Who the hell do you think I want to be?

[imomus]

As a general rule, British and American people idolize their own culture's richest, most famous and successful members, whereas the French idolize exotic foreign "others" -- the poorer, obscurer and further away the better. Or do I mean the lower middle classes of Britain, France and America worship bling and glitz, whereas the upper middle classes of those nations like documentaries about "unspoiled" ways of life? Yes, that's partly what I mean too.

There are clear cultural differences in attitudes to "the other". I see them daily in the editorial and textural differences between the cable TV stations I get. CNN and the BBC (while also somewhat different from each other -- the BBC has a slightly more "anthropological" approach) are basically financial, logistical, empirical, developmental and moral in their approach to the third world. French networks like TV5 and Arte, on the other hand, present long documentaries focused on "the art of living", on ways of being, on the aesthetic, the ethical and the textural. Whereas Anglo-media tends to portray traditional society as a deeply problematical zone of suffering, backwardness, poverty and oppression, Euro-media is more likely to ply the viewer with rich images of exoticism; to celebrate the otherness of the other rather than try to reduce it.

Anglo-Saxon coverage of the third world focuses on its difference as a kind of misery, whereas European coverage focuses on it as a kind of happiness. As a result, Anglo-Saxon policy (including Angrael's current multi-pronged war) is guided by a misapprehension: the idea that the "developing world" wants nothing more than to become like us. The more ambivalent European attitude is that we should make cultural "exchanges" with traditional societies, and, in some cases, become more like them. This attitude appalls the Angraeli right, who turn it into visions of a "Eurabia" where an "Islamofascist other" dominates white Europeans and converts them into "dhimmis"; tame, passive aphids.

I feel at home with the French attitude to Africa, Asia, the Middle East. And I feel increasingly alienated from -- and repulsed by -- the Anglo culture's focus on celebrity and aspiration. I locate the menace of fascism in bling-glitz culture, not in "Islamofascism". Comedian Bill Bailey has a funny line summing up the weirdly mixed British attitudes to bling-glitz: "We have this strange conflict, where we simultaneously say 'I want to be you' and 'Who do you think you are?', leaving us with a strange loop of 'Who do you think I want to be?'" It's a question the "developing world" is increasingly asking the West.

"Who do you think you are?" is what remains of the British interest in egalitarianism and fair play; let's cut down the mighty. "I want to be you" is a more recent meritocratic and Nietzschean American import of glitz-aspiration culture. The two impulses are at war in Britain (or do I mean in the lower middle classes?). In France, this deadly mix of envy and admiration is avoided. The attitude seems to be: "We are the French, and we are rich compared to these people in Mali. But they can teach us much about l'art de vivre. And above all, they are not the Americans, those vulgar imperialistic puritans."

The English Channel has always been much wider than its physical distance (less than thirty miles in places), but right now it feels positively oceanic, dividing, as it does, Angrael from the Eurozone.

Have a look at ShowStudio's Amaze Me microsite. Amaze Me is a competition organized by Sony Playstation Portable to motivate young people to be more creative. Mentors have been selected in various cities across Europe to issue challenges to young people, and judge the results. A short video clip sets a theme. You can watch these clips by city. Now, if I watch Berlin or Antwerp's mentors, I recognize people who think and feel very much as I do.

For instance, Droog Design's challenge to design ways that young people, who don't have much money, can optimize their very small living spaces seems deeply humane to me. The London mentors, on the other hand, prioritize bling and glitz. "Think of yourself as a brand," recommends hideous advertising man Graham Fink. "There are 60 million people in this country, what makes you so special? Why should I pick you over everyone else?" There it is, the image of a society of struggle, mutual hostility and competition in which everyone tries to profit at the expense of everyone else. Texturally too, Fink is creepy, with a stupid hairstyle and glinty, hostile eyes.

Or take Sarah Doukas. Her dyed blonde "I love money" hairstyle beats her to the point she spells out when she begins to speak: she's discovered "many of the world's most international models... in the most ordinary places". It's the exact opposite of the Droog Design approach. Creativity isn't about improving the lot of ordinary people, but about plucking a few lucky contenders out of the shitheap and giving them a chance to become celebrities.

