AD603 Critical Theory

World now is a village. And it seems that all the countries and cultures tend to develop in the same way, especially after World War II. Western culture and value have penetrated into every corner in non-Western world. Just take a look at Japan, Korean, Hong Kong and Taiwan, where were used to be the most traditional countries or places in Asia, nowadays turn to be the most fashion, modern and Western-world- like places in the East world. People there drink coffee more than tea, fond of Hollywood films, longing for the life in Western world, talking about New York or Paris rather than their hometown, having Christmas and Thanksgiving or Halloween even if these festivals have nothing to do with their own culture and history. What has happened to this world? When we talk about culture and history, the diversity is the most important element, and also to succeed what we have from the past is also what we should do in order to keep a certain type of culture alive. But what if all the different culture and traditions are being taken place by a single one, like the one from Western? Should we be happy or should we calm down and take it seriously? In my opinion, it will be a disaster.

Just think about fashion industry. Every year, in Paris, New York, Milan and London, fashion shows would take place far beyond the right season, in the name of pre-telling or prediction what will be popular next season or next year, even if there is no reason. Ironically, almost everybody follows such kind of rule, which means they believe what is expressed through those shows and fashion clothes or colors. And the result is people in different parts of the world, west or east, south sphere or north, all dress the same. LV, Channel and Versace can be found every where. It seems that people like to be in the same suit, wearing the same hat, carrying the same bag with others. It is ridiculous, but that is true.

Also Hollywood contributes a lot to these.

The whole world is watching Hollywood movies and on some degree, people try to live a life like what it is in the movie, a kind of perfect, ideal, or extreme or overstated real life in Western world. Non-Western world people got to know America mostly through Hollywood films and what they thought America was is just what had happened in the movies, which shows that mass media is more than powerful than we thought. From the movies, even the people in the faraway village in mountain areas in China get to know St. Valentine’s Day, young boys would buy flowers for their loving girls, though they have no idea what St. Valentine’s Day is and its origin.

It seems that the whole world now agrees to the same concept of value, regardless of different culture, tradition, history or ethics standard. The essence of our culture is peaceful, deep and implied. We seldom talked about sex, wealth or money in public in such a natural or unconscious way in 1980s. But things all changed in these two decades along with the development and the coming of western culture. Meanwhile, the social aesthetic standard changed. The term “sexy” becomes popular, which was even not in our language until 1990s.

It not only influenced culture related activities but also other day life ones, like dinning. Many Western style club or restaurants showed up every where out side Western world and some upper class people treat it as a kind of honor, a symbol of wealth or status dinning out in a Western style club or restaurant. Foxes and knives also become important members of dinner set at home.

Actually, the influence is not a one way street, it is interactive. China Town, Chinese food, Mexican food, Indian culture also have become accepted by Western world and are already parts of American culture now. The thing is which one is in charge. Chinese food has changed a lot in order to survive in America, which means all those non-Western culture are still the minor parts and have been colonized more or less.

The readings for this week are pretty interesting, which I mean is that both of the readings are different from what we have read before. Both of the readings have something related to diversity of culture or community.

What I’m always thinking about is that America is a country providing all kinds of possibility to accept all kinds of different culture from different places, which helps America become the culture center of the world. But after reading and deep thinking, I find that there are still some dark corners of culture merging, though that happens every where, it is of no doubt kind of big problem for US today. Since I’m a minority, sometimes I have the same feeling with the one talked by Adrian Piper.

In campus, we have many different organization based on different speaking languages, cultures and religions. And students prefer to find someone who shares the same beliefs and ideas, especially for minorities or whose native language is not English. And whenever someone talks about some strangers that his or her friends don’t know, the first question they will throw out might be “Is he/she Chinese/Korean or ……?” , just like what Adrian Piper has talked about in Cornered. Well, it is not anyone’s fault. Everyone has such kind of thoughts or ideas unconsciously. We all want to be in a group of people who think, behave, live just like us and also most of the time, we just simply supposed that what others think about and the way they think are the same with ours. And that is why at the beginning of the passage, Adrian Piper said if she did not say she was a black, audience might take it as granted that she should be white, since probably most of the audience there or population here are white people.

