Is it me, or is this person just incredibly shallow?
From an early age, I have been taught that to be accepted, to be loveable, to be cool, one must have the right stuff. At junior school, I tried to make friends with the popular kids, only to be ridiculed for the lack of stripes on my trainers.
I know that branding means a lot to many many people, but to me it’s one of those things I’m pretty impervious to. Maybe it’s just because I never got into the entire “Nike vs. Adidas vs. Reebok” thing at school, maybe it’s because the branding stuff was really only just coming in at the time I was in school (Waaaay back in the dark ages) or something, I don’t know. Hell, maybe it’s just because I was dragged up by my parents in a way that meant I could identify myself by methods other than bloody labels. God, reading that back it sounds epically snooty and disparaging. But I think it’s meant to. To identify oneself by ones labels and possessions just seems – to me – to be incredibly shallow and dull.
But then, as I’ve speculated before, I think that most people are actually quite tribal, and it’s these labels and so on that now provide us with the tribe names and ideals. People identify themselves by the fact they were Nike, Adidas, Gucci, Prada, Vuitton, whatever. It’s all part of the lifestyle. And the hooky labels, the faux Chanel, Prada, Burberry, whatever – are they for those who aspire to the lifestyle portrayed by that brand? For those who want to wear all Prada, but can’t afford it?
Diffusion labels are another part of the faux branding, too. Can’t afford Armani? Get Emporio Armani, or even the other one I can’t even recall right now. But it’s all part of the same thought process. “Identify with us. We’re cool, and if you wear our stuff, you’ll be cool too!”
Perhaps I’m just a cynic. Perhaps I’m a hypocrite – I do wear branded stuff, although out of preference (although that preference is based on the practicality of “they do stuff that fits a brick shithouse like me”) I tend to wear either stuff by M&S, or Cotton Traders. But like I said, that preference is based on practicality. And let’s face it, the M&S brand is never likely to identify anyone as owt except Sad. Or maybe Practical. There’s certainly no glamour involved…
But in general I find I don’t give a damn about what label is on something. I tend to not buy anything with huge brands on it – after all, why the hell should I pay money to a company in order to advertise their stuff? Chuff that – I’ll avoid as many brands as possible. But you can’t avoid them completely. Even the famous “no label” brand Muji (where ‘Muji’ is literally ‘no brand’ in – Japanese?) has become a brand in itself. In short, everything’s branded in one way or another.
I guess the decision comes in whether we decide to live with those brands, and buy only specific brands, or whether we go out and make a choice based on something other than a logo. Looking around my desk I see Dell, HP, iMate, Coca-Cola, Dymo, but that’s it. Most of my stuff is bought for non-logo reasons. I don’t know what the answer is to the current brand-addiction, other than that there’s plenty of other things out there that can be far more valuable than identifying yourself through a bloody label.