An article in The Observer on Sunday repeated the bling-glitz trope. Rachel Dickens, an osteopath from Fulham, is one of an increasing number of Brits to go to live in France. "Her client list from the yachting set reads like the contents of Grazia magazine. She can't namedrop for reasons of confidentiality - 'I'd love to tell people, "Guess who I saw in their pants today!" but I can't. Let's just say that it's rock stars, pop gods, supermodels, royalty - some of the richest people in the world. As well as hairdressers and gardeners and office workers.'"

Rachel at least seems to be veering slightly away from the Anglo glitz-bling mindset. In France, she seems relatively open to the idea of changing her way of living and thinking: "If you arrive and expect everything to be run the way you're used to, then of course you're going to antagonise people. Who wants a foreigner telling them what to do? You have to relax, learn the culture, accept how things happen. "Just because it's different doesn't mean it's wrong." That's a phrase I repeat to myself a lot.'"

Different isn't wrong; it's a start. It's safe to say, though, that she probably isn't yet tuning in to Arte Radio's Creations cartes postales, textural and exoticist sound postcards from Istanbul ("between minaret and demonstration, in the fabric ateliers, the souk and the café"), Burkina Faso, Niger and Mali. She's probably not quite in that European place -- whether it's a cultural or a class place -- where people who not only aren't Americans and aren't celebrities, but are actually poorer than you are, have something to teach you about how you could live your life. That place where the answer to the developing world's "Who the hell do you think I want to be?" is no longer answered by the Western "Me!"

Comments

[bricology.livejournal.com]

Hmmm...I suppose I should feel mildly offended by your saying "I feel at home with the French attitude..." (which includes the stance) "...they are not the Americans, those vulgar imperialistic puritans." Of course, there are many things about the image of America and Americans that I would like to shed, or at least not be identified with, hence my obligation to object. But why does it seem to me that you keep casting about for examples of groups that you can identify with or against, or hold up as having some sort of cohesive position, when reality is far slipperier than that? What is the value of these little Euler diagrams? Just for discourse? Or for comfort? It feels a bit too clubby for my comfort.

On what I find to be an essentially unrelated subject, Droog Design's output has always struck me as being largely centered upon novelty and gadgetry. Have they produced anything that actually answered a practical need or improved upon existing designs? Sorry to be so critical, but I find nothing in their work that goes beyond the superficially clever. If I might offer a couple of examples of truly great designers whose work encompasses child-like delight and radical problem-solving, I can think of no greater than Charles Eames and Buckminster Fuller--true giants of design--and prototypical Americans--whose works will be remembered centuries after Droog Design's stuff is landfilled and forgotten.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

But why does it seem to me that you keep casting about for examples of groups that you can identify with or against, or hold up as having some sort of cohesive position, when reality is far slipperier than that?

Because I believe firmly that you can have a culture of origin and a culture of destination, and that they don't have to be the same culture. Otherwise there's no journey, or rather, there's only the journey one culture takes through time. My own culture, Britain, has taken a journey which I'd describe (and I wish it had been more slippery and ambiguous, I really do) as "swinging right" since my childhood in the 1960s and 70s. So I'm interested in cauterizing my inner Briton. Or do I mean in re-inforcing an essentially British sense of fair play?

Anyway, culture tends not to work by tiny incremental empirical differences, but by definitions in relation to others. America and the developing world are the "others" for Europe, and, living in Europe now, I share the way these others get coded. But this is also, as I say, a matter of class perspective, and politics, and aesthetics. And I'm quite aware of the dangers of dismissing the "make them more like us" worldview (currently playing in a war theater near you as "force them to be more like us, for our own security").

