But move five steps closer, and the illusion fades. He is in the corner, yes, but the slouch is affected — he’d be more comfortable standing straight. His worn blue jeans? Brand new, but distressed. His ironic t-shirt? That once most noble badge of indie cred? It’s been on sale at the Urban Outfitters down the street for a month. And the paintings – the paintings! Up-close, they show themselves as crude copies of those prints featured in the discounted Salvador Dali calendars sold at Barnes and Noble: forced line, muddy colors, uninteresting ideas.

What’s offensive is not the young student’s pose, for at least he is trying to do something with his image. And the paintings, while bad, are not so bad that his art school scholarship would be threatened. No, what’s most worrisome is that he doesn’t know he’s posing, doesn’t know that the elements he’s so carefully cultivated as “his own,” are not. He’s exuding “originality” in the most culturally acceptable way, possibly the only way he knows: he buys it.

Those shelves of products that our young hero peruses in his off-time– all copyrighted, patented, or otherwise “pre-approved” for consumption – give him the feeling that he has freedom of choice, while, in fact, his freedoms are limited. “Have a problem? Use this face cream. Buy a car. Wear these blue jeans.”

These are his only options.

We should feel pity for him – after all, he’s lived in Pasadena his whole life, he doesn’t know. This is what he thinks is edgy.

Because he has taste, he makes do with what he has. But because he is young, he is a bit too proud. More seasoned personalities whisper to each other: His shirt, the off-white one? With the cartoon of a red-bearded lad, holding close his seven bottles of bear, stating, “Irish 7-Course Meal?” Done. His blue jeans? 700 dollars, faded in all the right places, do not connote the roughshod life. Oh no, they scream, “Mom buys my clothes!” And the Art. Oh God, the Art.

What can save our young hero, apart from extended sit-down sessions with Roland Barthes or concentrated perusals of Frederick Jamison (both of which are, for the most part, impossible to comprehend at such an age)? What can pull away the cowl of ignorance, freeing the young artist from that most hated of appropriations – derivative?

Ready? Here comes the answer – and it’s not drugs, religious experiences, or world travel. The answer is that he must study and learn the copyright laws of United States.

And in order to learn the copyright laws of the United States, he must first know what a copyright is.

Here are the simple definitions, according to onelook.com:

# noun: a document granting exclusive right to publish and sell literary or musical or artistic work
# verb: secure a copyright on a written work

Why is a knowledge of the legal presedence of copyright important to a young artist? Because in order to create, a good artist should know as much as possible about all his tools. This means not just the origins of his fine bristle brush, or the interesting history of the chemistry of his pigments.

While copyright law is not as glamourous as brushes or paint, it is nonetheless as important. For within copyright law lies the secret of what to do after.

And what do American’s do after they’re done? They sell. They horde. And, in turn, they covet, they hide.

While squirreling away money is a good idea, hiding creative output is not. Keeping the creative hidden leads to problems such as our hero’s – too much confidence in too much little.

Our hero’s problems stem from this ignorance – for, despite his fancy education, he is creatively ignorant – too many things have been kept from his eyes.

But wait! you say. Surely it is his responsibility to educate himself! There are libraries, public exhibitions, and teachers.

Of course, these are necessary elements in any person’s education. But our hero cannot personally own a library book, an outdoor concerts, or the mind of a great teacher, and the relative unavilability of ownership of fine works of art encourages a lazy attitude towards authenticity.

Within copyright law, too, lies a history of the role of the Artist within American Society, a role our hero has wanted to play, desperately, for many years. Is it not also his responsibility to know his legal rights?

Sadly, our hero does not know about the Berne Convention, held in Switzerland, in 1886. Led by that most diligent, most empathetic of writers, Victor Hugo. He does not know of Hugo’s obsession with la droit d’auteur.
He does not know most of his European and Asian contemporaries not only consider intellectual property more important than money, but that the status of the artist is more socially powerful than that of entrepreneur.
He does not know that Europe and Asia have historically made political concessions to facilitate their artists’ creativity.
Or that the United States didn’t join the Berne Convention until nearly one hundred years after its inception – on March 1, 1989.

