Weekly Feature: I Am An Anti-Capitalist, A Book Review

*This week, for the weekly feature, we have a book review by poet and scifi writer Josh Pearce. I first met Josh in college, in a creative writing class, and found his writing refreshing, though he’ll tell you I blindly critiqued his story in our fiction class, saying, “I don’t get it,” while the teacher gave him shining accolades. On second read, I got it and had no critique, but he thought I was just being nice. Nope. His writing was so awesome a mere mortal like myself could simply not comprehend it on first read.  Trivia question: Can you find Hello Kitty in the third picture below? 

I AM AN ANTI-CAPITALIST: a book review

it’s easy to say that i’m not fond of money, or that money is evil, when i am poor (as a majority of writers are). invariably, though, people with this kind of mindset look down their noses at the rich until the day when the poor writer produces a bestseller or gets optioned for a film and the millions pour in (fingers crossed, yeah?). but the evil here isn’t having money. the evil lies in using that money to undercut someone else’s brain, to supplant their perceptions, to play with their emotions, in order to make even more money.

when corporations exhort each other to bend the very fabric of reality in order to make manifest more of the moneys, it’s time to stand up to that shit.

I get this all from one book of the enemy I read. it’s called brand sense, by martin lindstrom, aka tool of the deceiver. brand sense’s main idea is that most advertising relies on only one or two of its consumers’ senses to make a connection – mainly sight, as in billboards and television – and that companies are missing out on this untapped wealth because they are not engaging more of the senses in their advertising. he says, “it there is a sound, touch, taste, or smell component, well, you’d probably be right in assuming that this is merely a pleasant coincidence. one may ask why these four senses have been neglected and left to their natural protective roles. I cannot think of a single reason!” (10) he’s clearly not very imaginative. but, moving on.

he says, on page 201, “in our contemporary urban society we’re more familiar with picking apples from supermarket shelves than from trees. not many more than a handful of adults, let alone kids, would be able to identify an apple leaf. although most consumers like the odor of what they believe to be real leather, what they were introduced to a generation ago was a fake leather smell that they now take for the real thing. we now perceive the altered world as more authentic than the original. technology has enabled companies like nestle, coca-cola, and carlsberg to add aroma to packaging on the supermarket shelf. the concept of authenticity will decide how far industry can go before running into a consumer backlash.” we have been deceived into a fake, illusory world by marketers.

and on: “things have to feel credible, real, and genuine – even if it’s coming from an artificial place. that’s the paradox. people don’t necessarily want to step into the matrix, where everything is an illusion.” brand sense claims this, even though everything that it offers is an illusion. “we also feel comfortable about the artificially added ‘new-car smell.’ we accept the bird sounds coming out of the loudspeakers in disney parks, and we may even buy a video of birds hopping about and chirping for our indoor cats. perhaps we do so because these are components that fulfill the perfect illusion that we pay to become part of. [I REJECT THIS.] even though the sounds and smells may be artificial, they are part of the real illusion.” (115)

what is “the real illusion”? that kind of language grates on me on so many levels, and YET lindstrom continues. “if the rolling down of the automatic car window doesn’t sound like ‘quality,’ the sound will have to be altered.” rather than altering the actual window to achieve quality. “in all cases, reality must shift closer to perception.” (108) that, right there, is really the basic problem of corporate messages – a blatant disregard for reality.

lindstrom wants corporations to build this cage of sensory overload around us, co-opting our “useless” senses – which are tuned by evolution to keep us alive – into nothing more than data inputs for hi-def, hifi, 4g advertisements. maybe we’d still evolve, but only into fat, blind, immobile maggots, incapable of living beyond this carefully constructed environment. like factory-farmed chickens – debeaked, amputated legs, blind, pumped full of antibiotics. and this is not a matrix-type virtual reality where ignorance is bliss and the corporation gives you a semblance of a good life if you give it your blood. lindstrom himself says, while analyzing the music played in department stores: “however, sad music resulted in greater levels of purchase intent.” (73) companies have a vested interest in making you depressed.

and we’re funneled into this virtual maze and purposefully trapped within. “navigation is one of the most powerful ways for a brand to bond with [imprison] the consumer. whether it’s an ibm trackpoint mouse, a nokia cell-phone menu, or the apple’s icons and setup, once a navigation system has been mastered, there is a natural resistance to learn a whole new system. the process has become intuitive and most people are reluctant to interrupt their day-to-day flow.” (107) “nokia knows that laziness [and fear of change] builds brands.” (36)

