhere in a public domain and I would sit or stand in a close proximity to it. In such a way that the viewer would see the poster and be able to see me at the same time.

wanted 2, originally uploaded by Jersonx3000.

What Does Nature Have to Do With Design?

I believe it was Buckminster Fuller who argued that "Nature is always most economical". His main point was that designers have to turn to nature as a point of reference. This is the same idea that is presented by Susan S. Szenasy. It is very interesting how both Fuller and Szenasy made key points such as technology, nature, and power structure. Szenasy quoted that "we should see the world as a system of relationships modeled on nature's own systems." This calls for designers to consider the sustainability factor of nature. Nature's system functions in a harmonious cycle or rather "everlasting" cycle. It is as if every act of nature that occurs today always has tomorrow in mind, and tomorrow will happen with the thought of he next day and so on. In this sense every living being in nature is part of a system, and humans (specifically designers) need to figure out how to work with the thought of tomorrow in mind.
A designer is an advocate and revolutionary, there is no socio-economic force too strong for a brave designer. The designer is supposed to stand for other humans. "To ameliorate the human condition" that is the primary goal of the designer; and there is no better teacher of amelioration then nature. Designers must learn to "work from nature, with nature and for nature." This is the best way for designers and human in general to become responsible and effective.

Sweatshop VS Hypersexuality

The main argument in the American Apparel issue concentrated on the ethics behind production versus those of promotion. While the company might be "sweatshop-free", it's advertising strategy is (as we may put it) "garment-free". This is a pun mainly on the idea that American Apparel uses hypersexual imagery to help sell their products. My take on this can be summarized in 7 simple words. "DO WE REALLY KNOW WHAT WE WANT?" First we were against the poor treatment of sweatshop workers, now we are are against "hypersexuality" in advertisement? It's one thing to rightfully complain about underpaid factory workers, but it's entirely another to complain about "sexuality in advertisement". In a world where we cannot have two sides of the coin, I would much prefer "hypersexual-advertising" over "sweatshop-barbarity".
American Apparel is one of the few companies who is "sweatshop-free" (so they say). I am in no way in support of degradation and exploitation of women, but the idea that American Apparel uses "images of young women that continue practices of subordination" sounds really exaggerated. There are gazillion more companies who use this same "unethical" strategy for advertising. The important question is are they "sweatshop-free"? American Apparel is. (well, so they say)

Branding the Individual

It has not been long since people have started to consume goods not only because of their functions, but for the emotional and social meanings that are embodied in those particular objects. 'Personal Identity' is the most common and understandable reason for consuming a certain product. We mix and match certain goods to create a sense of self. 'I only wear pants from such and such place, I use only Old Spice products, I only shop for groceries at this supermarket.' The word "I" in these statements reinforces the idea that the consumer is 'a unique individual.' This creates a form of identity for the individual that are characterized by all the goods that he or she consumes. This gives way to a deeper understanding to why people spend outrageous sums of money for a pair of Guess Jeans, for example.

This was Jane Pavitt's main point in "Branding the individual." By identifying themselves with a particular brand, consumers gain a sense of belonging to a particular social group. "In this way, brands are used as means of expressing personal identity and identifying with a collective taste." People gain a sense of belonging and uniqueness by associating themselves with certain brands or styles.

Thorstein Veblen states that "Investing in the construction of one's social self by consuming was a way for people to announce their membership of the bourgeoisie." It is very true that people use fashion as a mean of demonstrating their wealth and high social stature. People identify themselves and regulate their lives with certain brands as a way of placing themselves in society. Although the products that we buy are produced in mass quantity and therefore consumed by thousands of others besides us, we still feel a sense of individuality by customizing and mixing and matching the goods that we buy. Everyone is then able to associate themselves with a social group, or create their own lifestyle and taste. If the motives of consumption is to create or stabilize one's identity then people are 'rational' in what they buy no matter how absurd the 'price to quality' ratio may seem.

