Dear Abercrombie and Fitch,
How is the company? We are relatively unacquainted as far as corporations and citizens go, so I will tell A&F that I am a college student at a University, and I would just like to point out some interesting things I have noticed. Abercrombie and Fitch may find them interesting as well.
To start, Abercrombie and Fitch is a clothing store, correct? So, why is it that when one walks into an Abercrombie store or views an advertisement for Abercrombie clothing, more often than not one sees what appears to be naked, in the process of becoming naked, or partially clothed people? Is there a reason the models don’t want to wear the clothing? Is it itchy or uncomfortable? Does it smell funny? It makes me think I shouldn’t want to wear the clothing either if the models can’t even stand it long enough to have a photo taken. I’ve never really understood the concept of advertising clothing with people who are clearly not wearing the clothing in the advertisement. Maybe Abercrombie and Fitch could clear up a little of this confusion for me.
To continue, I was also wondering why on the application to be an A&F model, there is a place to fill out your weight. I’m not sure if A&F is aware, but people carry their weight differently, and weight is not a correct measure of an adipose to muscle tissue ratio. If you received an application from someone who was a number of pounds over the companies weight range for models, but he/she appeared to be a healthy individual, would you turn them down? Last I checked, A&F had more than one size of clothing in the store available for purchase. It would be nice to see more than one size advertised, you know, when clothing is actually used in the advertisements to start with. I recently read a book called Culture Jam, and learned that “Nine out of ten North American women feel bad about some aspect of their bodies, and men are not far behind.” I feel as though this could be due to the advertisements such as the ones put out by A&F and other companies that only show one type of person (and unfortunately all the companies seem to have latched onto this same body type) as the beautiful and desirable body. Maybe its time to show people that there is more than one type of beautiful in the world, and A&F embraces all beauty. Vary it up, you know? Open your minds, see the beauty in every body, and show that in your advertisements, and stop asking for people’s weight in your application. It just sounds shallow.
While I’m on the topic of clothing models, I would also just like to point out the long standing complaint many people have with A&F regarding the lack of diversity present in every aspect of the store. Not only is there a lack of diversity among the models, but also among the clothing and the employees. I have noticed that pretty much all of the tee-shirts sold by A&F have a giant A&F logo on them, usually followed by some random sport or obscure year, or the words athletic department. What is so significant about the years on the shirts? And does A&F actually have an athletic department? It might be a good idea. A&F could start an athletic department, and have sports teams that actually back up the ones on the shirts. It would promote a healthier America as well as getting up and getting outside. Just a suggestion.
I have also heard incidences of A&F stores firing or not hiring various employees or applicants because they do not fit the A&F “look.” This is much less than satisfactory. I would have expected more from a store than advertises all around cool casual-ness. Just so all parties involved in this letter are aware; the word casual is defined as free and easy, natural, unplanned, and marked by blithe unconcern. Trying to stuff all employees into a mold that fits the “look” of A&F doesn’t seem, to me, to be following along with the casual outlook of the company. Seems to be a lot more stuck-up and pompous in a silver-spoon-up-the-ass kind of way. A better way to accomplish this would be to just accept everybody for who they are and not hire only those who fit the mold, or can be made to fit. I’m not quite sure I understand this obsession A&F has with fitting everything into a specific and previously defined band of human.
Also, I was just wondering why there was a need for clothing that promotes the objectification of women and drinking. I would not call myself a feminist, but I am definitely all for equality. I mean, if A&F is going to make shirts that objectify women, why not objectify men too? There is a shirt for guys in on the A&F website that has a picture of a women’s lower body wearing underwear that says “I love College.” I have some ideas on what this shirt is trying to say, but I was just wondering what A&F was thinking the message of this shirt was. Why can’t A&F have a female equivalent to the shirt with a picture of a guy’s lower half in boxer briefs with “I Love College” written on his butt. Last I checked, both guys and girls “Love College.” Correct me if I‘m wrong, but I believe A&F’s target consumer is between the ages of 18 and 22. So, why is it that you have shirts for both genders promoting drinking, when the majority of the target audience is below the legal drinking age? Just doesn’t seem quite right. Why not promote activities the target age group can actually legally engage in? Just seems more practical.
