University of New South Wales Leon Li-Aun Sooi (z3292856)
SOMA 1600 Essay 22nd April 2009
Michel Foucault theorized a ‘normalizing gaze.’ Define this theory in relation to mass
media or digital media and ask, ‘Who is served by this normalization.’ Use two specific
examples.
In Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon, disciplinary power is distilled into its most ideal
form (Foucault, 1975). Under permanent threat of being observed by the tower's
guards, incarcerated prisoners automatically behave according to the prison's rules and
timetables, thus exemplifying the effectiveness of the “normalizing gaze”. Foucault
asserts that the panopticon is prevalent throughout society, as it is the most effective
way to control human behavior. In our consumeristic society, individuals – playing both
the roles of the guard and the prisoner – continuously examine themselves in relation to
the crowd, and are pressured to conform to social norms (Wren, 1999), usually defined
and propagated by advertising in the mass media. Thus, corporations that dominate the
media will have the most influence on social norms, and can manipulate them across
space (geographically and culturally) and time (changing social trends) for their
economic gain.
Mass advertising by corporations creates a homogenizing effect that erodes
geographical and cultural diversity, limiting individual tastes and preferences. This is
reflected in pop artist Andy Warhol's comment that “America started the tradition
where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest.” Regardless
of the individuals' social, economic, or ethnic backgrounds, they are compelled to accept
the “ideal lifestyle” promoted through the media, and are eventually normalized to
adhere to the trends (Leonard, 2007). Warhol's painting “100 Campbell Soup Cans”
(1962) illustrates this relationship between media and mass consumerism. A hundred
Campbell soup cans are painted on a silvery background, reminiscent of the glossy pages
of magazines, a mass-produced and mass-circulated medium that is responsible for
advertising. Furthermore, the hundred soup cans are arranged in a rigid 10 X 10 grid,
reminiscent of a supermarket shelf, emphasizing the mechanical and monotonous
nature in which mass consumption takes place. With a homogenized global consumer
market, corporations are able to increase their scale of production, and benefit by
operating more efficiently and reaping substantial economies of scale (Sloman, 2002).
Though Foucault claims that individuals are inclined towards normalizing
themselves to social norms, it is arguable that human nature seeks individuality. A desire
for novelty, variety and personal uniqueness is essential to some industries, such as
fashion (Sproles, 1979). Nevertheless, media advertising is able to capture the tastes and
preferences of diverse groups and still entice them into purchasing a similar product. In
“100 Campbell Soup Cans”, every Campbell soup can has exactly the same visual
appearance, yet they are differentiated by one perfunctory detail: flavor. The work
suggests that a small level of differentiation does exist in mass-consumed products,
possibly to increase its appeal to the public’s varying tastes and preferences. The variety
of choices constructed by the manufacturer creates an illusion of individuality (Adorno,
1944). Therefore, consumers can satisfy their craving for individual uniqueness despite
being conformed to the social norm.
To continually fuel consumerism, corporations manipulate social trends over
time, deliberately causing a product to become obsolete, such that consumers will
purchase a newer model (Slade, 2006). This marketing strategy, known as “planned
obsolescence” operates on the precondition that the “normalizing gaze” will seduce
people to keep making new purchases out of an anxiety to keep in line with the crowd.
Advertising sends out the message that those who do not follow the trend would be
discriminated as the “deviant” (Leonard, 2007). Under peer influence, individuals are
eventually pressured into aligning themselves to the new norms. The film Wall-E (2008)
paints a satirical scenario of the dystopian future of consumerism. The inhabitants of
Axiom are constantly bombarded with advertisements, and conditioned to be told what
to wear, what to eat and what to think. The beneficiary, of course, is the fictional multi-
national mega-corporation “Buy N Large”, which profits every time subservient
consumers heed the advice of a new advertisement. This acrimonious mockery of our
society’s consumer-capitalist system highlights the way media controls our minds and
behavior, allowing corporations to profit from the endless cycle of purchasing and
consuming.
It is lamentable that self-serving corporations seem to be exploiting this “herd
mentality” of consumers for their economic gain. Corporations defend themselves by
asserting that reaping economies of scale lowers prices (Sloman, 2002), and that
obsolescence encourages product improvement (McKean, 2003). However, there are
also external costs to society. The beginning scenes of Wall-E feature forlorn landscapes
with skyscrapers of garbage that humans left behind on the planet, rendering it
uninhabitable. This is an acute critique of the profligate waste that resulted from
unrestrained consumerism. Furthermore, the intangible damage to society can be
inferred from the emaciated, flattened colors of “100 Campbell Soup Cans”, suggesting a
superficial façade of society that has lost its original cultural diversity. Humans, deluded
by the glamour of consumerism, are transformed into impersonal automaton, just like
the mechanical and repetitive silkscreen process Warhol employed to create the “100
Campbell Soup Cans”.
Through the mass media, corporations aggressively advertise their products and
ideology as necessities for the “ideal lifestyle” desired by everybody, fabricating a false
impression of the social norm. For a self-conscious individual who is afraid of deviating
from the crowd, it seems almost impossible to live without purchasing the latest Apple
gadget or another redundant pair of shoes. Consumers are hurled into an endless cycle
of purchasing and consuming as trends rapidly evolve over time. While corporations
receive economic benefits from consumerism, society suffers from environmental
damage and loss of diversity. Nevertheless, it is not impossible to rectify the system.
With the right policies enforced (Grunwald, 2009), the government can also take control
of the media for social engineering. New social norms of energy efficiency,
environmental conservation, and financial prudency should be created to bring forth
benefits to the whole of society.
Bibliography
• Adorno, T., Horkheimer, M. 1944, The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass
Deception, Seabury Press, New York
• Foucault, M. 1975, Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Penguin, New
York.
• Grunwald, M. 2009, ‘How Obama is Using the Science of Change’, Time, 2nd April
2009, viewed 22nd April 2009,
<[Link]
xid=newsletter-daily>
• Leonard, A. 2007, The Story of Stuff, online video, accessed 22nd April 2009,
<[Link]
• McKean, K. 2003, ‘Planned Obsolescence’, InfoWorld (Editor’s Letter),
September, pp. 8.
• Slade, G. 2006, Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America,
Harvard University Press, Massachusetts.
• Sloman, J. 2002, Economics, Prentice Hall, London.
• Sproles, G.B. 1979, Fashion: Consumer Behaviour Toward Dress, Burgess
Publishing Co., Minnesota.
• Wall-E. 2008, motion picture, Pixar Animation Studios, Emeryville, California.
• Warhol, A. 1962, 100 Campbell Soup Cans, artwork, private collection.
• Wren, K. 1999, Social Influences, Routledge, London.