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD BECAUSE I AM AN ANTI-CAPITALIST

(or vice-versa)

the brands and corporations want more than just surface control over their consumers. no longer can a person silently endure an entity controlling what they do while simultaneously maintaining a rich and vivid inner life. a spiritual, emotional, life examined cannot, in a corporation’s eyes, be left in the hands of the people who are living those lives. “there’s every indication that branding will move beyond the me-selling proposition into an even more sophisticated realm – reflecting a brave new world where the consumer desperately needs something to believe in – and where brands very well might provide an answer.” (5)

“what becomes apparent is that the gap between the rational proposition of today’s brands and the need for emotionally satisfying products, services, and beliefs is growing. this is a need that’s properly being met by religion. if for no other reason, and without equating the two or seeming overly exploitative, [just exploitative enough] branding should aspire to build ever-stronger emotional ties with its customers.” (170)

and: “religions have leveraged the five senses for thousands of years. your brand can most likely be inspired by this.” (164)

AND: “few brands have succeeded in turning their customers into evangelists.” (210) not yet.

but: “hello kitty is a savior. she draws people into her perfect world and offers stability and happiness. nothing is more attractive than this place where chaos is removed, and you simply follow the rules – leaving it up to hello kitty to take care of you. hello kitty has twenty-five years’ experience doing just that. her devotees are free to project their every emotion onto her cute image. she has help lines, prayer sites, and private hello kitty counseling sessions.” (185) brain-washing and totalitarianism. this is what brands seek, by their own admission.

and, as a subset of this is that

I AM AN ANTI-CAPITALIST BECAUSE I THINK

(or vice-versa)

the greatest defense against a constant bombardment of soul-sucking corporate advertisements – both blatant and the subliminal – is rational thought. corporations know this. and they know how to quell this. first they take your body. then they go after your heart. then the only thing left for them is your brain.

“that ice-cream shop aroma could have belonged to any number of brands. but a combination of aroma and the signage on the store helped create a brand association with a refreshing product. that association may arise unbidden the next time you’re walking down the street in the heat. so what began as an unbranded experience is likely to convert into a branded one.” this is purely pavolovian. “a branded stimulus not only motivates impulsive behavior, it also directly connects emotions to the brand.” this promotes a lack of thought. “it requires constant reinforcement between [artificial] need and specific brand.” (104-105) this paragraph is a classic description of brain-washing.

lindstrom also describes the “disney world experience”: “from the razzmatazz at the main gate to the up-tempo walking music playing in the streets, the music helps monitor your mood.” (74) which is thought control. “the purpose of a sensory branding strategy is emotional engagement” (135) in order to sidestep rational thought.

“we celebrate mother’s day with gifts and cards. we bring flowers to a grave. these are actions predominately driven by ritual rather than by rational thinking. as such, brands would find it beneficial if they took their inspiration from this type of behavior.” (118) “we all engage in some form of these little practices to make our world safer. is it rational? hardly. however, we fear consequences if we don’t. superstition becomes tradition.” maybe YOU fear consequences. maybe YOU engage in superstition. not all of us do. I do not. and I avoid institutions, be they religions, cults, politicians, or corporations, who promote a fear-based motivation system.

once they have you, body and soul, the corporations make no qualms about using you as a viral agent to infect others. you alone are not enough of a prize for the corporation – they wish to reap the rest of your community. all at once. they have found that the easiest way to control a person’s thoughts is through groupthink.

I AM AN ANTI-CAPITALIST BECAUSE I LIKE TO BE ALONE

(or vice-versa)

corporations are instructed use their brands to replace the traditional roles of religion in a person’s life, especially the roles of emotional and social support. “everyone, everywhere, feels the need to belong,” says brand sense on page 178. but I enjoy solitude and am comfortable enough with myself to be capable of being alone.

“consumers get tired of talking about a product day in and day out [because this is pathetic], but they will latch onto individual aspects that unite them with other users, forming a common bond. the role of the brand therefore is simply to create the social glue to connect people.” (177) WRONG. the role of the brand is to take your money.

a brand, according to those doing the branding, promises “a unique sense of belonging.” (176) but I do not get my identity from the things that I consume. I get it from the things I create. and branding corporations are threatened by this. they are threatened by, and are afraid of, nothing more than someone being alone.

