Let's start with Coca-Cola... Huh. This is going to be fun, but I do believe it is one of the worst drinks in the universe. It doesn't taste good, it has no smell, it makes you burp or fart and in addition it is extremely sweet and unhealthy for you. Of course I do not have to mention that this is NOT an energy drink so you cannot expect to grow wings as soon as you have drunk a can of it. In fact, it's colour resembles burnt motor oil and... And why don't you just drink a juice instead, or even a coffee if you happen to be a caffeine addict? Ok, let's leave this aside.
Baudrillard (and McLuhan as well) argues that we construct a reality based on models of how we would like that reality to be, not on the reality itself, so for that matter Coca-cola (or Coke?, what is actually the matter with the names?) is the good example here. Coke has very strong emotional links to American psyche and the cultural identity of all citizens of the united states. It has emotional links to the masses who feel a part of the image. Coca cola is intrinsic, its name has become a product itself. People do not desire (that's the way I think, since I hate this drink) the content of the can, they just desire the very connotations it could create as a part of the image. However, the taste seems a part of the whole product and that's why they haven't changed it for years. Well, of course they could, but people would not buy it anymore because it wouldn't be the same drink then, or would it?
This is superreal, this is a kind of reality we create in our minds (or brain, if you happen to be a dualist). This is just a common social image we create ourselves.
If you want to learn something interesting, maybe you would like to ask yourself a question: What does the Santa Claus look like? Of course he is a jolly fat guy with reindeers by his side, he is wearing long white beard, a red hat and red trousers and red jacket. This was exactly what they made him look in Coca-Cola's advertising campaign in the late 1930's. The red and white colours were meant to be with accordance to a bottle of Coke. Isn't it interesting?
Baudrillard (and McLuhan as well) argues that we construct a reality based on models of how we would like that reality to be, not on the reality itself, so for that matter Coca-cola (or Coke?, what is actually the matter with the names?) is the good example here. Coke has very strong emotional links to American psyche and the cultural identity of all citizens of the united states. It has emotional links to the masses who feel a part of the image. Coca cola is intrinsic, its name has become a product itself. People do not desire (that's the way I think, since I hate this drink) the content of the can, they just desire the very connotations it could create as a part of the image. However, the taste seems a part of the whole product and that's why they haven't changed it for years. Well, of course they could, but people would not buy it anymore because it wouldn't be the same drink then, or would it?
This is superreal, this is a kind of reality we create in our minds (or brain, if you happen to be a dualist). This is just a common social image we create ourselves.
If you want to learn something interesting, maybe you would like to ask yourself a question: What does the Santa Claus look like? Of course he is a jolly fat guy with reindeers by his side, he is wearing long white beard, a red hat and red trousers and red jacket. This was exactly what they made him look in Coca-Cola's advertising campaign in the late 1930's. The red and white colours were meant to be with accordance to a bottle of Coke. Isn't it interesting?
No comments:
Post a Comment