[(Anonymous)]

Recently I read "Reassembling the Social" by Bruno Latour, and he was going on at one point about seperating 'agency' from 'figuration'. I think he was drawing on Greimas, and I didn't really know what he meant, having not much of a background in that kind of semiotics. I think you provided a good illustration here though:

"As a general rule, British and American people idolize their own culture's richest, most famous and successful members, whereas the French idolize exotic foreign "others" -- the poorer, obscurer and further away the better. Or do I mean the lower middle classes of Britain, France and America worship bling and glitz, whereas the upper middle classes of those nations like documentaries about "unspoiled" ways of life? Yes, that's partly what I mean too."

{British, Americans, and French} or {lower middle classes and upper middle classes} serve as different figurations for the same agencies. Thanks for helping me clear that up! I must say, I like the technique of giving more than one figuration; it helps one to see through the representation to the phenomenon, which in this case seems to be a matter of what kind of grass one finds greener - the expensive kind from the exclusive shop or the wierd purple kind across the valley. Sometimes it's so hard to tell the difference, though!

You should maybe visit weirder places when you come to America next time. Like Baltimore or Providence - those places are less cosmopolitan, maybe, but more weird, and probably more appreciative of weirdness as other than commodity.

Clay

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Interesting, Clay: I suppose this "figuration" allows a piece of rhetoric to rely on (necessary) binaries, but to put them "into 3D" by superimposing several contradictory binaries. It reminds us of the structuralist point that structuration is both necessary and arbitrary.

[pixelmist.livejournal.com]

It seems, to me, you're describing the ideal (wait for it) "scholastic" attitude: an intellectual playfulness, a retreat from the monolithic to the specific, a desire for a recombative ethos as opposed to a unchanging one. The degree to which this sort of ethic has been subdued in America saddens me deeply.

I locate the menace of fascism in bling-glitz culture, not in "Islamofascism".

...but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. The "menace of fascism" is ever-present. Whenever an ideology seeks to usurp all others, to supplant difference with a sterilized whole (ethnically, religiously, or through class oppression), fascism is bred. It's present in both, and both are to be avoided, if you ask me. Which you didn't. ;)

[(Anonymous)]

As so often before, you take some fair observations on human nature - in all countries - and force them to fit your preconceived idea that UK, America and Israel are bad while Japan and Europe are good (is the earth in those countries giving off some overpowering miasm?). Sure all of France just loves to "exchange" with the arabs. And the Germans have a great fondness for Turks and Poles. Czechs are currently having an amazing craic with the Gypsies.

Basically, what you're saying is that you don't like countries that exercise military or other power abroad. That doesn't leave a lot of innocents on th globe. Bhutan the new Japan, perhaps? Did you have a rivalry with your dad as a boy? Penis envy?

[niddrie-edge.livejournal.com]

I see how you can think that..my impression was that the projections of these cultural blocs was being wrestled with and how the projections/projects affect the sense of empowerment of those bathed in the glow.

Only last night a passionate friend raised the Oedipal issue(if i read between your lines)of "Kill Papa" as the premise of current criticism of the West and conspiracy theorising.

As I wean from the teat, supported by Papa's pay packet, when am I truly apart from him and grand Papa?

Perhaps the exotic other can help here when seen as the interloper in a stagnant familial relationship. Perhaps what we need now is an affair?

[zond7.livejournal.com]

I'm a long away from France (and so near to the United States), but the French take on the distant other described seems at least partly connected to Rousseau's "noble savage" meme, which always seemed to find a more comfortable home in France than anywhere else.

The U.S., of course, had a rather different take on that, as at the height of its popularity, Americans *were* the exotic noble savages. Benjamin Franklin managed to spin that for all it was worth to suck the French exchequer dry, to finance the American revolutionary war. (I can't imagine noble savagery finding any fit on the middle-class cellular walls of England.)

Distancing yourself from foreigners in order to better admire and learn from them has some advantages, but then, again, the further you place the Other from you, the easier it is to alienate them, even when they express an interest in joining you.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Yes... although I'd say that at the same time the Americans were, in some sense, the "exotic other", they were completing the genocide of the Native Americans, as well as importing slaves from Africa. And this genocide is one reason they have never felt comfortable with the Noble Savage idea. It just involves massive amounts of guilt (yes, even more than Europe's colonial history).

the further you place the Other from you, the easier it is to alienate them, even when they express an interest in joining you

I can't accept this. We've seen that Bin Laden's principal motivation is to remove American bases from Saudi Arabia. He seems pretty alientated to me. And his view is gaining ground in many countries now because, precisely, of the wars America has brought to Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. It's proximity which alienates.

