Adam Arvidsson, Brands: Meaning and Value in Media Culture.
London: Routledge, 2006. 168 pp. ISBN10: 0415347165 (pbk)
Review by Uri Ram Ben Gurion University, Israel Karl Marxs famous maxim to the effect that The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist (Marx, 1977: 202) echoes loudly in Adam Arvidssons proclamation that brands are a paradigmatic embodiment of the logic of informational capitalism (p. 13). The book Brands: Meaning and Value in Media Culture is devoted to the theoretical and empirical exploration of this thesis and its implications. In Arvidssons view, brands gained a prominent position in the 1980s. What makes brands so important is that they create a vital link between economy and culture: they extract value from shared experiences and common tastes and are spun into the social fabric as a ubiquitous medium for the construction of a common social world (p. 3). The functioning of brands is facilitated by two intermingled grand shifts that capitalism underwent in the 1980s: a shift to a neo-liberal political economy and a shift to a post-Fordist regime of production and consumption; two shifts that were premised upon the explosion of a new wave of communication technology and mediatization of all walks of everyday life. What is unique to brands, even if not entirely exclusive, is that in them it is not the products as much as the brands that matter (p. 5), or, that they are a form of immaterial capital (p. 7) that is produced by immaterial labour (p. 9). In other words, what matters most in brands is the symbolic or signifying dimension of the commodity, compared to the material use value of the older type of products. Furthermore, brands not only switch the roles between the material and ideal dimensions of products, but also switch the roles between production and consumption, whereby value is not extracted at the point of production, but rather at the point of consumption; these are the consumers who through their cultural creativity or politics of identity produce the newly added value of the products. In his interpretation, Arvidsson draws on the Italian Marxist school, known as the autonomists, that articulates anew Marxs concept of thegeneral intellect.With Marx, the concept related to the subsumption of labour under capital, so that only management can oversee the overall productive process. With the autonomists, in distinction, the concept relates to the subsumption of the whole social environment under capital, so that the labour process comes to encompass not only the productive process of the factory system, but the general process of communal and cultural creativity. Thus, the overall thesis that the book proposes is that the brand is not only a new form of interface between production and consumption, but a new form of the intermix that turns consumption and with it social life itself into a source of produced value which is extracted by capital. It is suggested that for consumers, brands are means of production, of style, mood, experience, community (p. 93), while for capital, brands are means of appropriation . . . a way to capture the productivity of the social and
subsume it as a form of value generating immaterial labor (p. 94). The
overall result is that brands represent the transformation of the context for life into capital, and of life itself into labour, which is typical of informational capitalism (p. 94). Besides Marx, Arvidsson draws on Michel Foucault, and especially his understanding of modern power as constructive rather then restrictive, and thus relates to a governing from below through tactics of enabling, empowering and programming (p. 128). The book holds six chapters, of which the first offers a general overview of the thesis and the last outlines the theoretical conclusions. Chapter 2 addresses the consumption of brands, and argues that the mediatization of consumption, especially through the electronic media, enhances the agency of consumers and their capacity to produce a common social and cultural space. Chapters 3 through 5 address the other side of the coin the new strategies developed by capital to valorize the productivity of consumption, which is diffused in the social space and in the new electronic space. The least convincing aspect of the book is the hypothesis suggested by it too late and too little about the coming crisis of informational capitalism. The crisis is supposed to stem from the emergent discrepancy between the growing dependency of capital on diffused social sources (the general intellect), and the growing independence of these sources from capital. Yet, rather then a crisis of capitalism, this discrepancy seems to suggest, in my view, a crisis in the analysis of Italian autonomist Marxism. It is a moot point whether the expansion of productivity into the domain marked as a general intellect is potentially more liberating, because it escapes the domination of any specific capital agents, as the autonomistsassume; or whether indeed it is potentially more repressing, since no space remains free from the domination or manipulation of capital. It seems that in the last instance, autonomy has been in fact appropriated by marketing. It seems thus that the major thesis of the book, about the new sturdiness of capitalism, is stronger then the expectation it harbours for a crisis of capitalism. All in all, the book aims to decipher the inner logic of the system of informational capitalism through the prism of the brand. It is rich in empirical analysis and in theoretical articulation and it belongs with the much called for endeavour carried by too few scholars to offer a sophisticated empirical analysis of contemporary capitalism with the tools of an updated MarxistFoucauldian theory. References Marx, K. (1977) The Poverty of Philosophy, in David McLellan (ed.) Karl Marx: Selected Writings, pp. 195215. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Journal of Consumer Culture 8(3) 432 Downloaded from http://joc.sagepub.com by Silvinta Tatavitto on August 18, 2009