In the world today, there is a great push for representation in corporate America. Think about it, you cannot go anywhere without seeing a brand name on any item. There are the big corporations that are representing themselves in ways that are outlandish. In Naomi Klein’s book, No Logo, the problem with representation has been illuminated. Furthermore, the agency of which the representation is intended is also addressed because it shows the purpose of the representation and why the corporation is intending that specific message. Nathaniel Hawthorne, in The Scarlet Letter, utilizes the idea of representation and agency when he depicts the A that has been placed upon Hester Prynne’s garments.
 |
| Big corporations fighting |
No Logo addresses how representation of big corporations has weaseled its way into many different affairs that should be out of their jurisdiction. Klein talks about how corporations have special agreements with many different organizations and schools to promote their product. Big corporations have a tendency to target the agency of the youth. The youth are too blind and ignorant to realize the true goals of the major corporation or because they find it quick, easy or cheap to access. Klein utilizes the example of a public school in Toronto that sold advertising rights to Pepsi. Pepsi has invested large sums of money into these schools and are targeting the youth to promote their product. In these contracts with the school, Pepsi blocks the school from selling any other competitive corporation’s product on its premises. The youth of the nation have become “self-promoters” for these major businesses. The young mind is easily conformed and is being shaped to admire these big businesses. In order to win a competition, one school had a “Coca-Cola day” in which they brought in Coca-Cola representatives, and everyone in the school was forced to wear coke memorabilia or a red shirt. One student was suspended because he wore a Pepsi shirt on this day. It is quite apparent that there is a problem with major corporations because they are invading every aspect of our life to promote and to condemn us to their will. Klein also writes about a Professor at Brown University’s research for a textile factory to investigate a few lung cancer cases. The professor deduced that there were harmful conditions in the factory for the workers and that there should be certain reparations. The textile factory (which was a large corporation) created a clause in the contract that the Professor could not go public with the information. My guess is that the factory knew that they were creating hazardous working conditions but they did not want to admit it because it would ruin their image. They wanted to be represented in a positive light so they tried to hush the professor by shutting down the professor’s research facility. The representation of major corporations has taken its toll in America. The truth is hidden and misconstrued because of the message that the corporations want to project to the world.
In The Scarlet Letter, Nathaniel Hawthorne utilizes representation and agency when depicting the A that is placed upon Hester. The A was placed forth upon her garments by the community in order to represent the sins of her flesh. The A was a branding in order to scare the community from committing any sinful acts that would violate the sanctity of the community. The A became a representation of evil and the community’s agency was to protect the people from evil. However, as time passes, the A has a new agency because it represents Hester as an individual. Hester wears the A proudly and does her daily tasks whole-heartedly and cheerfully. The A is then represented by her having a good attitude and its agency changes toward a good ideal. In this way, Hawthorne shows the means of representation and agency.
I think you portray excellently Naomi Klein's arguments about representation in corporate America. You talk about how the scarlet letter is originally intended to represent her sin, but then by the end of the novel it changes. I'm wondering if and how the agency that Corporate America uses can be changed into something "good" like the scarlet letter does?
ReplyDelete**this is keblogging commenting*** I like your connection between Naomi Klein's book and the Scarlet Letter-Specifically, the "A" as a brand. It's interesting to consider brands' connotations (for example wearing a T-Shirt from Walmart versus wearing a T-Shirt from Express). I find it interesting that the shirt from Walmart is being condemned because it's "uncool" and cheap, or that the "coolness" of brands is often based on price. The brand of the "A", however, is negative because of Hester's bad behavior, but the "bad behavior" of brands (in the areas of employment and manufacturing) is not really considered.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with most of what you are saying here, I'm a little confused by your use of the term agency. Agency, as I understand it, is, simplistically, the ability to do something. It seems like you're using the term to refer to something different than "the ability to do something". Could you possibly clarify this?
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the comments above mine, I like how you relate brands to Hester's letter "A." I think it could also be interesting to note here how even though Hester could take off the A if she really wanted to, she doesn't. Similar to this we have people in the real world who talk about the affect of brands and the bad things that they do, yet not all of these people are willing (or able) to get rid of these brands in their lives. This poses an interesting question and seems to create a dilemma for consumers as well as mixed messages.
ReplyDelete