And similarly, in the writing of The Mythology of Difference, Charles A. Wright, Jr. also talked about this. “While certainly such conditions may inform their work, evidently black artists speak only for blacks, women speak only for women, and gays speak only for gays, bound by a constrained notion of community.” Each individual stands for his or her community, which sometimes sounds a little crazy but it is true and very common. But the thing is that why Charles A. Wright, Jr. only mentioned these three groups? Do they have something special? Or is it just a kind of citing or examples? My answer is NO. Blacks, women and gays, these three groups of people are all kinds of minorities in society. What they can do and have to do is just to speak for themselves since no others can help. And the artists are the right persons who can express their feelings, ideas, concepts and faith in public without too much trouble and at the same time what they are longing for can be gained much more easily , which is kind of feedbacks or responds.

This is not isolated phenomenon. We would have noticed that in a shopping mall or shopping center, always, jewelry and watches are displayed together, fashion clothes and shoes are presented hand by hand. And almost everywhere in US, Subways, Wendy’s and Arby’s are located in line, Cvs and Walgreens are closed to each other, and that is the same in China, Mcdonald and KFC are always neighbors.

Then why?

The answer is simple and clear: the products these brands are selling are similar and have the same group of customers. Or we may say that each of these groups is a community made up by several different brands sharing the same markets or culture. Even we all know fast food is not good for health, there is still advertisement on TV, through the air, posted by newspaper, since all kinds of such food have to speak for themselves in order to survive.

And where is the diversity? Well, diversity lives only between different communities or groups. And to keep that difference, what we should do is just to keep all kinds of different communities and groups and make sure that none of them would be dying out due to our own prejudice or misunderstanding.

“……at some point of following World War II, a new kind of society began to emerge (variously described as postindustrial society, multinational capitalism, consumer society, media society and so forth).” Who can ever give a precise definition of Postmodernism? And who can tell exactly what is belonging to postmodernism and what is not? At this point, maybe history event is the best division. World War II is the turning point not only for politics but also for culture and social recognition, let alone the art. The trend of popular art, along with the event of planned obsolescence and fashion, in my opinion, best describes the main points and main ideas of postmodernism, which is called mass media today. According to Jameson, two features of postmodernism are : the transformation of reality into images, the fragmentation of time into series of perpetual presents, which focuses on the media and presents, showing us everyone can be protagonist, not only in his or her own world but also in others or in society. That reminds me of the movie, The Truman Show, within the male lead living in a world which is totally set up by editors, audience, actors, with lights-sun, blue ceiling-sky and painting-horizon. In the movie, all the people around US are watching Trumen every day, every hour even every minute. And the life of Trumen is just the commercial TV show.

Ironically, in reality, we are all somewhat like Trumen, living in a show watched by others. Just think about Youtube or any other similar web set, which offers individuals opportunities to record life of their own or others without permission, powerful media of net work is making everybody become Trumen and involves everyone into the center of mass media.

Not only the internet, but also cameras and video recorders give a strong support to build the world of postmodernism. In the past, only photographers could take so many pictures and had the prerogative to present their works in public. And also only actors or popular stars could be stars who could take part in a movie or opera. But with the help of camera, everyone now can be a photographer, believe or not, which is often denied by professional photographers. Holding a video recorder in hand, we all now can make short movies by our own or edit our own version of Superman, Friends, 007 or Mr. and Mrs. Smith. This kind of imitation or pastiche can only happen today, in the age of post-popular art, pat of postmodernism, as I call it. In this way, I would like to say that the core of postmodernism is anything can be art and everyone can create art, in any form, and also everyone in today’s society has rights to present their “works”, which means anyone can be the superstar.

Another thing I want to talk about is modification, or distortion of great, famous woks in history, like Leonardo Da Vinci’s famous work, Mona Lisa. Under the help of modern technology and software like photoshop, many different version of Mona Lisa turn out, with many different names related to the original one. That phenomenon is also called postmodernism art, which provides the opportunities of changes or brings new meanings or understanding to the original work. Mona Lisa is a famous figure in art history, the same with movies, in today’s society, everyone can be Mona Lisa, simply by placing his or her own picture in the face of Mona Lisa, which also expresses the idea: everyone can be superstar nowadays.