[tim-ellison.livejournal.com]

Mainstream American TV news should be seen as less of a reflection on a people and more of a monster of its own design than your post suggests.

[(Anonymous)]

It's absurd to compare the likes of CNN or BBCWorld with Arte. The first two are mainstream, global news channels. The third is a niche arts and culture channel that, even in France itself, is only watched by a tiny minority, and therefore is representative of nothing national. Rather it is representative of something international: it caters to a niche audience of older, arts-minded left-leaning middle-class people (like yourself). In most developed countries there's something a bit like Arte. In Australia there's SBS, which is very like Arte. There's BBC 4 in the UK.

With French culture, I think you're falling into the trap of assuming that the French culture that's exported and prized internationally by a certain class of people is representative of domestic cultural consumption. It isn't. Take a look at TF1, the highest-rating channel in France. You'll find it awash with schlocky aspirational programmes about the rich and famous, just like in England or the US. You won't find too many artful, art-de-vivre documentaries about Mali there.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

There's something in what you say: I'm responding to a bouquet of cable channels which I happen to have here, and pitting Anglo news channels against state-subsidized channels like TV5 (global Francophonie network) and Arte (French-German EU funded network -- I'd say its function is to maintain European cohesion rather than just interest a professional minority).

However, I do think that it's no accident that Anrael dominates rolling news networks while the Eurozone dominates cultural coverage. Angrael is currently the world's news agent or actor; news happens in English. (Of course, it will happen in Chinese sooner or later, and all this will change.) The EU, meanwhile, gets to specialize in the old Enlightenment ideas -- justice, equality, the noble savage and so on. TV5 and Arte are "Enlightenment networks", expressing the EU's marginality and humanity, its particular sense of having an "alternative narrative" to the opportunistic / equality of opportunity view expressed in Anglo policy and reporting.

Two structurations for the price of one: Europe has become the world's superego, America its id.

[wingedwhale.livejournal.com]

"Well, deep down, everybody's just the same, so of course those poor developing countries want to be like us!!!!!!"

[thenipper.livejournal.com]

The London mentors, on the other hand, prioritize bling and glitz. "Think of yourself as a brand," recommends hideous advertising man Graham Fink. "There are 60 million people in this country, what makes you so special? Why should I pick you over everyone else?" There it is, the image of a society of struggle, mutual hostility and competition in which everyone tries to profit at the expense of everyone else.

Forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but isn't this what you've been praising recently as "self mediation"?!

[lord-whimsy.livejournal.com]

Was going to mention that. How does the ethic described below by Nick fit into this new one?

"I spent a while browsing an excellent new book of photos of hip hop dandies from the 1980s, A Time Before Crack, by Jamel Shabazz (who also did the "Back In The Days" book). As I browsed, it occurred to me that the Friends With You guy, the back-in-the-days guys, Lord Whimsy and me all have something in common. We're all media-savvy, media-friendly self-creations, and we all seem to aspire to be cartoons. Whereas Hollywood stars and politicians tend to dress, act and speak with calculated moderation and timid vapidity, keen to hold onto their power and keep on the right side of the undemonstrative masses, we poorer, smaller media actors pull out all the stops. We have nothing to lose; there's really no reason for us not to embrace utter flamboyance."