Lastly, I would like to congratulate Abercrombie and Fitch on its induction into the 2010 Sweatshop Hall of Fame by the International Labor Rights Forum. I would just like to make it publically known that I strongly disagree with A&F’s activities at the Alta Mode Factory in the Philippines. Is there a legitimate reason for putting 100 of the union members on forced leave, other than the fact that they were exercising their right to unionize? Also, it would prove to be much better, especially for the workers and their families if A&F did not switch its production around from factory to factory so much. Stop being so afraid of commitment ad form some relationships with your workers. Without them, A&F is really nothing more than a false sense of casual and a severely misplaced moose logo. I was also wondering what the production quota was for this factory is. Supposedly it is set beyond human capacity, but I really wanted to hear both sides of the story, so I figured I’d give A&F a chance to weigh in on the matter. Also mentioned in Culture Jam was this idea of corporations as legal people. Personally, I do not recognize corporations as people, but if A&F wants to be seen as a legal person, maybe it should find its moral compass, and realize the wrong its doing and has been doing in places like the Alta Mode Factory, and stop.
That’s all. I look forward to hearing back from Abercrombie and Fitch. And please be rest assured, if I do not receive a reply, A&F will be receiving this email for the next 70 some odd years until a legitimate response is received. Thanks so much for your time.
Sarah Schipelliti
The Corporation:
One thing that surprised me from the film was the ability to patent all non-human forms of life. This is insane. A one-man company now has the ability to own a form of life. Way to make corporations able to play God. Soon, everything from batteries to the idea of a human will be patented, and the only thing left to patent will be the actual human itself. What happens when a company patents a disease, and then you unfortunately get that disease? Are you going to have to pay the company that owns your disease? Because if by some horrible chance I get a disease that’s patented by a company, I am sure as hell not paying them a single penny. If anything, they should be responsible for it and have to pay my hospital bills. People cannot own life. The only life you own should be, well your own. In all honesty, I don’t even think house pets are really owned. Yeah, you are paying for their food and providing them with shelter, but if my dog ran away, that’s his choice. I’d be sad, and miss him. But I don’t own his life. Nobody should be able to own any other life than their own. That’s my take on the whole situation.
One thing that really agitated me from the film was Monsanto’s control over the story on Milk that was trying to be aired by Fox journalists. Monsanto got involved only to cover up the true detriment that milk, especially milk with RBGH in it (so Monsanto’s milk), can cause. If there was nothing wrong with RBGH, then they wouldn’t have stepped in. I can’t believe that only a 90 day study on 30 rats, with most likely misreported findings (thank you Monsanto) is being used to justify the use of RBGH in milk for humans of all ages for all lengths of time. And I can’t believe the Fox producer guy just folded right under pressure from Monsanto and agreed to do anything for Monsanto. What really got me was when he said that “…the news is what we say it it…” Wow, way to make me loose faith in all news. No, wrong, its not what you say it is. I don’t care what law says that falsifying news is not against the law. Its against every moral law. Get a back bone, stick up for what’s right. Just because it’s a law doesn’t mean you should do it. As a news station, they have a responsibility to report honest and upfront news to the population. And as a company that presides over essentially all the food for America, Monsanto has a responsibility not to kill its consumers with its chemicals and “food” and hormones. It really bothers me that Sodexho is run by Monsanto. I want nothing to do with this corrupt company.
On significant item of new learning I had from this film was learning about the appalling involvement of American companies in Nazi Gemrany during the war. One such involvement was the creation of Fanta Orange. Fanta Orange was created by Coke so it could still make profits in Nazi Germany during the war…while people died. An IBM system was used by the Nazis in every concentration camp and railroad system used to get prisoners to the camps. It was punch card system where the cards needed to be printed out. And to print the punch cards out,the Nazis used machines that were leased out to them by IBM. Then the machines needed on site maintance done once a month. So IBM can’t say they didn’t know…They did. They even collected profits from it after the war. Its just atrocious and appalling and if I had no respect for Coke before, I don’t know what you would call my lack of respect for them now. It’s a shame they have exclusive pouring rights at UVM. Boycotting beverages sold at UVM? I think so…
One question I had during the second half of the film was is there any way to get Monsanto and Coke off of the UVM campus or is that impossible in the eyes of the administration?