Every individual wants to be popular and that is why all kinds of shows, singing or dancing competition are so welcomed and popular among public. Take Furong, for example, a pop figure in internet in China, simply by uploading her own pictures with extreme looks and activities to the internet. She is a star now, although in an abnormal way.

 The revolution of popular art has gone, but the influence of it still remains and the development of postmodernism is still on the way. What on earth is postmodernism? I guess no one could tell but what we already known is that everything is possible in the world of postmodernism, art can be anything and anything can be called art.

Space, Knowledge and Power

“

“The space in which we live, from which we are drawn out of ourselves, just where the erosion of our lives, our time, our history takes place, this space that wears us down and consumes us, is in itself heterogeneous……but in a set of relationship that define positions which cannot be equated or in any way superimposed.”

The term “space” could be understood in many different ways. Architecture is one, so is time and history and distance between one and other is also one of the understandings. And the relationship between one individual and another can also be a way of understanding. There are many different kinds of relationship among people in human society. Friends, husband and wife, parent and children, employer and employee, teacher and student, producer and customers and so on., all of which is defined or recognized by the distance between one and another, close or far away or in between. So even a couple are not in the same city or country, they are still in a very close relationship. The certain position we gain in the social life is located by the relationship and also by the emotion or mood we have.

In the past, the relationship between one and another could be told very easily since the traffic or the communication media were not that convenient or powerful, compared to today. But now, with the help of internet, the relationship becomes complicated sometimes. Everyone may meet someone new through internet and become good friends or lovers or even start a family. Under the shadow of internet or with the help of every satellite’s tiny but strong signal, everything is possible in any relationship. Strangers can become closed to each other and ex-enemies can be friends, sometimes only on internet. The space created by internet is mysterious but huge or even more much larger than what we could imagine. At the same time, the position of knowledge and power has been changed. The power of media which used to be dominated by paper based mediation things has been succeed to the internet. Just look at the 2008 election, this is the first time that internet has taken part in and is playing such an important part in the whole campaign process. And I’m sure that the influence of internet on the result of election will be serious.

Also, reading and writing, drawing and painting, design and redesign may create new spaces, knowledge and power, the power of culture and public opinions. This kind of space is based on ones’ thoughts and realization. When it comes to design, what it can create is a style of life or a certain space of living, both physically and mentally. In the interview with Paul Rabinow, Foucault discussed the changes of function of architecture and the role of architects in the 1700s and today. What I am thinking is that what has happened to architecture is just the same with design, industrial design. The aim of design sometimes is trying to create a way or media or a special space between products and users, providing emotional communication and interaction. In this way, the power of design turns to be domination. At the same time, people’s realization of design has changed. Design is not only the attachment of industry or life, but it is a part, a significant part in daily life. The space created by designers is new and unique which leads people to think deeply in new ways, look at different relationships in different ways and like to have some exchanges of position with others, which help people understand others better.

Something about Mirror

I like looking at myself in the mirror very much. Maybe it is kind of narcissism, well I just like it. And I am sure that most of the girls like mirror and even boys, who seldom admit it. Believe or not, according to a survey, males care about their appearance much more than females and look in the mirror more often then females. And that throw out a question, “Is mirror only for checking physical outlooks for human?”

The answer from my view is not, absolutely not. Individuals love to look in the mirror and find themselves not only because they want to see themselves physically but also to recognize themselves and see the confidence and smile on their face. In that case, mirror is not only the glasses with reflection. In fact, it is the mirror of personality and self-acceptance.

Let’s come back to Lacan.

The ego is kind of combination of self-image and self-identification. For infants, they have no idea of self and also ego. So when they look in the mirror for the first time, they get confused and even angry. They yell, shout and cry which helps nothing with the situation. And then they finally find out, if they smile and be friendly to the mirror, they will get feedback in the same way. I guess that is one of the reasons why adults like mirror since they may obtain what they want in return from their own behaviors.