"It seems to me that New York is one of the cities that encourages precisely this sort of self-mediation. Downtown New York is dense and intense, concentrated and tolerant. People work on their look, people have a schtick, people quickly find that extremity is an excellent sales tool, it gets them remembered, noted, reported. I haven't yet seen the Klaus Nomi move, but I'd imagine it was exactly the same when he was in New York, or when Quentin Crisp came here to make himself the ultimate cartoon of the "great stately homo". I even think of the vogueing Latinos in the documentary "Paris is Burning". It's a common misconception that people who give themselves the license to flounce, to vogue, to make a splash, are somehow spoiled rich socialites. But I'd argue that it's the poor who really pour their heart and soul into making an impression, into self-mediation. The poor and the hungry. Few of us are rich, and it's unlikely that we'll ever be played in a Hollywood movie by Johnny Depp (though you never know). But we have a certain instinct, part-commercial, part-aesthetic, for dramatic self-editing and self-presentation. In some cases we make a living playing the larger-than-life characters we've devised, acting them out in real time on the catwalks, corridors, subway tunnels and runways of a city like New York."

http://imomus.livejournal.com/2005/07/09/

[myrtle-stars.livejournal.com]

I just watched a documentary called "Darwin's Nightmare" which frankly kind of sucked because of the missing links it seemed to have. In the documentary, one of the Economical officials mentioned that a documentary should also contain 'the good.'

I was wondering why the good was not mentioned also. There must be some kind of happiness in Tanzania. There must be some sort of artful living. I don't know. I totally got depressed about the whole situation there, though I still feel as if I know squat about the place after watching that documentary.

At any rate....you just made me want to check to see if there are any French channels in our cable guide. I would really like to imbibe more of their view of other nations than the view I have been getting.

[(Anonymous)]

While nobody likes to break up a nice neat little binary, I'd like posit a third position: one can appreciate other cultures, without imperialistic inclinations, and still find the idea of the "noble savage" to be wholly ridiculous.

Society was formed precisely because man is not good by nature. Man also did not build the skyscraper, rocket ship, or compose the Fifth Symphony just to drop everything and mill about the bush carrying a spear and wearing a fur loin cloth.

-henryperri

[kementari2.livejournal.com]

Hear, hear.

[beketaten.livejournal.com]

This is probably a terribly simplistic point, but calling all Americans "Vulgar imperialist pigs" is like looking at a crowd of people around and mosque and spitting "Terrorists!".
Now I know that you didn't necessarily mean that to be your specific opinion, and was probably a faceitiously exaggerated one, but I think that there is definitely something worth saving about the ideals of America's foundation. People like to think for some reason, that America has only done bad things, none of which I will deny, but I think there are things also, to be extolled, and not necessarily in the most obvious places.

Century of the Self

[(Anonymous)]

Hey have you seen Adam Curtis' stunning BBC documentary 'The Century of the Self', about the history of American public relations, and its relationship with the history of psychiatry in America? Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, was Sigmund Freuds nephew, and helped pioneer all the techniques used to create the American 'self' you speak of, especially in its use in politics.

Anyway, it's quite fantastic - if you want me to burn you a copy, let me know - cymbalta60@gmail.com

J

[(Anonymous)]

Still all those people keep coming to Europe and USA from the Thirld World... I suppose they wouldn´t mind being a little like us.

There's so much material here

[zzberlin.livejournal.com]

It's hard to take it all in.

<< Creativity isn't about improving the lot of ordinary people, but about plucking a few lucky contenders out of the shitheap and giving them a chance to become celebrities. >>

But don't the shitheapers improve their own lot while vying to be chosen?

What do you think of the television show, American Idol? Think about all those kids (and grownups) out there in the US bettering themselves because they want to be selected. (I've seen the show a couple times and enjoyed it but never managed to watch it regularly.)

The great thing about the American approach is that you learn young that you can do/be/get anything you want if you work hard. The bad thing about this approach is that it is slightly absurd since in reality, much luck is involved in such success. Wasn't it Horatio Alger's characters that could never quite get there no matter how desperately they tried...

Re: There's so much material here

[bopscotch.livejournal.com]

They're not really bettering themselves for the sake of bettering themselves though - they're bettering themselves to get the money and fame that comes with being on American Idle.

[qscrisp.livejournal.com]

Hello. I was just wondering, is there something wrong with your main site? I don't seem to be able to access www.imomus.com at the moment, only the blog here.

