How does Panopticism link to branding within the fashion industry and what impact does this have upon society?
This piece of writing will discuss how modern day branding links to Panopticism and how this is impacting upon us as a society in particular ways in terms of how we view each other and the judgements we make. It will begin by looking at the Panopticon, what it was and the impact it had when it was first created and then go on to Panopticism and how this theory was created from the Panopticon structure and the things people learnt from it. It will also look at the examples of modern day panopticism that surround us today, so the theory can be further understood and then go on to discuss branding and the impact logos have upon us to have made branding such a huge necessity within what has become a very panoptic society. There will be a focus on how it impacts upon our identities, stereotypes and ways in which consumers are encouraged to buy into brands. It will then summarize by discussing the direction in which branding and consumerism is heading and deciding wether panopticism will always play a part in this.
The theory of Panopticism comes from the circular building which was designed by Jeremy Bentham and built in the late eighteenth century known as the Panopticon. The Panopticon contained a central observation tower and separate ‘cells’ around the outside of the building where people would be kept. These cells were placed in such a way that the person being held was unable to see anyone around them and the people who were opposite were too far away for any form of contact, leaving them completely alone. The concept behind the building was that the person being kept within the Panopticon could be seen but would not know when or if they were being watched from the central observation tower. Bentham produced this structure in such a way that it could have a number of uses,
“punishing the incorrigible, guarding the insane, reforming the vicious. confining the suspected, employing the idle, maintaining the helpless, curing the sick, instructing the willing in any branch of industry , or training the rising race in the path of education: in a word, whether it be applied to the purposes of perpetual prisons in the room of death, or prisons for confinement before trial, or preintentiary houses, or houses of correction; or work-houses, or manufactories, or mad-houses, or hospitals , or schools”
(Bentham, 2008, P1).
Due to the nature of the design of the Panopticon it was believed and proved that it could have so much power over those kept within it that they would be mentally trained to behave in a better manner. The Panopticon therefore was described as, “a laboratory; it could be used as a machine to carry out experiments, to alter behavior, to train or correct individuals” (Foucault, 1977, P66). Once this correction technique began to work on people, the central tower didn’t necessarily have to be occupied because the people being held would still think they were being watched once this fear had been placed upon them enough.
“In fact, in it’s most explicit practices, imprisonment has always involved a certain degree of physical pain” (Foucault, 1977, P16)
This part of the text best describes the effect that the Panopticon would have, the prisoners would feel some kind of physical pain because they are being kept away from everything and everyone. Food would be rationed and conditions wouldn’t have been the best. The psychological effect of the Panopticon is likely to have reduced crime committed at the time because once prisoners had gone through this ordeal they would come out of it a better person.
Panopticism is a social theory that was developed by French philosopher Michel Foucault. To summarize the theory, it is the idea that people can be controlled and made to act in a certain way if they are in a situation in which they could be under constant observation. In the same way that the Panopticon corrects peoples behavior, Panopticism also corrects it but not necessarily permanently and this is because with the theory people are only being watched under certain circumstances and in certain places, not constantly. The term “Visibility is a trap” (Foucault, 1977, P64) perfectly describes Panopticism because people have no choice but to behave in a certain manner as there may be consequences if they fail to do so. This visibility is what gives Panopticism it’s power and ability to have such a huge impact upon people. Although the theory has been around since 1977 if not before it still exists within modern day. Examples of modern day Panopticism include, swimming pools, university lecture theaters, CCTV and open plan shop floors. Society is also a main form of Panopticism but takes less of a physical form with one of the main elements being how conscious we have become because we are constantly being watched by each other.
One element in particular that makes society watch each other more than ever is the fashion industry because society has become something within which everyone feels the need to follow the ‘trends’ and buy into the latest brands so that those who are watching are impressed by what they are seeing. “Consumers believe a brand ‘speaks’ to them in some way, and represents a lifestyle they either have or aspire to” (Campbell, 2003, P8). The idea that a brand represents a lifestyle is exactly what the consumer is looking for because they can create a certain image of themselves that may not be true but doesn’t matter to them as long as they impress and are in keeping with the trends. The more popular brands tend to be up market because they create the impression that the consumer is quite sophisticated and shows they can afford the finer things in life, which is some what an achievement in society. Brands have become so established within our society that they can add a huge amount of value to an item that may have not much difference to the unbranded equivalent, yet society continue to fund this because we dress to impress and want to be noticed along with aspiring to this ‘ideal lifestyle’.
Brands create a number of incentives to encourage consumers to buy into them whether this be some sort of offer or a limited edition item. H&M is a company known for giving its consumers an incentive to purchase items, “H&M opens its doors to the world of Roberto Cavalli. The italian designer will create a one off collection for women and men exclusively for H&M. A designer to the stars, he regularly dresses international personalities such as Beyonce, Gwyneth Paltrow...” this is an extract taken from (Superbrands, 2007, P81) which discusses the company and how far it has come. H&M bring celebrity designers into their company to create a limited edition collection because they are aware how society has become so obsessed with branding and how celebrities have a huge impact on what we think of ourselves or a lifestyle we may want, so this technique will prove popular.
