Comment by Aurornis
20 hours ago
> Something about the whole thing always registered to me as, like, lame—too normcore, too boring, perhaps even too cheugy to an informed and taste-driven millennial ur-consumer like me. The kinds of brands I like to buy aren’t what they sell at Costco
Good example of how people can build identities through their brand choices and purchasing habits.
It’s a foreign concept for many of us who seek out the best product or deals for each purchase and will change brands in an instant if another company releases a better product. Yet the crossover between brands, identities, and lifestyles is deeply held by many people.
I know some will try to turn this into a criticism of Americans, but in my travels and international business experience I wouldn’t even rank Americans in the top 10 for integrating brands and identity. In some countries I had to make a conscious effort to try to wear clothes from acceptable brands and swap my functional laptop bag for something more stylish to avoid letting my purchasing habits become a point of judgment from others. It’s actually refreshing to come back to America where as long as you’ve made some effort to look more or less appropriate for the occasion few people care about the brand of your clothes, laptop bag, or car. Some people are proud of their Audi or designer bag, but I rarely run into situations where I’d be judged for arriving in a sensible Subaru instead of a Mercedes.
> In some countries I had to make a conscious effort to try to wear clothes from acceptable brands and swap my functional laptop bag for something more stylish to avoid letting my purchasing habits become a point of judgment from others.
It is kind of fascinating, having come from such a culture, to realize that in the end, Americans, at least the average of the America I met, are not nearly brand conscious as I and everyone in my place supposed them to be.
Of course, America is a fucking giant and diverse place, and I think that even native born Americans have no fucking idea of how many different Americas exist, so, take my views of America with a giant grain of salt.
> It is kind of fascinating, having come from such a culture, to realize that in the end, Americans, at least the average of the America I met, are not nearly brand conscious as I and everyone in my place supposed them to be.
Speaking as an American with a formative decade overseas, I think some of that may come from the economics of international trade.
People think about a faraway place based on what gets transported and sold from there. If a country's most-visible exports are gourmet food, you'd start thinking that perhaps the average resident is a gourmand. In the case of the US, those "cultural exports" often involve branded goods, copyrighted media, food franchises, etc.
The brand that's 'Australian for beer' is very difficult to find in its domestic market!
3 replies →
Nit: a gourmand is the opposite of a gourmet
19 replies →
> Of course, America is a fucking giant and diverse place, and I think that even native born Americans have no fucking idea of how many different Americas exist, so, take my views of America with a giant grain of salt.
I've been around a good amount of the US and yeah, being very judgey on brands just doesn't seem to be much of a thing. Maybe if I hung around rich people it'd be different, but I do know some rich people and they typically don't seem to give a shit either.
Well, other countries are diverse too. What Aurornis experiences is just a tiny fraction of other countries.
And yet, Thorsten Veblen was American. Have we mellowed out since his observations about "veblen goods"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good
> Of course, America is a fucking giant and diverse place, and I think that even native born Americans have no fucking idea of how many different Americas exist, so, take my views of America with a giant grain of salt.
And yet somehow, with first 3/4 of this sentence, you've given a more accurate story about America than is almost ever provided!
Not only are we not all brand conscious, some of us are so brand-blind that we buy clothes with large ads printed all over.
I mean there's probably some correlation between arriving at this conclusion and the fact that most Americans establishing any sort of presence outside the US are probably influencers who are being bought to wear product. Hasan, for example, has a pretty decent user base outside the US, and literally wears nothing but designer clothing (which I always found comically ironic, given his political views).
I had a recent conversation with a colleague out of SE Asia and it was surprising to me how little access they have to a diversity of product. For example, I was describing my homelab which uses a lot of Minisforum hardware (mostly due to size constraints) and I found out that, despite literally being geographically closer, said product could not be purchased in their country. So I would imagine that leads to more homogenization than what might occur in the States. But that's just my ignorant conjecture.
> "What's great about this country is America started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest. You can be watching TV and see Coca-Cola, and you can know that the President drinks Coke, Liz Taylor drinks Coke, and just think, you can drink Coke, too. A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good.” - Andy Warhol
Unfortunately I think America is starting to lose this way a bit, with the influx of newer premium brands and the fracturing of American consumers into endless lifestyle personas. But there's still some truth left in it.