I found the second half of the second half of the film to be more hopeful than the first 3/4ths. Even though I found the majority of the film to be, not depressing, but frustrating (not the film itself but the content), I really liked it. It made me want to go out and fix things and “jam” the corporate world so to speak. Actually, after last class, before this assignment was posted, I sent a letter to American Eagle about their new advertisement that says “What hot people wear” and “Hot people wear shorts” and how dumb it was and how I disagreed, except with much more polite and eloquent language. I’m waiting to hear back. If not, they too will be receiving emails from me for an indefinite amount of time. But then this assignment was posted and I have to admit I was quite excited about the excuse to write to another company and give them a piece of my mind. But the video opened my eyes to quite a few things that I had never known or heard of before, and I’m glad it did. As a side note, I thought that was amazing when Michael Moore brought the smokers to sing Christmas carols to the cigarette company.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Interesting...
article on facebook and privacy...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/technology/17privacy.html?src=me&ref=technology
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/technology/17privacy.html?src=me&ref=technology
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Where is society's breaking point for stupidity and corruption spewed out by our 'beloved' corporations?!?!
Culture Jam, 73-136:
1. “This nice ripe, red tomato, a Flavr Savr,” is genetically speaking part flounder.” Really? This is crazy. We need to just grow tomatoes and other vegetables as vegetables. They are delicious the way they are and don’t need to be fiddled with. And of course, this technology is owned by Monsanto, who else? I also found the study done by UCLA on supermarket brussel sprouts to be quite interesting as well. The study found these brussels sprouts had almost no traces of vitamins. No wonder Americans suffer from obesity and malnutrition at the same time. We take perfectly good vegetables and genetically engineer them so they have no nutritional value whatsoever, and then we wonder why we are so sick. The drug companies then swoop in and feed us full of medications to compensate for our sicknesses that probably derived from the “food” we are being fed.
2. A quote from Robert Solow in The Global Economic Pyramid Scheme section absolutely blew my mind. He stated that “If it is easy to substitute other factors for natural resources, then …the world can, in effect, get along without natural resources, so exhaustion is just an event, not a catastrophe.” And this man is a Nobel laureate. It is this kind of thinking that is going to dig planet earth into an ever deepening hole. Even if we could physically get along without natural resources, which I don’t believe we could, the psychological effects on the human psyche, without any nature or natural resources would be a catastrophe in itself. Imagine a world without trees, or any other natural resource. Humans, although we seem to forget it, still need some sort of connection with nature to keep us sane. Take that away, and I don’t want to see what the world would be like then.
3. I also found another concept in this same section to be quite interesting. “Our current economic system cannot tolerate any reduction in consumption. We simply cannot deal with that idea. That is our rigidity. And that is the kind of rigidity that brings civilizations down. For a species to survive in nature they must be flexible and adaptable to the environment and the changing world around them. If they can’t change the environment will prevail, not the species. If humans can’t change the way we think and make the necessary changes to adapt to the rest of the world, then we are silly to think we will come out triumphant.
4. I also found the idea of how cars have “ …eroded our sense of village and the vitality of our neighborhoods” to be really interesting. The introduction of cars has decreased societies need for more face -to -face interaction. As the author put it, “ The arteries may be alive, but the beating heart of community is hard to find.”
5. I also agree that “…chronic TV watching is America’s number one mental health problem, and that a society in which citizens spend a quarter of their waking lives (more than four hours a day) in front of their sets is in serious need of shock therapy.” It’s so true. There is so much out in the world to actually experience. But since pretty much every aspect of life has been televised, people don’t feel the need to actually go out and see for themselves. They don’t know what they are missing. Furthermore, chronic television watching is probably one of the causes of so many of the other mental health problems in our society today.
