When you think about London what come
to your mind? BigBen, red telephone booth, London eye, tea shop,
anything else? A red circle with blue thick line might be somewhere
in your imaginary.
In “ Tube 150th
anniversary: Brand 'worth its weight in gold' ” in the BBC News website , Majumdar says that
the London underground sign; a red disk with the blue strip, contains
high value in the term of brand identity. Apart from its duty to
unify different company of underground train companies into one
brand, it become another iconic signature of London till many
products with the logo can be sold as souvenirs.
This article reminds me of a cute
Shinkansen doll I received as a souvenir from my friend after she
visited Japan. A white and blue train with the big black eyes and
pink dots on its “cheek”, is very cute illustration of one of the
fastest trains in the world. I think the Japanese are very good at
creating character for their products. They can turn product or
everything around them into a cute character which brings many
advantages from the marketing perspective. The consumer can easily
remember the brand and they feel closer to the product because of the
process of personification. Moreover, this technique can turn a
simple item into a unique and precious one. It is called value adding
technique. What Katie said in my previous blog post is a good example
of this issue. Unpan man animation can create the fad of eating
unpan. The normal bread is be added value by the animation.
Turning to another point of view, I
think the characterize technique might start from a non marketing
reason. The Japanese and Asian people (may be include the ancient
European),in the past, they held a believe that everything around us
have a spirit inside it. For example, the river, Thai believe that
there is Pha Mae Kongka (Mother of river) who is the spirit who take
care of the river. The forest, the house everything around us have
spirit to protect them. Although it might sound unreasonable and
unscientific, I think it is a good technique from the past to make
people respect to the nature and feel guilty to destroy it just for
satisfying human's endless need. Unfortunately, these useful believes
were replaced by the thoughts from scientific world in the
enlightenment era.
We have the ability to create value
from 'almost nothing'; like, the Coke logo which is just some white
line on red background. This logo worth billion dollars. In contrast,
for the priceless nature of this world, we neglect to protect it by
saying that characterizing nature is a fool believe from the ancient
time. :(
__________
Reference
A brand logo might come to be precious when the brand come to be admitted as a valuable thing. I think this order is natural, but some companys think the reverse order is right, so they advertise first before their goods are assessed. I might be wrong to live in the competitive society, but nobody know which one is helpful to survive.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your blog posting, I remember the Japanes animation "The Spiriting Away of Sen and Chihiro"(2001), where the small reiver's god is one of main chracters. It gives us time to think what we did to nature.
I am also thinking of this amimation while I wrote my 4th paragraph. I am glad that my writng can remind you of this amimation. I am a big fan of Studio Ghibli and the one you mentioned is my favourite animation of all time. :)
ReplyDeleteI like the Japanese furniture, food, which consumer can see their willing to produce in detail delicately.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I'm not sure that scientific world destroy natural resource and spirit. Maybe you think that I have this idea because I'm a scientist. But I think people neglect to protect the nature because of excess wanting of human, which destroy everything. One day, it will destroy us too.
I agree with Mo's idea;I also don't think a developement does mean destrroyment always. Sometimes I have a question how the companies contribute to the society and the world as they have campaigned. I cannot deny I also live in the floods of propaganda.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Mo and Jennifer. In fact, I think more technology is often good for nature - if much more can be produced from a smaller amount of land by heavy use of chemical fertilisers and insecticides, that means that more land can be left in it's natural state. And this seems to me a strong argument against organic farming, which must destroy a much larger natural landscape to produce a smaller quantity of much more expensive food. I'm not sure if the moral reasoning behind organic farming makes any more sense than the economics.
DeleteIf there were solid evidence of health benefits from organic farming, I would look more favourably on it, but I'm not sure that that evidence exists. Does anyone know of any reliable studies that have been done on this?
The idea of organic farming certainly sounds good, but that doesn't mean it is good. A lot of things that sound good turn out to be awful in reailty, for example, communism, prohibition, censorship and so on.
I have studied about an organic animal farms. I like the ideas about it, because it sounds good for us and environment. But I'm not sure that it's good in the reality. You know that there are many rules and processes to be an organic farm by the stuff that is created by developed countries. That's why it look good in the surface. it's nother easy to be an organic farm actually. Sometimes it look like a commercial barrier.
DeleteAnd good to see Mo and Jennifer diligently keeping up with their daily response writing.
ReplyDeleteIt's OK to take a day or two off now and then, but not too many. If there are no existing topics that grab your attention, write a new post, and we'll hopefully get around to more on that tomorrow morning.
I did not mean we should reject science and technology, but I think the new invention from scientific world should base on the idea to find the most effective way for human to live with nature, not base on the false illusion that human can control the nature.
ReplyDelete