I agree that looks matter. I am susceptable to our consumerist economy too, especially at the grocery store. I teach kids that a national brand product has the same contents inside the package as the store brand product, and yet I just buy what is on sale or the brand that I prefer over the store brand. I realize the hipocracy, but how can I be immune to the science of brandology?!
The What Not to Wear episode I watched yesterday said, at one point, that Pam's bad hair and lack of make up were hiding her beauty! As soon as I heard that, I cringed!Postrel made two points that I loved.
1. "Aesthetics is nothing more than a tool for manipulation and deceit."
2. "... sign of the pervasive falsehood oiling the machinery of gratification and instant desire that is contemporary capitalism."
Both of these quotes flash me back to the Paul Hirsch interview when he said that editing movies is all deceit and lies. Which I stated earlier is not true of teaching. But now, I think that maybe I was wrong when I consider my grocery shopping habits. Sometimes, maybe we do teach an ideal instead of the real. Postrel went on to question form and function (surface and sebstance) like Susanka, when she discusses the not so big house- without function, what is the point in anything. So in our society, and to our students, why is branding so important? Why do we care?!? Now it is Hollister, American Eagle, and Pink.
When I was in middle school, it was I.O.U, Skidz, and Z. Cavvaricci. But why, when we know its not whats on the outside that counts? Have we, as a society, confused product branding with people branding? While a flashy package may make us choose a more expensive toothpaste, does it also now make us choose people?!? I know there are many answers and possibilities for these thoughts, but maybe we as teachers need to be extra careful that our consumerist subconcious does not blur lines in our classrooms.
Hi Abbie,
ReplyDeleteWell you definitely have posed some controversial questions to probe about society. If I can connect it with looking the part as a "teacher" in the classroom...what would that be??? hmm I am thinking - a sharp business suit, glasses etc. When I was young and played competitive tennis, I remember looking at kids with all the cool clothing (ie Nike skirts, tops, dresses), the big tennis racket bag and matching tennis rackets.....I thought to myself..wow! they must be reallly good! Now it certainly wasn't the case a lot of the time....could that be true in the classroom as a teacher too? Maybe....!
I like your thought a lot. What is fashion? For me, to some degree, is to win other people's approval or appreciation. In other words, beauty or fashion is an subjective issue and is defined differently.
ReplyDeleteKnowledge and learning is to a great degree defined by the society as well. So does the quality of teaching. Does successful teaching mean helping students to be more creative, independent learners, or getting high scores in exams, as defined by NCLB?
Gaoming