In reality, mirror is not only mirror and also not only mirrors can be mirrors. All kinds of objects, abstractive or not, can be mirrors. Girls look at themselves in the mirror while dressing up, boys look at themselves in the mirror while shaving, babies look themselves while learning and at the same time, people look at others’ faces while talking in order to get feedback, producers look at selling numbers to learn the market and editors look at the audience for deeper inspirit. When it comes to talk about ego, I would like to say something about films. On one hand, films, on some degree, are the reflection of deep thinking and kind of ego of the editor. On the other hand, all the audience have different thoughts and different personalities and understandings based on different background. That is why different individual has totally different comments or comprehensions towards the same film. In that case, film is just the mirror, telling who you are and what you are thinking about while watching the movie and what you have experienced or what kind of ego or personality you have which is different from others. That is similar with other personal preference, such as music, fiction, TV programs and brands. Certain group has certain hobbies or likes which can tell others what kind of people they are or which class they are belonging to. All the stuffs above are mirrors in our social life.

Mirrors are everywhere. Anything in our life and anybody around us can be a mirror. Human beings are social animals and we need respondent and feedback from others so that we would know in which way we could express ourselves better and also we get information about how others think about ourselves. And communication is brought out at this point. Language is the most important element in communication, both writing and speaking. We often take it granted that what we speak everyday is just what it should be. But when it comes to a second language, the situation is different. For the first language, it has already be a part of our unconscious personality since we were born with this certain language and we are exposed to this environment since we were born. But the second language is another thing. We have to pay special attention and effort to learn how to speak and how to master the language in a logical way, like grammar. But we don’t learn grammar before we can speak our own language. In this case, language is a sign telling us what group we are belonging to and which society is new to us.

Sometimes, mirror has magical power like the one in fairy tales. It not only can reflect our looks but also our thoughts.

If someone says he or she knows nothing about Freud, it is possible. But if someone says he or she knows nothing about conscious and unconscious, probably they are lying. We all have experiences about conscious and unconscious which are not prerogative of Freud.

Unconscious:

According to Freud, unconscious is made up of desires, impulses or wishes of a mostly sexual and sometimes destructive nature. Unconscious wishes get their energy from the primary physical instinct. And dreams are the best evidence of the unconscious since dreaming and sleeping occurs when our body is totally relaxed.

Conscious:

It is a kind of self-control.

Some of the unconscious feelings, wishes and desires are not good or not right or not appropriate at the certain moment. So when an individual is awakened and has clear thought in his or her mind, he or she is in charge of his or her action and could make right decision, ignoring the other voices from unconscious personality.

That is why when people get drinking or have drugs, they are caught by a kind of illusion or just out of conscious. In these conditions, violent, improper sexual action or other activities happen a lot. Unconscious personality takes control of our mind from conscious personality.

Well, that doesn’t mean conscious and unconscious shows up in turns. In fact, my understanding is that conscious and unconscious exists at the same time. They are just the two faces of one person. Conscious is on the surface which can be seen easily while unconscious is under the veil. The relationship between these two is just like the one between evil and angle. We can always see this from cartons or movies. When one guy is trying to make a decision whether he should teach the boys a lesson by fighting or not, two little men will show up and argue with each other, like evil and angle. Sometimes it is ridiculous that we can not tell which is conscious and which is unconscious clearly because we even have no ideas what our needs are.  

But when it comes to ID, EGO, SUPEREGO, things turn out to be a little confusing and complex.

What Freud believes is that ID is who we are ever since our birth and EGO is what we should be or is our personality shaped by family, culture and society while SUPEREGO is the basement of judgment for what is right or not by the acceptance of public. Mostly, people can take charge of ID, keeping their primary desires under control but they can seldom go as far as SUPEREGO, which help a person become the leader of morality world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axEFrFHMvUs&feature=related

So how can Freud’s theory help with the culture industry?