My question is what is it going to take for people to wake up and smell the corruption and deception flowing right beneath their feet? Where is society’s breaking point for excessive nonsense?
The Corporation:
It’s crazy to follow the progression of the perception of the concept of a person, capital, and property. First slaves were considered capital and property . Then, finally with the fourteenth amendment they were considered to be people in the eyes of the government. Then over the next thirty years, everyone returned to a sort of capital and property with the recognitions of corporations as people. Its quite the nonsensical cycle. Frankly it needs to be stopped. I also found the part of the movie that delved into what kind of person a corporation to be ingenious. In my opinion, their diagnosis of a psychopath fits perfectly. Another issue brought up on the film that really bothers me is the putting of antibiotics into food. We then ingest those antibiotics through the food, however small the amount. This builds up over time, and thus, you have the birth of many bizarre antibiotic resistant strains. People get sicker and then need more medicine. People spend more money on medicine and treatments because they are sick and our economy looks like it has good progress. That should not work. Our GDP should not increase at the expense of peoples’ health. I also found this concept of the person behind the corporation not being as horrible a person as the corporation. It was interesting to hear a CEO of a company talk about how his values and beliefs are different from those he makes for the company because he has to. This seems as though we have created this sort of monster that is now beyond our control. Not good, not good. We cannot let this happen. If our economy and businesses are beyond dour control, we are at their mercy, and should not be. The creator should not become the victim. I also really appreciated the question, “Why does something gain wealth when a company puts a fence around it?” It’s interesting to think about. It goes along with why are designer bags and clothes so much more expensive? You are buying a name, nothing more. Also, there was one point in the film where a marketing woman said she was asked if what she was doing was ethical, and she replied that she didn’t know. Well, lets think about this. If you don’t know if it’s ethical or not, it probably means you really just don’t want to tell the truth. Which means that in all actuality what you are doing is not ethical, which means you should stop doing what your doing. The fact that this woman thought that by not admitting it was unethical made her actions less unethical, is just stupid and wrong. Also another person in the film made a comment along the lines of you should have faith in the corporate world because its always going to be there. This is the absolute wrong thinking a person could possible have. Why don’t you just roll over and die right now. You can’t change anything if you don’t think you can. The exact opposite of their thinking works just as well, it’s just a matter of which school of thought to choose. And I know that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but in my opinion, in this case, there is a right and a wrong school of thought; the latter being the correct one.
I think that most of the United States is not familiar with this film’s content because of a number of reasons. For one thing, corporations do a damn good job of covering their asses. They distract people with colors and material goods, and sales and fatty food, and slowly dumb them down over time to be more apt to buy into their advertisements for more stuff. Also, if people are content in how they are living, they aren’t going to seek out problems with their source of pleasure. Corporations are providing people with stuff to satisfy their blind consumer needs. You can’t bite the hand that feeds you, never mind stop to breathe, when the hand that feeds you is forcefully shoving food down your throat. I think if more people knew about the content of this film and acted on it together, a lot more could be accomplished than a few people knowing about this information, and an even fewer amount having the guts to independently act on this information. There is strength in numbers, and without numbers, all you got is a few smart, determined, outside –of-the –box-thinking people without the support to get the ball rolling.
1. “This nice ripe, red tomato, a Flavr Savr,” is genetically speaking part flounder.” Really? This is crazy. We need to just grow tomatoes and other vegetables as vegetables. They are delicious the way they are and don’t need to be fiddled with. And of course, this technology is owned by Monsanto, who else? I also found the study done by UCLA on supermarket brussel sprouts to be quite interesting as well. The study found these brussels sprouts had almost no traces of vitamins. No wonder Americans suffer from obesity and malnutrition at the same time. We take perfectly good vegetables and genetically engineer them so they have no nutritional value whatsoever, and then we wonder why we are so sick. The drug companies then swoop in and feed us full of medications to compensate for our sicknesses that probably derived from the “food” we are being fed.
