• http://profile.typepad.com/6p0120a5823410970b www.genjipress.com

    The problem is, I don’t think you can intend to build cultural significance into anything. Nobody intended for “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” to become the phenomenon that it did, and if it had been deliberately designed to become one (the way its limp follow-up “Shock Treatment” clearly had) I don’t think it would have worked at all.
    These things are a crapshoot; they don’t happen because of anything you can predict. Sure, you need to make your movie/game/book/thing the best it can possibly be, but you can’t assume it’s going to have a larger cultural significance, because that’s not something you can provide yourself. It’s a happy accident.
    The other problem is what “value” consists of. What is it? What I think has value and importance may be deadly boring to most other people. What other people think has value and importance may be silly or trivial to me. (And from what I’ve seen, most of the values held by the culture at large are pretty appalling, as they consist mostly of getting money and being famous, typically at someone else’s expense.)
    So if we’re going to talk about “cultural engagement”, it makes at least as much sense to also talk about how to do a little more than just give people whatever they want, because sometimes what people want is not what they need.
    And also, doesn’t it seem rather ironic that the “shared experience” mostly amounts to going out and buying stuff?

  • http://www.stevensavage.com/ Steven Savage

    I think the shared experience thing about buying stuff is actually because its one thing we do have in common in a consumer culture. It’s just that people latch on to everything else and look for significance. Just looking at the various media phenomena, creations of fan-language, etc. People crave this stuff.
    I think actually cultural significance may be something one can shoot for – the problem being most people who tried to create it failed because they were looking at it wrong – as a marketing tool. There was no “value” because of that fact.
    Of course what is value? I could (and probably should) explore that in detail. It’s been something I’ve wondered about for the last few years since my own profession is one that I feel provides value – but it’s not often seen (until it goes away).

  • http://profile.typepad.com/6p0120a5823410970b www.genjipress.com

    Re: shared experience via buying — I think you’re right, and that it’s not something limited to our moment in time. I suspect something like that has existed as long as there has been money.
    What I am suspicious of, though, is using the shared experience of buying as a substitute for other things — whether it’s creating on your own, or forging connections with other people in ways that have nothing to do with commerce.
    The other week when I was at NYCC/NYAF, I spent Thursday night in the company of a number of other fellow fans. Most of the talk at these get-togethers take a few basic forms: 1) What did you get? (or, what are you planning to get?) and 2) What did you just watch? My impression is that the vast majority of people are entirely comfortable with the commercial / consumer aspects of the whole thing, but that doesn’t mean it should be the be-all and end-all of what to aim for. Unfortunately as soon as you deal with an audience in anything remotely approaching commercially significant numbers, it’s hard NOT to be consumed (ha ha) by those concerns.
    It’s also hard not to admit how commercial success is one of the most direct predicators of, and instigators of, cultural significance. No one argues that “Harry Potter” is culturally insignificant; it sold far too well for that.
    But at the same time, consider the Velvet Underground. They sold almost no copies of their albums in the time they were together as a band, but it’s been said (and I agree with this POV) that most everyone who bought one of their albums during that time started a band themselves, and probably a good one.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/tamara126 Tamara Hecht

    If consumer culture is something people have in common, what can be said for the people who don’t have a disposable income? I think that’s where the virtual “collecting” games (like Pokemon) come into play. If you can only afford one game, make it something that lets you participate as a consumer in the game world.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/6p0120a5823410970b www.genjipress.com

    @Tamara: It’s also where things like a public domain come into play, where you have things that are free in every sense of the word. You might not be able to check out “Game of Thrones” if you can’t afford it (although you might be able to borrow it from a library), but “The Count of Monte Cristo” is available for nothing but the price of a megabyte of bandwidth.