Well, at the beginning, I have no idea. But on my second thought, I think maybe there are some possibilities. Let’s take advertisement for instance. At the bottom of our heart, we all have a kind of desires or wishes to buy what we want even we don’t need. But most of the time we cannot make it for some reasons such as financial reasons and also our conscious personality and EGO controls us at the same time, keeping us away from the ideas of purchasing. But what business and advertisement want is trying to persuade us to buy the products all the time. And what they are using as the weapon is our ID or the unconscious personality we have underneath. We could always find such words spoken in the commercial, “Are you still using the old ……, why not have a change and try the new…,” or “Are you searching for a better solution for …..? Try this…..” All these are trying to speak out what we are thinking about with ID or by unconscious control from which we are always trying to get rid of. With the call out from the advertisement, we turn in easily and finally decide to pay for the product which supports the culture industry on and on.

From Freud, we get to know much more about our mental world. And with the help of conscious and unconscious, ID, EGO, and SUPEREGO, we learn more about ourselves. I ‘m not quite sure what relationship is between Freud’s theory and the mass culture, but I’m sure it will certainly help a lot when it comes to the decision of business world.

The illusion life under spectacle

While reading the material, I kept thinking what Debord was trying to express. Spectacle, commodity and life, these three terms twinkled in my mind now and then. What is the relationship of these three words? And what is the subterranean connection between one and another? After rereading and thinking, I picked up the sentence” the spectacle is the stage which the commodity has succeeded in totally colonized social life” as the topic. And I would like to replace the word “spectacle” with “mass media” wherever it is.

According to Debord, the world we are living in and the life we have today is totally dominated by commodity through spectacle or all kinds or mass media, such as television, advertisement, films and music or newspapers. And the reality of the world has been changed into the realty of all kinds of information expressed by all those media. People tend to believe that the stories happened in films or fictions are the really stories which would happen to them one day. Thus, many teenage girls are dreaming of becoming super stars on stage or marrying a billionaire guy. And through all the advertisement and propaganda, the commodity has taken charge of our social life with no difficulty. One simple example is shopping. Women go shopping almost every week or even every day even if they do not need anything. It is the commodity advertisement that constantly persuades them to purchase. The business men and the producers keep telling customers what they really need is the commodity, a lot of new, fashion, cool and expensive commodities and what customers should do is just keeping buying all these stuffs all the time. And at the same time, they also tell customers what they have bought is not only goods but also happiness or satisfaction or something else. Within the continuous attack under the illusion of friendliness, people just turned in and finally get used to the world controlled by the commodity. People spend money on all kinds of activities in order to gain happiness and satisfaction, love or even respect. And that reminds me of the song, sung by Beatles, “Can’t buy me love”.

“I’ll buy you a diamond ring, my friend, if it makes you feel all right. I’ll get you anything my friend, if it makes you feel all right. ’Cause I don’t care too much for money, for money can’t buy me love. I’ll give you all I’ve got to give, if you say you love me too. I may not have a lot to give, but what I’ve got Ill give to you. For I don’t care too much for money, money can’t buy me love, can’t buy me love”

I guess most of the people would agree to the song, but the thing is that today more and more people are trying to obtain love or emotional feedback through paying for something. And ridiculously, people treat it normally. It seems that all kinds of stuffs or things can be commodities and everyone can own anything simply by paying. Take emotional experiences, like joys from singing or dancing, for instant, what we should call it when it turns to be a product for sale? I have no idea at this point.

In my opinion, there is still something cannot be sold or exchanged by money. Although we are in the age of industrialization, all the things we use are produced by industry in large amount, there is still something that we should keep it unique and cherish it as the faith of our life heart and soul. Neither the commodity spectacle nor the industrialization can substitute the human potential and intelligence and the ability of deep thinking.    

Technological reproducibility

From Walter Benjamin’s explanation, the development of mass culture and modern art is based on the technology reproducibility, which has already been controlling the culture industry and also has changed our understanding of art totally different from the past. Even the unique existence no longer lies in the reproduction, the art itself, or the existence of art is still there, no matter how many reproductions will be produced.

Human beings today are getting used to the work of art by technological reproducibility, we wear the same style of clothes, we listen to the same pop music, we enjoy the same films and also we are all producing the same products. There was once an extremely crazy period that public treated those individuals who wore different, who spoke different, who thought in different ways, monster. People went mad at that time because of the freshness of the technological reproducibility and what they were thinking at that time was, people should be all the same since it was the fashion. And that in return promoted to the development of the culture industry.