Society can be described as Panoptic because no matter where someone goes they are always likely to be being watched by someone else, society is constantly under surveillance and being judged upon the way people act when out in public. Due to the fact people know they are being watched within society, they act in a certain manner so not to create the wrong impression because the fear created by this particular type of Panopticism is the fact if you don’t act in a certain way you will be judged in a negative way. People, although not all will admit it, value the opinions of others very highly so the effect the Panopticism has may make people untrue to themselves.
“Whom do I wish to please, and in so doing whom am I likely to offend? What are the consequences of appearing as this kind of person as against that kind? Does the image I think I convey of my self reflect my true innermost self or some specious version thereof? Do I wish to conceal or reveal?...and so fourth” (Davis, 1992, P24).
This quote can be applied to branding as well as fashion culture, There is always going to be a variation in opinions on whether or not particular brands are seen as ‘popular’ because everyone has different tastes so effectively when a brand is purchased, the consumer is looking to impress a particular audience, that of those who share the same interests or long for/have a particular lifestyle. By wearing particular brands are people wanting to create an untrue version of themselves because they are scared the true version will not be liked or will not fit in to what is seen to be ‘popular’ or do people use these brands to express the exact type of person they are and show they are proud of this with no care for what others may think. Due to the Panoptic nature of modern society this has also had an impact on consumerism,
“Our culture has evolved into a consumer culture and we from citizens to consumers. Gratitude for what we have has been replaced by a sharpening hunger for what we don’t have. How much is enough? has been replaced by How much is possible?”
(Lasn, 1999, P63)
this states that consumerism has increased and this increase could easily be down to the panoptic effect we have on each other. It’s as though people in society encourage one an others hunger for these brands that realistically we don’t need. Relating back to the Foucault text it could be said that consumerism causes physical pain because society may feel depressed and hurt if they don’t have these commodities.
“I was in grade four when skintight designer jeans were the be-all and end-all, and my friends and I spent a lot of time checking out each others butt for logos.” (Klein, 2005, P27)
This quote could describe the negative impact that consumerism and panopticism together are having on society. Younger generations are becoming increasingly aware of the fact they are being looked at and judged by their peers. Does this influence come from they way in which we are brought up? The younger generations parents may want them to look good too because they feel as though they can be judged on this appearance. We may ask the question when does panopticism within society begin for us, and the elements Berger discusses within his text may have the answer. “Seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognizes before it can speak.” (Berger, 1972, P7) Berger states a good point in the sense that we begin recognizing things straight away so technically this is a form of panopticism because we are looking and making a judgement, even as a small child, nobody will truly know what they are thinking whilst they are seeing something. They may already be making judgements but not in a horrible sense, just in that of opinion.
“Fashion branding will increase in importance as consumer goods and fashion markets become more homogenous through globalization. Logos, distinguishing characteristics, great advertising, merchandising and even thorough employee training are going to be crucial for the survival of mass fashions” (Hancock, 2009, P185)
This quote indicates that the fashion branding industry will in fact not slow down at any point within the near future but continues to grow with the help of consumerism and society’s need for these brands due to their popularity. In conclusion it can then be said that Panopticism and branding together have made our society judgmental and generally not overall pleasant, people live within fear that they are going to be judged for things they may genuinely like so most steer clear of them and this has no indication of changing as long as brands keep excelling and stay part of the ‘popular’ culture. Society has become mixed up because it can no longer be noticed who is being entirely true to themselves and who is creating the image they want people to see.
Bibliography;
Bentham, J. (2008) Panopticon; or the inspection house, Milton Keynes, Dodo Press.
Berger, J. (1972) Ways of seeing, London, Penguin.
Crowther, D & Green, M. (2004) Organizational theory, London,Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Davis, F. (1992) Fashion, culture and identity, Chicago and London, The university of Chicago press.
Entwistle, J. (2000) The fashioned body, Cambridge, Polity Press.
Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish, London, Penguin.
Giddens, A. (2009) Sociology, Cambridge, Polity Press.
Hancock, J. (2009) Brand story, New York, Fairchild Books.
Klein, N. (2005) No Logo, London, Harper Perennial.
Lasn, K. (1999) Culture Jam, London, Harper Collins.
Lyon, D. (2006) Theorizing Surveillance: the panopticon and beyond, Devon ,Willan Publishing.
Superbrands. (2007) Cool brands, London, Superbrands (UK).
Tungate, M. (2008) Fashion brands: branding style from Armani to Zara, London, Kogan Page.
Vaid, H. (2003) Branding, London, The Illex Press Limited.
Yurchsin, J & Johnson, K. P. (2010) Fashion and the consumer, New York, Berg.