Here is something else he doesn’t know: copyright laws in the United States, had, until 1989, been focused on keeping intellectual property private in order to facilitate economic growth. In other words, in the US, copyright law has historically been a monetary issue, not a creative one…Thus the shelves of products posing as freedom as choice.

And here is something else: thanks to the acceptance of the Berne Convention, which decrees that work belongs to its creator as soon as it’s created, without having to fill out government forms, the tide is turning.

And finally, another fact: the most notable example of progressive copyright translation in the United States is the group called Creative Commons. Creative Commons gives artists the information and encouragement needed to not squirrel their work away, in fear that someone might steal their ideas, but rather, to share and remix their work with the work of others.

And now, for a theoretical leap: This is a necessary step on the incline from being derivative to being truly POSTMODERN.

(Ugh, but why postmodern? Isn’t that old hat? AU CONTRAIRE).

The hallmark of postmodernism is the desire to combine.
And we are at a point in cultural history where the only thing left to do is combine.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Marcel Proust, that most beloved of all neurotic writers, stated as a child that he did could not name a single color as his favorite, but rather, he found the most pleasure in their combinations.

And all postmodern art is a hybrid – a little of this, a little of that – which in turn encourages the creation of the global ego – an ego much less offensive than the ego present in our young hero at the start of this article.

Some say the start of the Enlightenment was thanks to the creation of factory-produced mirrors, which allowed even the most plebian life form to see themselves as individuals. But today, we don’t look to the mirror for accurate reflections. Instead, we gaze into the computer monitor. Our thoughts, words, and images, regardless of original source, create a collective brain, one that can be harnessed most powerfully through an artist’s understanding of copyright.

And even science is beginning to consider human beings in a similar way – the millions of individuals that populate the Earth are really a single, throbbing organism, a human membrane, if you will, that covers our planet, hovering, blue and bulbous, like a helium balloon bobbing about in the milky way.

Which takes us back to our hero’s work. Remember? Those great blue swathes of sky and stars that looked so good from a distance? Does he know about Turner? And if he did, would not his unpleasant ego dissolve, leaving him – his ideas and his work – behind to do the talking. And would not his art – our art – be improved?

Here’s the The Fancy PDF, as published in “Let Go” magazine

In fact, we know more about the effects of negative advertising than about the effects of, for lack of a better word, “Lovertising.”

However, psychological studies have proven the advantages of positive reinforcement over negative reinforcement. If, after performing a trick, a dog is rewarded, he’s far more likely to do it again. But will a dog do the same trick if he’s beaten when he is *not doing the trick? Imagine his quandry: he lives, breathes, plays, eats, yet is beaten — without context — with the desired result of “the trick.” He doesn’t know what “the trick” is, he only knows that he has to keep doing different things, anything, to stop the beatings.

“Lovertising” is a new way to approach business-consumer relations, and is well-illustrated by the following home-made ad. Created by “xgeronimo” – a youtube alias – the clip’s tagline reads, “We demand respectful/intelligent anti-smoking advertising instead of subhuman/shocking advertising.”

We like the idea of respectful/intelligent advertisting as a reaction to subhuman/shocking advertising. Not only are consumers more likely to respond to respectful, positive reinforcement, but respectful/intelligent advertising has little to no negative side-effects.

This absence of cynicism is the next wave of brand messaging. People are sick of being jaded. Feeling good is the new shock value.

Art and Money depend on each other for survival.

During the Renaissance, the Medici family was famous for their artistic sponsership – which has continued to beautify the European environment hundreds of years later. Today, successful businesses like to point to their involvement with and donations to arts funding as evidence that they have our best human interests at heart. Surely, a business involved with the arts is more trustworthy than one who has no interest in our spiritual expression.

Thanks to this relationship, many artists (who might have otherwise starved) have been able to buy bread, travel, and otherwise engage more meaningfully with the outside world.

Which in turn enriches their art, and thus, the reputation of their sponser.

With the Money/Art connection so strong, it was inevitable that someone would ask the question: instead of making art to make money, why don’t we use money to make art?

The Dollar Artist asks us to consider this relationship.