What Walter Benjamin is discussing in the book is that with technological reproducibility, art and the work has escaped from the chain of the tradition, which indicates that art should be the prerogative for nobility and the value of art mainly depends on its unique existence. Everyone can enjoy the art and can also possess the art as his or her own by buying the duplicates. And the reproduction of art, as I understand, bring new life to the art, which keeps the art work alive for long and also provides the possibility of art education in public.

Mass culture or the culture industry is mainly set up by the foundation of technological reproducibility, posters, films, music, fashion, and also what I am doing now, design, the industrial design. Art and culture now is not isolated from business and industry any longer, they are now part of the business or we can say they are the soul supporting the entire industry. Unlike other forms of modern art, films and photography are brand new, which means they are not the direct results of traditional art. Personally, I enjoy photography a lot and strongly agree with what Walter Benjamin said, “To photograph a painting is one kind of reproduction, but to photograph an action performed in a film studio is another. In the first case, what is reproduces is a work of art, while the act of producing it is not. The cameraman’s performance with the lens no more creates an artwork than a conductor’s with the baton; at most, it creates an artistic performance.” Films, photographs and painting, they are totally different forms of art presentations. Films are a combination of reality and art sublimation while the other two are more concentrated on reality. Well, design is also different from all these three, which is more commercial and practical. Walter Benjamin did not talk too much about design but in my opinion, design should be the best representative of technological reproducibility, especially in today. Most of the designs, no matter what kinds, are thrown out according to the plan or special needs for commercial cases in business in order to produce in large amount. Designs sometimes are produced for production with no other purposes while films or music still has structures, literatures or other art-liked stuffs in side. Design, sometimes, from my understanding, is the outsider from art as the result of technological reproducibility, though it has certain connection with art and culture, the nuclear of design projects is to make money on the behalf or art and beauty. Films and photographs still express some critical sounds or describe something while today’s designs seldom do.  

I guess I have clear understand of technological reproducibility after reading but now I feel lost after thinking and writing. I have no ideas why it happens. Maybe that is what Walter Benjamin expected.

As Williams asserted “culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language”, whenever we talk about culture, more or less we may get confused on some points or even we may start discussion. Along with the development of industry and technology, culture and our understanding of social art has changed a lot. It seems that Adorno believes that the culture industry focuses the old and familiar into new quality without adding new elements to essence but only changing the outlooks. Like commercial advertisements, producers have to make new advertisement after a certain period when audiences are getting boiled with the old ones. Even if customers know it clearly that either the old one or the new one is the same in content, the new presentation and different outlook makes them satisfied.

Culture industry has leaded art into an entirely new step since the industrial evolution, though the term culture industry was used for the first time in 1947. In the old times, artists were living outside industry and they only focused on their works without thinking about the industry or the market. But now, that is not the case. Art is now a kind of special products, manufactured more or less according to plan. Take Vincent Van Gogh for example, his original paintings are now among the most popular ones in auction market. Thanks to the culture industry, we may also buy any copy of his works from any store, paying only $10 or less. Another voices is shouting at the same time: can we call duplication art? And I guess probably that is the biggest controversy in the critical field. Someone has argued that art is on the top of the pyramid, it should be provided to people who are living in higher classes or who can really understand and appreciate it. Also they insist that it is a bad thing or wrong direction for art to make those things manufactured in large amount. Part of the value lying in art works is their unique present and their rareness. Culture industry or the mass culture totally tears it down. Artists become common employees of industry, selling their ideology or their skills. And some times what the artists create is only to meet the customers’ needs rather their own thought and ideas, which enhances the control of business and market to art itself. As Adorno discussed in the Culture Industry Reconsidered, ”if the response of the culture industry’s representatives is that it does not deliver art at all, this is itself the ideology with which they evade responsibility for that from which business lives”, most products in the culture industry only follow the steps of customers and market, without deeper meanings inside. And what is more, they change their faces so quickly from yellow to blue, from bright to dark, from cute ones to sexy ones, along the wave of fashion. And what really makes confused is that people just enjoy such changes and prefer to be a member in this crowded group.