2. A quote from Robert Solow in The Global Economic Pyramid Scheme section absolutely blew my mind. He stated that “If it is easy to substitute other factors for natural resources, then …the world can, in effect, get along without natural resources, so exhaustion is just an event, not a catastrophe.” And this man is a Nobel laureate. It is this kind of thinking that is going to dig planet earth into an ever deepening hole. Even if we could physically get along without natural resources, which I don’t believe we could, the psychological effects on the human psyche, without any nature or natural resources would be a catastrophe in itself. Imagine a world without trees, or any other natural resource. Humans, although we seem to forget it, still need some sort of connection with nature to keep us sane. Take that away, and I don’t want to see what the world would be like then.
3. I also found another concept in this same section to be quite interesting. “Our current economic system cannot tolerate any reduction in consumption. We simply cannot deal with that idea. That is our rigidity. And that is the kind of rigidity that brings civilizations down. For a species to survive in nature they must be flexible and adaptable to the environment and the changing world around them. If they can’t change the environment will prevail, not the species. If humans can’t change the way we think and make the necessary changes to adapt to the rest of the world, then we are silly to think we will come out triumphant.
4. I also found the idea of how cars have “ …eroded our sense of village and the vitality of our neighborhoods” to be really interesting. The introduction of cars has decreased societies need for more face -to -face interaction. As the author put it, “ The arteries may be alive, but the beating heart of community is hard to find.”
5. I also agree that “…chronic TV watching is America’s number one mental health problem, and that a society in which citizens spend a quarter of their waking lives (more than four hours a day) in front of their sets is in serious need of shock therapy.” It’s so true. There is so much out in the world to actually experience. But since pretty much every aspect of life has been televised, people don’t feel the need to actually go out and see for themselves. They don’t know what they are missing. Furthermore, chronic television watching is probably one of the causes of so many of the other mental health problems in our society today.
My question is what is it going to take for people to wake up and smell the corruption and deception flowing right beneath their feet? Where is society’s breaking point for excessive nonsense?
The Corporation:
It’s crazy to follow the progression of the perception of the concept of a person, capital, and property. First slaves were considered capital and property . Then, finally with the fourteenth amendment they were considered to be people in the eyes of the government. Then over the next thirty years, everyone returned to a sort of capital and property with the recognitions of corporations as people. Its quite the nonsensical cycle. Frankly it needs to be stopped. I also found the part of the movie that delved into what kind of person a corporation to be ingenious. In my opinion, their diagnosis of a psychopath fits perfectly. Another issue brought up on the film that really bothers me is the putting of antibiotics into food. We then ingest those antibiotics through the food, however small the amount. This builds up over time, and thus, you have the birth of many bizarre antibiotic resistant strains. People get sicker and then need more medicine. People spend more money on medicine and treatments because they are sick and our economy looks like it has good progress. That should not work. Our GDP should not increase at the expense of peoples’ health. I also found this concept of the person behind the corporation not being as horrible a person as the corporation. It was interesting to hear a CEO of a company talk about how his values and beliefs are different from those he makes for the company because he has to. This seems as though we have created this sort of monster that is now beyond our control. Not good, not good. We cannot let this happen. If our economy and businesses are beyond dour control, we are at their mercy, and should not be. The creator should not become the victim. I also really appreciated the question, “Why does something gain wealth when a company puts a fence around it?” It’s interesting to think about. It goes along with why are designer bags and clothes so much more expensive? You are buying a name, nothing more. Also, there was one point in the film where a marketing woman said she was asked if what she was doing was ethical, and she replied that she didn’t know. Well, lets think about this. If you don’t know if it’s ethical or not, it probably means you really just don’t want to tell the truth. Which means that in all actuality what you are doing is not ethical, which means you should stop doing what your doing. The fact that this woman thought that by not admitting it was unethical made her actions less unethical, is just stupid and wrong. Also another person in the film made a comment along the lines of you should have faith in the corporate world because its always going to be there. This is the absolute wrong thinking a person could possible have. Why don’t you just roll over and die right now. You can’t change anything if you don’t think you can. The exact opposite of their thinking works just as well, it’s just a matter of which school of thought to choose. And I know that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but in my opinion, in this case, there is a right and a wrong school of thought; the latter being the correct one.