The Dollar Artist use ordinary US-printed dollar bills to create fascinating bits of origami, ranging from the traditional (pigs, cats, swans), to the more contemporary (your loved one’s name, Mary at the Cross, and our favorite: The Kiss).

These delicate, spring-green creations are wonderful examples of intelligent design, for this venture illustrates what creative context can do for a product. The figures elicite reactions from many difference audiences: from the informed to the kitsch, yet are clean, simple, and rooted in artisan history.

And we like to think about the question elicited by the Dollar Artists — What came first, the dollar or the art?

To see where it all began, see Magnifying Connections: creating an installation, episode 1!

UPDATE: Here’s another video for all of you! Me, drilling holes in styrofoam balls!

This is the question posed by Digital Family Reunion (DFR). jungle [8] has taken on the task of bringing the molecular level into a unified visual field. It began with Creative Director Lainie Liberti giving the visual interpretation of what a tech holiday party would want to stir in the consciousness of its attendees.

You will not find images of dreaded Christmas sweaters from grandma nor will this party leave you cringing from the onslaught of lackluster, forced, and drunken conversations about office politics and gossip. The goal of DFR is to synthesize 1.0 + 2.0 and create a platform for collaboration, discussion, and innovation for our communities, while of course, having a great time in the company of like-minded individuals.

One look at the website and invite for DFR and you will know this is not your typical holiday party. As with all things jungle [8] takes on, causes run the gamut of our affections. We aim to unite, to create, to empower, and leave in our wake a trail of limitless possibility.

On a cellular lever, we are molecular energy working in brilliant formation. The visual depiction created by jungle [8] for DFR is a flow of energy created by the visible light spectrum. Each of us vibrates on different energy levels, and we merge to create a community reflective of our unified energy. Out of this energy field, bursts of solar power emanate indicative of our social selves, active, powerful and radiant.

The task of translating this image into a live installation rests on the design concept of jungle [8]’s graphic designer Tuan Vutran. With creative genius beginning a steady knock on the door of perception, the installation takes on an earthy form. A week from today, at 8:15 PM, DFR will begin a yearly tradition known as the Business Card Installation Ritual.

Tuan is piecing together the Business Card Installation one Styrofoam ball at a time. Like planets, connected through clear, plastic umbilical cordlike tubes, reflecting prisms of rainbow light, the balls will appear to take flight with wings made from 2000 business cards from the original dot commers. The molecular representation symbolizes all of our talents fusing to herald a new year, a year of collaboration, change, and interconnectedness.

All in attendance for DFR will be asked to add their business cards to the Card Installation and become immortalized in a tangible reflection of our ever changing molecular bonds.

Be sure to see: Magnifying Connections: creating an installation, episode 1

The customizable, personalized iGoogle pages have had themes for a while now, so extending Google’s already masterful grasp on theming to Gmail appears to be nothing short of a logical progression.  And, as all things Google usually are, Gmail themes are really, really great!  But that’s not what is most interesting about this fresh Gmail experience.

Google has, arguably, one of the strongest brands worldwide.  Its name and colorfully lettered logo both conjure connotations of reliability, ease, and a quirky fun.  Google, although treating their products and solutions very seriously, has never taken itself too seriously.  It’s evident during every holiday or special occasion worldwide when Google alters their logo slightly to express the occassion visually.

There’s no rigidity with Google’s brand, even though there is a strength and it is consistently one of the most recognizalble.  Google’s brand, instead of demanding a rigid look and feel, relies moreso on its personality.  That personality, that emotional connection, the confidence in their brand are major reasons why they have such a strong presence and outstanding level of success.

And the fun-loving Google continues to extend that confidence with the release of Gmail themes, where a handful of the themes created haven’t just added to the Gmail logo, but have completely changed it entirely.  In what some may consider a risky branding move (losing a certain amount of brand identity), Google sees as a further extension of their core brand personality.  It’s this levity, this laid back confidence that empowers Google’s brand personality.  Simply put — Google is fun, Gmail is fun.. so have some fun with a fresh Gmail experience.

Whatever taste, aspirations are yours when choosing the car of the, your future, the constant in the equation will be its green properties. In the 2008 Paris, Detroit Motor Show, the diversification of the designs, technologies and creativity displayed incontestably the full range of environmental awareness of the car manufacturers.