I am always thinking about the problem started by fashion, which is the number one support to the culture industry and also is the biggest bread maker. Today the fashion market is totally run by the culture industry, leading people into different popular color every year with no reasons. Can anyone tell why we have purple this year and pink next year? Maybe it is just some fashion designers and business guys’ decision. But what they tell us is on the behalf of art and culture, fashion culture. And what they are running for is trying to persuade people to believe what they “create” is right, is the rule and they make it. Well, we cannot deny that, more or less, we are all influenced by the fashion, which is the result of business management and the efficacy of advertisement. And that is how the culture industry is running. So another question is thrown out: can we call fashion art? Or we can only give him the name “the youngest son of art”?

Well, I have no idea. What I know is that fashion is a part of modern art and it makes up the most important section of mass culture today. Design is also, in my opinion, a kind of fashion, especially these days. We follow the certain trace, like green design, and certain ideology to make brainstorm in order to make the public satisfied and reach the point of interest. And industrial design is not art, as we can see, since it is under the control of market, client, customers, producers, also technology and culture. And what the clients want is somewhat beyond what the customers’ needs, despite that the design is for the customers, only because it is the client not the customers pay for the design. 

Probably, we should take culture industry more seriously since it is about our life, our society and of course, the art.

To be honest, I had no idea what critical theory is before reading these materials. Although I can not totally understand what has been discussed by Max Horkheimer, at least I have already learned some basic knowledge of Frankfurt School and their critical theory.

As far as I understand, the critical theory, founded by Frankfurt School, is concerned more about individuals and the mass culture rather than the society as a whole. As Max Horkheimer said, “For this theory is not concerned only with goals already imposed by existent ways of life, but with man and all their potentialities.” The development of society and the history moves on with the historical trends and rules as well as the men’s thoughts and their efforts. Compared to other modern specialized science, critical theory put more emphasis on individuals and their inside world. I’m sorry to say that I can not talk too much about psychologist or economy or politics, since I’m not such kind of persons who engaged in these specific fields of science. But I can talk about design or something similar. Probably it sounds too far away from design to critical theory or to philosophy, but please remember that, everything has something inside in common with others.

Whenever talking about art or design, people would think all these stuffs have no logic or rules to follow. In fact, that is not the case, especially for industrial design, which is concerned about markets, consumers, producers, fashions and the most important parts in my opinion, life experience and individuals. That is to say, everything has its own philosophy, simple or complex, we just can not ignore or even deny it. Imagine, with all these elements, markets, consumers, producers, fashions and individuals, what is coming up in your mind? Right, that is economics. So industrial design should also, on some degree, follow the rules of economy in order to make more money or win more customers and better reputations in the circle of industrial society. And in modern world of industrial design, the starting point of design is just from individuals and their needs or their particular preference. I guess that is why pop culture or pop music is so widely spread these days. And another trend which we should also keep an eye on is something called Non-mainstream culture has been developing fast underneath, which is the very unique form of language of expression for certain groups of individuals. And the products manufactured today are also pursuing such trends to satisfy the certain groups of people whose population is increasing quickly. Take Apple Company for example, which is an extremely successful case in industrial design, personally I appreciate the design but I can hardly afford it. And that is the point. Does the price really match the product we buy? Or it is only because the design or the idea of the laptop or something is so bright that people become crazy about it? Well, that is how Apple fans turned out. But if we look at this phenomenon in another way, at least one point can be concluded that the designers of Apple have totally understand the rules and the relationship between industry, customers and the work of design, that is commercial design. I can not clearly tell how individual has played the important part in this process, but we do have realized how significant an individual’s will is to this market. Well, another group of individuals who are also leading the direction of development in industrial design, is the designer. I always treat designer as a special group of people, since their personality are a little bit strange. On the one hand, they participate in the process of manufacture and marketing, on the other hand, they themselves are also consumers. Thus, they act as a bridge connecting the two sides, producers and customers. Whenever a revolution or of consumption is being on, which might roll the entire industry down, no doubt, it should be designers’ responsibility to get conscious of that before its coming.

Actually, not only the industrial designers, everyone is playing some different parts in reality at the same time, and what we do, what we think, how we act will also, more or less, influence the community we are living in.

That is just what I am thinking about while reading. 

Thanks.