> where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest
To say that "the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest" by using Coke as an example is a significant oversimplification and is cherry picking examples to prove a point. The richest consumers buy plenty of consumer goods that the poorest cannot even dream of buying or even renting.
If there was a truffle-infused Coke with edible 24k gold flakes that cost 10x as much (and actually tasted good) you can be sure pretty much only the richest consumers would be drinking it, and that everyone who couldn't afford it would be doing everything in their power to keep up with the Joneses.
What percentage of "the poorest" own their own home or go on international trips more than once a year let alone owning multiple homes, luxury cars, and private jets?
Andy Warhol's quote is about aspiration and perceived attainment. The average person is not aspiring to drink a gold flake truffle-infused Coke.
The implication is the lack of a rigorous class hierarchy in America. Not that the rich don't live different lifestyles or consume more. But that niche luxury products were considered effete and un-American.
(Andy Warhol was almost certainly also being ironic - that the richest people in America publicly shared the same trashy taste as average Americans).
The closest analogue today might be an iPhone. Rich or poor, if you want the "best" phone you have an iPhone. Sure, there are gaudier and more expensive phones out there. But you're essentially using the same product as the richest Americans.
49 replies →
There was a time when some people were paying “10x” the price of regular water for “raw” water. It was stupid but there is little chance your average Jane and Joe on the street aspired to buy that water. Of anything it was a the butt of some of their jokes.
It's close to true about personal computers. The poorest can't afford Apple computers, but you don't need to be that rich to buy Apple hardware and what's up from that in terms of mainstream status? Nothing, as far as I can see. Specific groups might want a Framework laptop or System76, but those brands are invisible to most people, including, it seems, most rich people.
(And for servers and other business machines, well, other criteria apply, but owning something in the Top500 has to count for something in terms of prestige.)
Hey! The president eats BigMacs dontcha know!
Admittedly that’s because he’s an overgrown child, but what the hey.
> with the influx of newer premium brands and the fracturing of American consumers
I don't find it unfortunate, but I also think this is a bit of a misdiagnosis of the problem.
Coke is a bad example of this because it's mostly unchanged (and when they did try to change it, it became infamous. The "new coke" change). For almost all other american consumer products, the old time well known brands have decided to cut corners and cheap out on production. It's particularly obvious with restaurants where so many of the old chains have moved over to pre-prepped microwaved foods instead of actually cooking in house.
Americans have learned that brands can't be trusted to maintain quality. If a company can get away with it, they'll use any sort of deception to raise the price or cheap out on the ingredients. And they relied heavily on "it's X brand" to keep selling the lower quality goods.
That, IMO, is what's driven americans to brand fracture. People have learned that for a lot of clothing there's no difference between what they get from Temu and what they get from Old Navy. In fact, there's a real good chance those goods were made in the same factory.
American capitalism, for all its defects, was always a mass oriented endeavour in constrast with Continental Europe.
The mantra was sell more, more, more and more, and to do that, you need to sell things to poor people to. A French enterpreneur would be happy selling phones only for the upper middle class and above. In America the idea was to install as many landlines as possible and gain with scale.
Exactly. The deeper wisdom is that the current bifurcated US economy reveals the malaise at the heart of modern America.
When a company can make more profit by catering to the ultra-rich-only than selling a quality mass-market product at a reasonable price to masses, that says a lot about the economic segmentation of those masses.
> American capitalism, for all its defects, was always a mass oriented endeavour in constrast with Continental Europe.
I think it's important to call out that the "capitalism = more stuff" idea is a bit of historical revisionism.
Soviet leaders very specifically saw the goal of Communism was to create abundance and a post scarcity society. There are lots of quotes in particular from Khrushchev about this:
“The socialist system will outstrip capitalism in labor productivity. It will provide the people with more goods, more cultural benefits, and ensure a higher standard of living.”
“Communism is the highest form of organization of society for labor. On the basis of powerful productive forces, it ensures the highest productivity of labor and abundance of material and cultural values for the whole people.”