Aligned with the desiderata of industrialized countries’ consumption, the values of the car industry shifted with in the back of their mind, to maximize the good on earth. From luxury to ordinary cars, the competition is sharp to present excellence in fuel economy, in gas emission reduction : The paradigm of the Millennium!

If Toyota with its famous Prius enjoys its leading position among the diesel sales (hunted by Honda, Nissan, Ford…), the appearance of new technologies as the Blue Tec for Mercedes, or the hydrogen power for BMW expresses the eagerness of brands to overthrow any supremacy in surpassing the market expectancy. Performance is now synonymous with respect of the environment, the clean energy is the common denominator.

Since the mass consumption opts for ordinary cars, luxury cars responding exclusively to the high-end market, developing a car that corresponds both to the financial affordability and the eco-consciousness of the nowadays tendency will be the coming challenge. For that matter, the “agile and zippy” Jetta TDI designed by Volkswagen has already won people’s heart over the Prius!

Without disarming and on the offensive track, Toyota, once again, started the electric vehicles race by proposing to the public in 2010 its “plug-in hybrid electric” prototype, twin version of its popular Prius, bearing (I guess!) in mind for its conceptualization that it will follow its elder sister’s glorious steps!

Powered with its lithium-ion battery pack, the motor generates 50kW allowing an autonomy of 7 miles at 62mph. Electrifying isn’t it?

Its fierce competitors Chevy Volts, GM plug-in are sparkling, right behind! Soon, cars like computers will become obsolete as launched on the market!

Only problem in this clean energy picture : what is the end of life of lithium-ion batteries?

It was last June when we saw our first Cabana Cachaca ad, and triggering our first blog in response. The dramatic black and white ad features the model’s completely bare ass as the centerpiece, making it a startling ad to find in a magazine that featured a child star on the cover.

Since then, the campaign has raised eyebrows with its racy ads, some of which had to be taken down and cropped to make them suitable for the public. All of the ads feature totally naked models posturing in high heels, leaving nothing to the imagination as they flashed tan-lines and Brazilian wax jobs. The website is even more graphic, and it starts to seem ironic that the only part of the model they won’t show is her head. Faceless models sound familiar? Yeah, it reminded us of Tom Ford and one of his perfume ads, too.

But there’s a difference here. Tom was selling cologne, a beauty product, and he didn’t try to classify the product as a depiction of a national identity. He could equate the product with whatever ideal he wanted, and not worry about offending the truly authentic.

Apparently when the folks that branded Cabana Cachaca penned the slogan “Authentically Brasilian”, they didn’t think the truly authentic Brazilians would mind being equated with a waxing procedure. Apparently, when their client New York business man Matti Anttila said he wanted to make a distinctive, high-quality spirit that showcased the best in Brazilian technique and tradition, they didn’t think that mission was good enough. “Authenticity and quality”, were the exact words their client used when he described what his product stood for. “Nah, let’s throw some naked ass in there to get attention!” must have been the logic they used, and it caused them to stray so far from the brand’s original, truly authentic Brazilian identity as a traditional product only made in Brazil.

In the debate over the ads, some have argued that Brazilians have no problem being associated with a beautiful woman. They are known for their gorgeous women, and proud of it. But the ad isn’t celebrating the woman and her beauty, it’s objectifying it. The model is headless, need we say more? And the problem with objectifying something is it can turn to a stereotype fast. How can we Americans pride ourselves on being politically correct and respectful of other cultures if we’re equating an “authentic” national identity with girls groomed for sex? Cabana Cachaca features the slogan above a girl’s bare ass: “When you want nothing standing between you and a good time”. On a socially-conscious level, this ad campaign sucks.

A reader left this comment in response to the ads:

“As an American married to a Brazilian and having traveled many times to that country, I can definitely say they are a lot more open there than here when it comes to sex, but this is such a stereotype that is ridiculous and insulting. It is the same as using Tony Soprano’s stereotype to advertise Italian products.”

A lot of brands throw around the term “authentic”, and the word is slowly losing its meaning. We can say one thing for sure: Brazilian-waxed booty arched in the air to sell alcohol certainly doesn’t count.

