{"id":19176,"date":"2024-06-17T10:44:45","date_gmt":"2024-06-17T09:44:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/drikkes.com\/?p=19176"},"modified":"2024-06-18T08:33:53","modified_gmt":"2024-06-18T07:33:53","slug":"keep-ruining-everything","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/drikkes.com\/?p=19176","title":{"rendered":"Keep Ruining Everything 🤮"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Heute Morgen die Vogue Business<\/em> dar\u00fcber, wie die Modeindustrie sich ein neues Marketingfeld erschlie\u00dft “for cultivating an intellectual brand identity”. Irgendwie mu\u00df man ja versuchen, sich an ein ever-trending Ph\u00e4nomen wie BookTok ranzuwanzen. Im Artikel dann aber dies \u00fcber das Thema hinausweisende Moneyquote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

It also marks a shift from fashion\u2019s traditional tie-ups with visual arts, Granata says. \u201cThe literary world still has a more authentic cultural cachet insofar that it is less connected exclusively to a market,\u201d she says. \u201cAs the \u2018art world\u2019 increasingly becomes the \u2018art market\u2019, there is less of a reason for fashion companies to associate themselves with it<\/strong> \u2014 as, historically, fashion brands aligned themselves with other arts for their cultural aura and to move away from fashion\u2019s association with consumption.\u201d<\/p>\nBook girl summer: Why brands are leaning into the literary world<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

(Hervorhebung von mir.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Das ist schon eine starke Beobachtung: Weil bildende Kunst selbst mittlerweile zu kapitalistisch agiert, als da\u00df sich f\u00fcr Marken aus ihr noch glaubw\u00fcrdig kulturelles Kapital schlagen lie\u00dfe, wendet man sich unbedarfteren Feldern wie der Literatur zu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aber was will man von einem System anderes erwarten, da\u00df es geschafft hat, das gem\u00fctliche Rumh\u00e4ngen zuhause unter dem Labal “Hygge” vermarktbar zu vereinnahmen?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n