And it's worth pointing out that that this isn't a Soviet invention. Marx himself made it a central point that material deprivation was an ill (not a feature) of captialism:
"After the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly — only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety…”
“The possibility of securing for every member of society, by means of socialized production, an existence not only fully sufficient materially… but guaranteeing them the free development and exercise of their physical and mental faculties — this possibility is now for the first time here.”
When communist abundance failed to materialize, there was a concerted effort to reframe the promise of communism to be purely one of egalitarianism and turn overconsumption against the West as a criticism.
5 replies →
An Italian man once told me, "Coca-Cola is American champagne." Take it as you will.
I thought that was Miller High Life.
It's not the same, but concerts used to be affordable. Now they are insane. I'm incredibly fortunate that I have a high paying job and can afford to go to shows if I wanted to but I refuse to pay these insane ticket prices. Same with sports. I no longer have any desire to go to an MLB game and get fleeced with a $15 bud light. I'll go to some minor league game in a shitty stadium with no special amenities and enjoy a baseball experience. We are at the breaking point and it's showing.
the minor league stadiums i've been to in Texas were on par with the mega stadiums, just smaller (and cheaper!)
you'll get a kick out of this. one concrt hall i went to recently was charging THIRTY THREE DOLLARS for a single shot of Whistle Pig. Not even the good stuff.
Earlier today I read how World Cup resale tickets are dropping below face value for many of the upcoming matches. This evening I read that FIFA tripled the price for the best seats. Bifurcation indeed.
> Unfortunately I think America is starting to lose this way a bit, with the influx of newer premium brands
Witness Erewhon fruit juices/smoothies.
Andy Warhol was an apologist for the toxic consumer culture in the US. It’s a big part of why he was so successful.
Coke is a great example. There’s no product more useless and unnecessary than that flavored fizzy sugar water. Or should I say, high fructose corn syrup water. If you drink it, why? Probably because you were indoctrinated since childhood. Same goes for pretty much all fast food. There’s nothing good or desirable about any of it unless you’ve been indoctrinated into thinking that.
Modern US coke doesn't taste much like the coke I drank growing up (late 70s, early 80s, before they switched over). I remember drinking "a perfect coke" on a hot day, it tasted almost "botanical". These days, the closest thing I can find is Mexican Coke (which they sell at Costco), it's a lot dryer (less sweet) tasting to me than US coke.
Sometimes on a hot day for the short period the kid's napping I find myself at Home Depot searching for this or that tired from the work week under pressure as the clock ticks down having no idea what I'm doing and I make it to checkout tired no exhausted and I see the ice cold cooler the Coke its last moments before it's soaked with condensation open the door scan it rush to the car twist it open it screams wow sometimes there's nothing like an ice cold Coke.
10 replies →
> There’s nothing good or desirable about any of it unless you’ve been indoctrinated into thinking that.
Ah, that's too harsh.
Sugar water tastes good. Fast food is made quickly and it tastes good. There's no "indoctrination" that happens to make people realize that.
I agree that coke has 0 nutritional value. However, the flavor is agreeable to most people.
1 reply →
Coke Classic is much better as a cooking ingredient than it is a soft drink, IMO. Diet Coke is a different matter for me.
To add to your point: Someone should let the author know that considering oneself informed and taste-driven is itself cheugy. The performative aspect is the essence of cheug. So I hope he was being ironic.
Costco itself, in a way, is a sort of Wittgenstein's ladder, or Wittgenstein's warehouse, because eventually you realize that everything sold under the Kirkland label is just a de-badged top brand. If you still reach for brand names for staple goods at Costco knowing full well the Kirkland product is either the same or superior, then you know that the shadows of brand names still haunt you and occlude your sight. When you are able to escape these shadows and see the sun, then you are free.
While true concerning the quality of Kirkland brand, sometimes there are still differences that can matter. I love the Kirkland bacon but they don't sell a thick cut version (at least at my Costco) so sometimes I buy the "brand name" instead.