The Institute of Color Research has uncovered that within 90 seconds all humans make a subconscious judgement about a person, environment, or item — and from 62% to 90% of that subconscious assessment is based on color alone.  That’s a small window to make your case.  And for the burgeoning brand, that’s a judgement that is not only going to be made quickly, but will solidify without even a conscious awareness.

So, first and foremost, color is your ally.  Color is what will be noticed first, assessed quickest, and remain longest.  Among Smashing Magazine‘s 7 Ingredients of Good Corporate Design, color stands in the number 3 spot.  About color, they say that when designing the visual identity of a brand the colors should emphasize the philosophy and strategy of the [brand].  Most definitely.  But even further, colors should trigger an emotional reaction within the viewer, no matter if that reaction be subconscious or outright.

Not convinced that color has that much impact on the human psyche?  Or just unconvinced that that impact is not quite as universal as everyone may think?  Follow me.  Take a look at Cymbolism.

From Cymbolism’s website:

Colors are believed to have very specific meanings, but these meanings vary over time, place and culture. For years designers have been using colors to communicate feeling and mood, to trigger memories to make us act a certain way.

Cymbolism is an attempt to quantify the association between colors and words [and emotions].

With Cymbolism, colors are synthesized into their word equivalent by a community of online voters.  Just match color that is immediately triggered by the word provided.  Then, the voter is provided with a continuum of other voted colors that others felt were representative of the word.  Also, after voting, click on a color to see the most associated words and emotions for that color.  Not only interesting, but another front to attack when creating the visual representation of any brand.

Perhaps with the use of color theory and recognizing how and why color impacts humans all, your brand will be known solely by its color like a certain delivery power-house. “What can brown do for you?” And how about Alltel? They’ve successfully stripped their competitors down to their primary color palettes.

Ask yourself, what are your colors saying about you?  Probably a lot more than you’ve every consciously realized.

Now, let’s correspond: What are you all trying to convey with your color choices?  Which colors impact you most?  Let us know!

But that’s what we do. We give, get, trade, throw away, and get more. We celebrate the stuff. It is us, and we are our stuff. We don’t buy things just because we need them. We buy things to show ourselves we deserve them. We buy things to stretch our power. We buy things so we can get home and sit down and look around us at our possessions and feel big. We buy because we have opinions, and we want to express those opinions through our purchasing choices. Discerning marketing has targeted this need to make our opinion known, flex our power. And they give us the consumer experience to fulfill that. A forum where you can thrash about, have a temper tantrum, cry, indulge, make your needs known. Because whatever it is, you are guaranteed a product to fill that need, be it an actual need or whim.

But what you are really buying isn’t the product. You are buying the experience. The item or service holds significance because of the feelings it makes us have about ourself. It’s not about the stuff, it’s about us. We are buying indulgence, prosperity, the feeling of wealth and security. We’re so attached and addicted to our things because of the experience created around them, not so much the item itself. But what happens when we move on to the next feeling, the next new thing, faster, better, bigger, our next plastic love? What happens to our old self-indulgences?

Artist and Photographer Chris Jordan‘s images struck me as graphic documentation of our one-sided, destructive relationship with things. Look at these images and tell me what you feel. I for one felt a strange, almost reverent awe. It was like I had created that sea myself, that sea of bottles. Like a kid staring at all the shattered pieces of a lamp they just broke. All those pieces. All those parts. Like a string of bad decisions from your past lined up in front of you. In a sense, viewing our waste should be a spiritual experience, because it really is a part of us. It is us. 

I think Chris Jordan might be saying it best here, when he says,

The pervasiveness of our consumerism holds a seductive kind of mob mentality. Collectively we are committing a vast and unsustainable act of taking, but we each are anonymous and no one is in charge or accountable for the consequences. I fear that in this process we are doing irreparable harm to our planet and to our individual spirits.

As an American consumer myself, I am in no position to finger wag; but I do know that when we reflect on a difficult question in the absence of an answer, our attention can turn inward, and in that space may exist the possibility of some evolution of thought or action.
  

Read more about Chris Jordan on stalkmarket here.