I think that most of the United States is not familiar with this film’s content because of a number of reasons. For one thing, corporations do a damn good job of covering their asses. They distract people with colors and material goods, and sales and fatty food, and slowly dumb them down over time to be more apt to buy into their advertisements for more stuff. Also, if people are content in how they are living, they aren’t going to seek out problems with their source of pleasure. Corporations are providing people with stuff to satisfy their blind consumer needs. You can’t bite the hand that feeds you, never mind stop to breathe, when the hand that feeds you is forcefully shoving food down your throat. I think if more people knew about the content of this film and acted on it together, a lot more could be accomplished than a few people knowing about this information, and an even fewer amount having the guts to independently act on this information. There is strength in numbers, and without numbers, all you got is a few smart, determined, outside –of-the –box-thinking people without the support to get the ball rolling.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Culture Jam 3-71
I found this reading quite interesting. In reference to the camping trip scenario mentioned in the beginning, its scary but true. Sadly enough, I can see the beginning stages of this in my sister. She would rather sit on the beach and text people not at the beach than engage in any other beach type activity. It's annoying as anything... especially since she is younger than me, and should not appear so lethargic and technology obsessed when it comes to exploring the outdoors. Its sad, really. I thought the idea of the kids in the camping scenario going through a loss of "those selves that, when disconnected from the urban data stream, cease to function." As much as I would like to say this isn't true, a part of me thinks that if this hasn't already arrived, it is surely on its way.
I also really liked that part about the earth being a part of our bodies. "If the earth felt less like something out there and more like an extension of our bodies, we'd care for it like kin...If the self is expanded to include the natural world, behavior leading to destruction of this world will be experienced as self-destruction." This statement takes on a very holistic, nature oriented outlook on the world, which I personally think would only benefit our society. "When you cut off the flow of nature into people's lives, the spirit dies." So true, so true. All in all, I really enjoyed the Mood Disorders section.
I also found the Ecology of the mind section to be really interesting as well. It's so true though, if you look at the numbers, it seems as though America is full of people who are just mentally falling apart. "Americans are turning into annoyingly self-absorbed hypochondriacs." This is not to say all mental disorders are self created. I do think that there are some people who do have certain mental disorders, but the shear volume of people in this country alone and the range and span or disorders is just unfathomable, and not to mention unnecessary. I do believe that many of the people who are diagnosed with certain mental disorders could just as easily be helped with a lifestyle change as with psychological help or psychological medications. People are so quick to assume a drug will fix a problem they seem to have based on the symptoms just listed off to them from the television screen. When in reality getting up off the couch and getting some endorphins flowing may better relieve the depression or restless leg syndrome that may seem to be creeping up on them.
This idea of suffering caused by plentitude is also quite interesting. I wouldn't call this type of suffering as intense as the physical suffering caused by for example, malnutrition. But I do think that on some level this plentitude suffering may have some truth to it. People living shallow and meaningless lives and never knowing true satisfaction or happiness. The more things we have the less substance our lives seem to have, so to compensate for the less in out lives, we buy more, which in turn results in less. Its a vicious cycle, although no where near the level of suffering endured by those with the opposite of plentitude.
I also thought the noise section was quite interesting. One part of this section that really stuck out to me was the idea that "quiet may be to a healthy mind what clean air and water and a chemical-free diet are to a healthy body." I also really liked the the poet Marianne Moore's idea that the "deepest feeling always shows itself in silence." It's true, you can really understand how your feeling and decipher what you are thinking so much better when it's quiet and it's just you and your mind.
The jolts section was also quite interesting, it left me with the feeling that our instincts are being visually used and abused.
