RE: Query on modes of resistance

You might consider looking at the ways that apple positioned themselves in 
the market as a liberating alternative to PCs.  This starts with apple's 
famous 1984 commercial (directed by Ridley Scott, and released at the end of 
1983).  And it continues through their "Think Different" campaign.  Apple 
has always been very good at positioning itself as a more "democratic,"  
"countercultural" and "individualistic" company.  And, there might be 
something to it in their corporate culture and in the minds of mac people.  
I like macs.  I can't afford one.  And I like my artist friends and the work 
they produce on macs.  But if buying a really expensive computer is a form 
of resistance, I'd ask who is resisting what, and what are the alternatives. 
  Submitting to authority and buying a 400$ PC?  Running a hand-me-down on 
Linux?  Unplugging yourself?  Using the library computer?

Ipods are also cool as hell.  Also way out of my price range.  I also dig 
the spirit of napster and all that, but MP3s, as much as they maintain the 
original aura of casually swapped bootleg commodities, are not necessarily a 
challenge to the music industry (at least as they figure in the 
apple/ipod/itunes structure of easier/more consumption).  The free podcasts, 
radio shows, and dj mixes that people can listen to on their ipods can be 
really challenging, mind-expanding, and subversive.

But I would suggest that the Ipod offers a liberation from materials 
(smaller, less clunky than cds [I remember thinking CDs were mindnumbingly 
small], easier to organize, and easier to use) and seeks to draw an 
association between that feeling of "freedom" and the idea of a 
social/political/cultural liberation.  The ads at least try to show this 
exuberance.  With still silhouettes of bodies in motion, ample wires 
connecting ears to ipods.  And the sillhouette image connects the people to 
each other.  Each listens to the music of their choice, but all are rocking 
out with great vigor.  Images of concerts show people connected by a 
universal appreciation for content, images of the ipod experience show 
people connected through a universal appreciation for a common interface.

But then the question remains is whether or not this exuberance is something 
that emerges from the use of the product?  Are the inspired by the ads about 
the product?  Both?  Neither?  Is there a difference?  When I see people 
using an Ipod, they are usually doing what they would otherwise be doing: 
disciplining themselves on an elliptical trainer, feverishly trying to shed 
the last micrograms of fat from their emaciated frames.  Although, they 
aren't encumbered by a clunky and skipping cd player.  And they might be 
listening to a better mix of music.  But who knows, maybe they are listening 
to Bikini Kill and training for the big one.  One can only hope.

What do Ipods do?  Who knows?  I don't mean to sound like I'm eating 
mushrooms, but as someone who has grown crustier as I age, I wonder if 
highly individuated aural environments are like manacles for the soul.  I 
tried enjoying music on an mp3 player (an RCA lyra), but it leaves me with a 
twinge of alienation.  It's a good way to listen to radio shows that are way 
too crazy for general consumption.  But for some reason, I feel like music 
needs to be in the air, between people, if that makes any sense.  Lately, I 
want music to suture me to the people around me.

The key, I expect, would be to talk to lots of people about how they use 
their Ipods.  But I wouldn't get to hung up on the word "resistance," when, 
as my friend Pat Vrooman likes to say, acquiescence might offer a better 
explanation.

peace,
Davin

_______________________________________________
CULTSTUD-L mailing list: CULTSTUD-L <at> comm.umn.edu
http://www.comm.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/cultstud-l