That's interesting. Where I live, the thing that sticks out in my mind the most about buying Kirkland bacon from Costco, is how ridiculously thick-cut it is. It's literally the thickest bacon I've ever encountered lol
You are correct, I may have exaggerated a bit.
> but in my travels and international business experience I wouldn’t even rank Americans in the top 10 for integrating brands and identity.
You can't just say this and leave us hanging. Which countries?
>build identities through [...] purchasing habits
> foreign concept for many of us who seek out the best product or deals for each purchase and will change brands in an instant
But you are, yourself, defining yourself partially here through your own purchasing habits. In fact you are doing it to a far more universal degree than most of the ones you criticize.
Not that I'm immune to it, but nor do I claim to be. I think it's useful signal just like anything else. Watch: My quintessential American habit is that I wear roughly the same nondescript black T shirt, black boxer briefs, black socks, and maybe an unlabeled black hoddie that I purchase off of Amazon, mostly just sorting by ratings. If at any point I reach into my closet and the stock-flow system that is my laundry habits have deemed it such that I am actually out of stock of any of these items, I immediately go to Amazon and purchase another 6- or 4- or 12-pack. If you feel you understand me better as a person after reading all that, you probably do.
Exposing my superficiality, perhaps: but it pains me that you don't wear pants.
Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
You mean leg prisons?
Where?
I feel like logos are 100% done now.
The best clothes here in Sweden, from our own Swedish brands, have no logos. And have not been for a long time. Scandinavian minimalism and quality is the best.
Asia is the one obsessed with brands. Europe is not. We care about quality.
But quality is strongly associated with brand. Showing off the logo might be taboo, but everyone can tell the difference between an IKEA kitchen and a Funkiskök.
> I know some will try to turn this into a criticism of Americans, but in my travels and international business experience I wouldn’t even rank Americans in the top 10 for integrating brands and identity.
Can you give a few examples of those brand-centric cultures? Which product categories do they follow? I've never seen anything like this, so if I were to go to one of the places that has this culture, I should probably know about it in advance.
China, India, Singapore, and Korea are a few off the top of my head.
The great thing about Costco is that everything they sell is reliably fine. Is it the best in the world? Probably not. But it's usually good. At worst it's average.
When I find myself reading Consumer Reports or The Wirecutter looking for "what is the best toothbrush" it's not that I actually need the best toothbrush. I'd be perfectly happy with a good toothbrush. What I'm trying to do is avoid spending a bunch of money on something that looked like a good option and turns out to be ineffective, unreliable, short-lived, or otherwise terrible. Most retailers are absolutely overrun with trash now.
Generally at Costco it's not a worry, if it's a crappy product they're not selling it.
This right here, other places have a store brand that can be good or mixed, as well as just plain trash in the aisles.
You know it's decent at Costco or you can return it in a few months when it craps out.
Meanwhile every other large retailer is trying to turn into a copy of Amazon where anyone can sell anything with no quality control
This is how I approach Costco. Everything there will meet a minimum standard, so I'm more willing to try something new. Also, the prices will pretty much always be fair. Could I track down a better deal somewhere else? Possibly but I usually don't want to expend that extra effort to save a buck or two.
It sounds like you’ve just been around toxic and superficial people in your international travels and then extrapolated from them to their whole countries.
Unfortunately, they have people like that everywhere.
Not necessarily.
South Korea is one example that I have intimate knowledge of where one's consumer habits (the clothes one wears, the car one drives, the logo on one's handbag) is the ultimate signal of status.
You're automatically pre-judged by complete strangers without having to say a single word.
There are always exceptions to the rule, but it is in fact an unspoken rule over there.
The same is true in India. I live in the US, and when I visit relatives in India, they are nonplussed that I can afford a fancier car but choose to drive a Toyota. Clothes, watches, my phone brand - everything is under constant analysis and people feel free to comment on everything. I am used to it now but it gets tiring.
5 replies →
are you not describing "toxic and superficial" ? I specifically take issue with pre-judgement based on clothes, cars, and logos.