“the most important element, however, is to ensure that the ritual is a shared one. rituals for one don’t hold much weight. one may appreciate a beautiful sunset on one’s own, but the sunset is only totally splendid if there’s someone to share it with. and if a whole community witnesses that sunset together, it turns into a sacred moment. the bonding in turn becomes the reward.” (190) this statement goes back to the point I made about having an internal life. the corporation does not believe that your individual, personal, inner experience holds any value at all. it’s like they do not believe that you really exist unless you get enough people to have the same view as you. otherwise, you are simply beneath their notice. the corporation deals only on the level of the hive-mind.

I WRITE POETRY BECAUSE I AM AN ANTI-CAPITALIST

(or vice-versa)

the corporations may be vague, faceless opponents, but their marketing and pr arms work hard to mask even that. “in exactly the same way that people project individual personalities, so should the brand. and in the same way that these personalities consist of a whole range of moods and attitudes, so should the brand.” the individual experience, the individual himself is replaced by the corporate. it is the rise of a new form of life, one hostile and powerful.

it sounds like the corporations want nothing more than for you to love them, an emotional connection, an irrational attachment. they would use any means to acquire this – brain-washing groupthink, and all other methods of orwell’s 1984, including newspeak. “it takes years for phrases, words, and sentences to be identified and accepted as ‘belonging’ to specific brands.” (53) fight this.

“there’s one brand, however, that has scored higher in purloining language than any other. it is a brand that welcomes you to its kingdom of fantasy, dreams, promises, and ‘magic.’ this will come as no surprise to anyone who has stayed at a disney resort, taken a disney cruise, or eaten in a disney restaurant. it doesn’t take long to hear ‘cast members’ encouraging guests to ‘have a magical day!’” (50)

poetry is a powerful use of language, and corporations know this. poetry establishes emotional connections, quickly and bitingly. poetry makes irrational thought comprehensible. “we taste with our nose. we see with our fingers and hear with our eyes. however, just as we can identify a brand by a smashed bottle, so we can break down the senses to build up and generate positive synergies.” (71) this is brain-hacking. and those “synergies” used to be called “poems.”

“from our study it is clear that if you show an image of a strawberry, then add a strawberry smell, the effect is good but not amazing. yes, it creates attention, but it is not necessarily remembered because it is expected. it is when you combine the senses in nontraditional ways that true memorability occurs – like showing a picture of a car and adding the smell of leather seats.” (127) this is the gist of poetry. and the brands and advertisements are going after us by using poetry.

to combat this – the theft of language, the replacement of thought, and the distortion of reality as defined by our senses – we write our own words, define our own language, and decide what holds value to us. we decide for ourselves what is real and what is mass-produced trash passed off as real. “multisensory brands can carry higher prices than similar brands with fewer sensory features.” (70) they want to charge us more for co-opting larger portions of our own brains. “there’s a distinct relationship between branding and placebos. in each case, it is believed that the brand adds value to a product or service. this may or may not be true.” (197) this is not true.

AND NOW, FOR A LAST REALITY CHECK

“trademarking components that build loyalty and avoiding expiring patents will become the main drivers” (211) so that brands can own a section of human experience forever. well fuck that shit. before corporations can patent my thoughts the very second that I think them in my brain, before corporations can trademark my likeness, brand my clothing, patent my genes, own the ambient sounds of my world, and regulate what odors I can smell, they will face a shitstorm of my wrath – mostly in the form of a sharply written word.

but we will tell them that we are still human. we are people who, despite all appearances, still think and emote and imagine, who day-dream and fantasize. we will prove to them that those internal roilings are worth something, even without corporate backing. we will declare that a world free from chaos, where we don’t have to make any decisions, is not a world that we desire, that their company-approved heaven sounds boring as fuck. and that I will use whatever fucking language and whichever fucking words I fucking want to, no matter where the fuck I am and no matter who the fuck owns those words.

we will tell them that in a reality-ripping war of poetry, we will win, because we are the better writers. we sit – quiet, alone, thinking – and they tremble.

“Even a writer who writes full-time and gets all those benefits is more likely on the chopping block because writers are seen as expendable. (Never mind the fact that we write the world into existence. It’s like nobody appreciates gods anymore.)” -Chuck Wendig

Josh Pearce can be found at Book of Tangents. His poetry and short stories can be found in numerous publications. The credit for the second photo goes to Sofa Shark.