I thought the loss of infodiversity was also really interesting. The concept that "lack of diversity leads to inefficiency and failure...and the loss of one language, tradition, or heritage-or the forgetting of one good idea is as a big a loss to future generations as a biological species going extinct" really holds a lot of weight, and I don't think it should be taken lightly.
I also liked the Manchurian consumer section as well. The last part of this section really made me kind of step back and "take stock of my life". Would an anthropologist be able to assemble a portrait of my personality and would that portrait be " an original or a type?" It really made me wonder, and I'm still not quite sure, although I would hope the portrait would be an original one, but I'm not quite sure.
One part of the The Cult You're In section that stood out for me was that "We have been recruited into roles and behavior patterns we did not consciously choose."
In The End of The American Dream, the urban legend wedding sewage disaster example, however gross, I can see the parallels. Also, the idea of the American dream being so seductive that people just keep on dreaming is so true. People would rather just go on blindly living and ignore everything around them.
I also really liked that part about the earth being a part of our bodies. "If the earth felt less like something out there and more like an extension of our bodies, we'd care for it like kin...If the self is expanded to include the natural world, behavior leading to destruction of this world will be experienced as self-destruction." This statement takes on a very holistic, nature oriented outlook on the world, which I personally think would only benefit our society. "When you cut off the flow of nature into people's lives, the spirit dies." So true, so true. All in all, I really enjoyed the Mood Disorders section.
I also found the Ecology of the mind section to be really interesting as well. It's so true though, if you look at the numbers, it seems as though America is full of people who are just mentally falling apart. "Americans are turning into annoyingly self-absorbed hypochondriacs." This is not to say all mental disorders are self created. I do think that there are some people who do have certain mental disorders, but the shear volume of people in this country alone and the range and span or disorders is just unfathomable, and not to mention unnecessary. I do believe that many of the people who are diagnosed with certain mental disorders could just as easily be helped with a lifestyle change as with psychological help or psychological medications. People are so quick to assume a drug will fix a problem they seem to have based on the symptoms just listed off to them from the television screen. When in reality getting up off the couch and getting some endorphins flowing may better relieve the depression or restless leg syndrome that may seem to be creeping up on them.
This idea of suffering caused by plentitude is also quite interesting. I wouldn't call this type of suffering as intense as the physical suffering caused by for example, malnutrition. But I do think that on some level this plentitude suffering may have some truth to it. People living shallow and meaningless lives and never knowing true satisfaction or happiness. The more things we have the less substance our lives seem to have, so to compensate for the less in out lives, we buy more, which in turn results in less. Its a vicious cycle, although no where near the level of suffering endured by those with the opposite of plentitude.
I also thought the noise section was quite interesting. One part of this section that really stuck out to me was the idea that "quiet may be to a healthy mind what clean air and water and a chemical-free diet are to a healthy body." I also really liked the the poet Marianne Moore's idea that the "deepest feeling always shows itself in silence." It's true, you can really understand how your feeling and decipher what you are thinking so much better when it's quiet and it's just you and your mind.
The jolts section was also quite interesting, it left me with the feeling that our instincts are being visually used and abused.
I thought the loss of infodiversity was also really interesting. The concept that "lack of diversity leads to inefficiency and failure...and the loss of one language, tradition, or heritage-or the forgetting of one good idea is as a big a loss to future generations as a biological species going extinct" really holds a lot of weight, and I don't think it should be taken lightly.
I also liked the Manchurian consumer section as well. The last part of this section really made me kind of step back and "take stock of my life". Would an anthropologist be able to assemble a portrait of my personality and would that portrait be " an original or a type?" It really made me wonder, and I'm still not quite sure, although I would hope the portrait would be an original one, but I'm not quite sure.
One part of the The Cult You're In section that stood out for me was that "We have been recruited into roles and behavior patterns we did not consciously choose."
In The End of The American Dream, the urban legend wedding sewage disaster example, however gross, I can see the parallels. Also, the idea of the American dream being so seductive that people just keep on dreaming is so true. People would rather just go on blindly living and ignore everything around them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