Brand on the Run

Richard Benson made a very clear point with his first short story on "Brand on the Run". He used the example of a man named Bernard who always liked clothes from good labels. The more expensive the clothes were, the better. Later on, Bernard discovered that a pair of Italian-label shoes had been made in Taiwan. He then realized that he's not really paying for the proper craftsmanship associated with such "Italian-heritage" shoes. Why should he be paying all that money for the shoes if they are "made the same place as everything else, 'cos then it's just the label, innit?"
This idea of the consumer paying for the label, and not necessarily the quality of the product, has recently escalated to a point of absurdity. I have experienced this first hand, as many of my friends have fallen victim to the "brand trend." Every youth from a particular neighborhood can be seen wearing either NIKE or JORDAN's footwear for the sole purpose of being "cool." We don't buy clothes because they feel comfortable anymore, nor do we buy them for their long lasting and high quality. We only want and buy what is "hot" at the moment. If this is taken into consideration, then we can see why "the power of a corporation often exceeds that of a democratically elected government." The "brand" can easily use propaganda to market it's products; as Benson described, with marketing departments using "activists techniques" to enhance their counter cultural allure.

Krystof Wodiczko

How do you suppose the immigrant utopia, or the "No-place" can be implemented in the everyday life of an immigrant? How can the immigrant situate themselves in the "No-place"? Is it a physical, virtual, or mental "place"?

Julia Kristeva says that "The foreigner is within me, hence we are all foreigners. If I am a foreigner, there are no foreigners." How can the "local" come to understand the "stranger"? How can those barriers of language and expression be broken?

The Impotence of Being Earnest

"The Impotence of Being Earnest" brings forth the fundamental saying that "Things are not always what they seem." It is a very common trend to use sincere language as a mean of getting a persuasive point across to a wide audience. The problem with such an approach is that, at times, it is almost impossible to tell how genuine the claims are. The 2000 "First Things First" manifesto is signed by 33 figures from the international graphic design community. The proposal calls for a betterment of social consciousness. In this sense, anyone who is supportive of this proposal will be recognized as a "socially responsible" individual. The issue is: "how many of these 33 figures are in full support of this proposal?" Is it not safe to say that some, if not most, of these 33 figures only signed to gain some type of status as a supporter of social change?
Aside from how many of the signer truly support the manifestos, the authoritarian and suggestive tone of the manifesto seems to disregard the class structure of the design world. The higher class of Professional elites would most readily support the manifesto which is aimed at the lower class of anonymous designers. In this sense the higher class are only claiming the moral ground over advertising.The thought of blurting out such claims is not far from the realms of absurdity. Although the manifesto was written in an earnest fashion, it was impotent, chiefly because it lacks concern for the condition of the lower class of designers.

THE FUN BUS... Pre Experiment

For my 3 hour disturbance I thought it would be cool to post naked pictures of myself on facebook using an alternate IP address and account. I chose to remain anonymous, as it turned out the majority of my friends did not answer to my friend requests as they did not know who I was. So, there was no way for me to do this experiment.
It was not until last night however that the greatest thought came to mind. What if I boarded one of the campus buses from the front and exited at every stop from the back and ran up to the front again; thus allowing the bus driver to see me getting in the bus a second time, and then a third, a fourth and so on. My phone is trash i don't have a digital camera, as such, I was not able to record anything. The idea was to experiment for 1 hour instead of 3.
I woke up really early this morning and went out on what I called THE PRE EXPERIMENT. (Im getting a new phone tomorrow afternoon so I should be able to go out for 3 hours and do audio recordings of my 3 hour experience on the FUN BUS.) I went out and proceeded to do the disturbance for only 1 hour tho, as I thought it would be a waste of everyone in the bus thinking I'm "crazy," if I'm not able to record the experience somehow.
To my delight, there was so many reactions from the fellow bus riders (nothing big) ranging from weird stares to whispers and to the bus driver not noticing at all. That was the most shocking part of my experiment as he was the main target. DANG IT!!!!!!! I WISH I COULDA RECORDED!!!! THIS WEDNESDAY MORNING, I SAY!!!!!