Also, I've been looking for stuff on third culture kids. I don't suppose you could point me in that direction? I would be much obliged.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Yes, there is a problem with www.imomus.com just now. It's not responding. Christian in Norway, its new host, is just downloading the files and we'll reassign the DNS soon and have it up and running again soon... from Norway.

vested interests

[(Anonymous)]

perhaps the french attitude that you describe can be attributed to that country's lingering connection with its colonies and its wish to reduce immigration to france? i mean, could what appears to be a progressive attitude actually serve rather conservative interests? wouldn't france's isolationist right wing *want* the third world to be romanticized ("they don't need our intervention, as they have their own groovy lifestyles and/or holism of culture"). - br

[(Anonymous)]

i think addressing america's exaltation of wealth is tricky, as fame/celebrity has entered the image (as an image, *old money* is quickly losing currency (wealth and breeding (a controverisal term in my own mind)have been divorced, i think))). celebrity certainly tends to afford affluence; however, i think, it's also both an ontological and a metaphysical issue. celebrity confers, i imagine, a relief from essential anonymity. if esse est percipi, fame is the eye of god. americans idolize attention as much as wealth.- br

Those "Amaze Me" briefs...

[thetemplekeeper.livejournal.com]

I was amazed by the passive-aggressive "no bullshit" attitudes exuded by the UK judges. Against the "license to be creative" briefs offered by Antwerp and Dublin, the London judges set quite tight limits to what should be attempted. I suppose the UK briefs could be seen as pragmatic in a very English manner, spelling out not just the sort of piece that should be tried, but also the kind of person you should be in order to be able to produce work they want to award. However, they also show a horrid kind of narrow-mindedness - as though the judges are too busy to be surprised, so you should not try and do anything outside their own specified boundaries. Rather than welcoming bewilderment and even upset, they want more of the same; and perhaps we are expected to behave like supplicants offering our attempts at creativity to these unsmiling High Priests, ordained by the holiness of money and column inches.

Re: Those "Amaze Me" briefs...

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly my feeling too! And of course this is both a political stance -- a take on creativity from an increasingly right wing, glitz-bling culture -- and an honest response to environmental pressures in the UK, where a property bubble and a very high cost of living makes it imperative for creatives to think about how they can earn money right from the start.

Aspirations are good!

[rob-kun.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty appalled by what you've suggesting here... it's a mistake to think that valuing aspirations is such a negative trait.

I'm working on making a series of documentaries about Ghana and the fact is - from all the hours and hours of original footage I've looked at - that having aspirations and dreams to live a better life is universal, from the subsistence farmer to the shanty town dweller to the rich businessman. There's not one person who doesn't want to improve upon their life. But don't take my word for it - have a look at our showreels for the films yourself. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=worldwrite

[trini-naenae.livejournal.com]

I was planning on clicking on all of the links and reading through all the comments and making a good and proper comment myself after reading this in the early morning today (8-15). Now that I've finally been able to touch a computer again... It's almost midnight, and... classes tomorrow and sleep is a good thing. So short version it is.

I do agree with you that the US had a tendency to think that everyone else must want what they want because of course that's what they want.

I haven't lived in France, so I can't say I have a good idea of how they think. I don't like the idea of glorifying a group of people because they're far away and different though.

Appreciating differentness is a good thing. I'm reminded of that daily when I work, as some of my co-workers say very demeaning things to me because I don't fit into their understanding of "normal" and how people should act. However, interacting with that differentness, and learning to coexist around people who frankly, don't make sense to you, but they're people, and it's ok, is even more important.

All in all I agree with you, but admiring from afar just doesn't work for me. Experiencing it, and discovering the differences, and seeing the positives and the negatives, and realizing that it's different, and it's ok, should be the ultimate goal.

Minor quibble, probably at society at large: I find the blonde = rich materialistic girl stereotype so annoying. Hair color stereotypes are silly, why do we put up with them?

[bricology.livejournal.com]

I think it's related to that way that many people negatively stereotype Americans: because they weren't fortunate enough to have been born an American (or a blonde). Some people find it comforting to verbally despise what they secretly wish they were.