C hen we think of consumerism, the image can come to us more readily to mind is that of a mall filled with all kinds of products waiting to be acquired by us. In the hypocrisy that characterizes the man many are aware of the many items they buy unnecessary and have no problem openly acknowledge. However, not all unnecessary consumer products are the same and it looks like a special halo justification for the excessive consumption of products considered "cultural", under the motto "if culture is good." No need to buy compulsively pots and pans, that's wasteful, but if it's books and records other history, that is commendable. And is that even something as seemingly noble and elevated as "culture" also has become business, materialized in objects that can be acquired, not necessarily valued. How did we fall so low? this topic I was talking the other day with a musicologist friend who told me how, in some circles by moving, and obviously in particular in relation to the music market, not to see potential customers that seem to give more value to the physical act of purchasing records, that musical works themselves. In the forums music by moving, there is a competition to see who gets greater number of records, who is the most difficult to get the best price possible. Interesting thread in principle on what records are being heard or have been purchased, they become an endless list of "trophies" that are displayed as in a personal exposure (or even a museum, because there is a museum for personal satisfaction of those who lost), leaving the thread empty of all content.
The same applies to other sectors, where special packages of films, limited editions, trilogies in tins estate, are incessant complaint calls to acquire thousands of people to see once and then show them off on the shelf. One might think that with this Internet video stores are losing a lot of money and customers, as there is the possibility that a particular download a movie instead of renting, however, paradoxically, many prefer to buy it. A few years ago I spoke with the owner of a video of Salamanca protesting a bit about this issue, and rebelled at the idea of \u200b\u200brent prices down wondering how many passes there then give a film to amortize the cost of acquisition , bearing in mind that the more passes you give, the more can go wrong (customers are treated right things rather small). And not without reason. Well, interestingly, paid 30 euros for buying a movie that will not be so many times to consider the amortized cost, rather than rent it each time you want to see it. But there is this kind of "fever of private property" in which it is desirable to have things and it is desirable to have them on loan.
The most obvious evidence and direct result of consumerism, I always say, are the "lumber." Sure you could do a study and found a direct relationship between the amount of stuff stored and the degree of unnecessary use of its owner. And watch, I am the first to admit that I have packs of tins movies and special editions of movies "cult." And yes, some may be good idea to have them because I might see them many times, but all or joke.
Turning to cultural, and finally, it seems that large amounts of money spent on cultural issues may be a small defect, but as culture, is a healthy habit. But the question is: to what extent we are not too degraded or even emptied of all content to their own culture by making it mere physical acts of transaction? Who would say that, apparently, and not beyond, expect to be more cultivated, which has its own library full of hundreds of books purchased, or having just one or two?
0 comments:
Post a Comment