"State of Sameness"
(Or how this writer sees trend and pressure
driving people "to be the same" than "to be different")
It's been months, if not years past since this person made a writeup about contemporary culture. And based on observations, it seems that in order to survive has to join into the current regardless of its outcome, no matter how shitty it is least the rest find it "appealing" in order to buy it, whether it is originally made or an imitation of sorts yet still finds it appealing to buy and be part of the in crowd.
Whether it is a form of clothes, footwear, gadgets, music, anything what is commonly seen and broadcasted, people right or wrong tries not to be left behind, to the extent of giving up one's own idea by pressure and be contented on what is canned and replaced by the present order.
That somehow made this writer sees anything around in a state of sameness.
Driven by what was seen in media, it makes people compel to buy and die for the things being commonly seen, right or wrong just to be part of it not knowing its possible consequences. Year after year you see them desperately exchanging old for new, of giving up Chuck Taylor's for Jordan's, of old Nokia's and Alcatel's for Apple's and Samsung's "just to get in" and not because of its purpose behind those things.
Pardon this writer's view as he sees the sameness of things despite different brands, but in seeing such typical clothing in the streets, where were those whom are wearing getups out of uniqueness? Does street, formal, or even casual wear nowadays has to conform according to present day "consumer tastes" or rather say interests of textile magnates lessening taste and purpose in favour of profits? Of keeping high art still relegated to a highly paid few and the rest be end unjustly contented in canned nonsense? Sometimes it's not in the packaging that made them buy but the reality of pressure in letting you buy that clothing or footwear for chrissakes.
And it may seemed difficult nowadays if that's the case to seek what really fits and addresses the need for self identification, expression especially when it comes to fashion, that the trend, pressure dominates over those of personal desire to attain and wear without worries, and that same pressure is so demanding that compels to buy simply because it is compelling to be "in." Where were the days choices been involved? Of compare and contrast? Of creativity and innovation? Purpose? What this writer sees is sameness in the name of intense competition which is saleable. Be it in sneakers, streetwear, jeans, what he or any other concerned individual sees is sameness.
Same style despite different colours, yet having same targets with their "demands". Sameness in a sense that in the name of profits creativity is subordinate to "demands", with ceaseless repackaging and be interpreted as "the customer's want", and obviously, has nothing to do with expression not even purpose regardless of the claptraps being vented in different mediums.
Again, pardon this writer's words given his incorrect observations, but if he may ask, when will people dress with style, and that style as according to their expression and purpose? Anyways, regardless of different names, colour, or even appearance of sorts, sameness prevail as long as their "consumers" demanded as such: Adidas or Nike, still they are sneakers; Jag or Levis, grey pants are grey pants; so are the shirts whether it is bought from Makati or from Recto.
But it's up to the people whether if they chose to succumb to the so-called fad thinking how "to get in", or making their minds dare to create and be deviant to the so-called flow, including those of trying to lessen "sameness". This person may afford to wear good clothes, of having the money enough to get in with the crowd, sipping tea or drink coffee from an expensive coffeeshop while making a post, but he chose to be deviant, to swim upstream, and be critical as much as possible despite enjoying life knowing that not all those whom enjoy such things are contented staying in their parameters, they defy by joining in an struggle against a current inferno, and perhaps they make struggles fabulous, turning revolt with style.
Whether it is a form of clothes, footwear, gadgets, music, anything what is commonly seen and broadcasted, people right or wrong tries not to be left behind, to the extent of giving up one's own idea by pressure and be contented on what is canned and replaced by the present order.
That somehow made this writer sees anything around in a state of sameness.
Driven by what was seen in media, it makes people compel to buy and die for the things being commonly seen, right or wrong just to be part of it not knowing its possible consequences. Year after year you see them desperately exchanging old for new, of giving up Chuck Taylor's for Jordan's, of old Nokia's and Alcatel's for Apple's and Samsung's "just to get in" and not because of its purpose behind those things.
Pardon this writer's view as he sees the sameness of things despite different brands, but in seeing such typical clothing in the streets, where were those whom are wearing getups out of uniqueness? Does street, formal, or even casual wear nowadays has to conform according to present day "consumer tastes" or rather say interests of textile magnates lessening taste and purpose in favour of profits? Of keeping high art still relegated to a highly paid few and the rest be end unjustly contented in canned nonsense? Sometimes it's not in the packaging that made them buy but the reality of pressure in letting you buy that clothing or footwear for chrissakes.
And it may seemed difficult nowadays if that's the case to seek what really fits and addresses the need for self identification, expression especially when it comes to fashion, that the trend, pressure dominates over those of personal desire to attain and wear without worries, and that same pressure is so demanding that compels to buy simply because it is compelling to be "in." Where were the days choices been involved? Of compare and contrast? Of creativity and innovation? Purpose? What this writer sees is sameness in the name of intense competition which is saleable. Be it in sneakers, streetwear, jeans, what he or any other concerned individual sees is sameness.
Same style despite different colours, yet having same targets with their "demands". Sameness in a sense that in the name of profits creativity is subordinate to "demands", with ceaseless repackaging and be interpreted as "the customer's want", and obviously, has nothing to do with expression not even purpose regardless of the claptraps being vented in different mediums.
Again, pardon this writer's words given his incorrect observations, but if he may ask, when will people dress with style, and that style as according to their expression and purpose? Anyways, regardless of different names, colour, or even appearance of sorts, sameness prevail as long as their "consumers" demanded as such: Adidas or Nike, still they are sneakers; Jag or Levis, grey pants are grey pants; so are the shirts whether it is bought from Makati or from Recto.
But it's up to the people whether if they chose to succumb to the so-called fad thinking how "to get in", or making their minds dare to create and be deviant to the so-called flow, including those of trying to lessen "sameness". This person may afford to wear good clothes, of having the money enough to get in with the crowd, sipping tea or drink coffee from an expensive coffeeshop while making a post, but he chose to be deviant, to swim upstream, and be critical as much as possible despite enjoying life knowing that not all those whom enjoy such things are contented staying in their parameters, they defy by joining in an struggle against a current inferno, and perhaps they make struggles fabulous, turning revolt with style.