2 replies →
Nope, the US (especially the West Coast and Mountain States) is extremely non superficial in certain very odd ways: * Almost nobody cares what kind of car you drive. The richest people I know literally don't care and drive Subarus and Toyotas and Ford pickups. * Nobody cares about watches or jewelry. * Clothing? It's literally Costco or Walmart for people I know who have tons of money. Unless their wives/gfs/bfs/husbands buy them something fancy for their birthday. * Fancy wines and liquor? Wines yes, scotch yes. But it's not outrageous.
The things where you notice the money are private planes and nice houses/apartments (and multiples thereof) and art. And perhaps caring even less what people think of them.
In mountain states everything exposed to nature is just beaten into an average. The environment is so harsh it makes sense things affected aren’t much of a status symbol or at least don’t remain one for long hah.
1 reply →
I don't think much of class, but caring about brands is low class behavior (present in both the poor and the rich).
[dead]
Nobody is going to come to your funeral and tearfully wail that you had fabulous taste in handbags.
Brands may serve as camouflage when you're trying to conform, but conforming is not an identity. Your identity is based on what you create, not what you consume.
Depends on which funerals you go to.
I've absolutely heard eulogies that talk about stylish grandma was up to the very end. The could go on about how she never left the house without looking like she could have been ready for a photo shoot. How she brightened every gathering she was a part of, and even had this marvelous ability to pick the perfect accessories, including -- yes -- handbags.
You seem to be conflating two things that are different -- "fabulous taste", and "conforming/consuming". Putting together and accessorizing an outfit is an act of creation. Looking sharp is usually quite the opposite of conforming.
Remember that when you dress with style, you're brightening the day of the people who look at you, like a walking work of art. Some people look at it as vain, but other people understand it's making the world a more pleasant place, just like good manners or a helping attitude. If you can appreciate the way a tasteful statue adorns a park, you can appreciate the way a tasteful outfit -- handbag included -- does the same.
But, I won't be there to see how they feel about me at my funeral. I'm here now, to see how they treat me. So yes, doing things to conform / be one of the crowd may not be what people remember you for... but it may be what impacts your daily life.
Just an observation. My computer bag is older than most of my coworkers.
Disguises can be very useful, but one should be wary of becoming their disguise.
(If you're having to say this to someone, I suspect you are wasting your breath.)
> It’s a foreign concept for many of us who seek out the best product or deals for each purchase and will change brands in an instant if another company releases a better product.
Perhaps those folks found certain brands regularly have decent (enought) quality and stick with them, and/or they have a personal aesthetic that they've developed that may be 'limited' to certain brands.
Some folks also don't want to go through the effort of constantly/regularly (re-)evaluating things: they've found that Brand X gives them enough quality/value, and have stopped looking.
> Some folks also don't want to go through the effort of constantly/regularly (re-)evaluating things: they've found that Brand X gives them enough quality/value, and have stopped looking
This argument stops holding water when those same people start judging other people for not also using Brand X.
> It’s a foreign concept for many of us who seek out the best product or deals for each purchase and will change brands in an instant if another company releases a better product.
For those of us who grew up in the era of the "Are you a Mac or a PC" [1], many Americans are intimately familiar with the concept of brand identity.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_a_Mac
Mac, yes. But I feel like being a "PC user" was never a coherent social identity. People use PCs for various reasons, usually pragmatic.
(Reflecting on it, I don't think I ever knew anyone who was "loyal" to Microsoft, or, dare I say, even particularly liked them as a company. At least certainly not the way people like Apple.)
In that sense, I feel as though Apple is the exception that proves the rule. There are really (almost) no other brands in Americans' everyday lives that elicit such a strong brand identity.
There are certain cases where brand attachment is stronger, but overall brand attachment in the US is pretty weak.
Heh, I haven't seen it myself, but I'm suddenly reminded about derision for having blue (or was it green?) bubbles.
-- I actively seek out the Kirkland clothes.
South Korea?
> Some people are proud of their Audi or designer bag, but I rarely run into situations where I’d be judged for arriving in a sensible Subaru instead of a Mercedes.
I agree. You can go into Costco and see a store full of individuals who happen to be shopping at Costco that day, or you can go to Costco and see the same people as slaves to an imagined Costco lifestyle that you can then write about for 800 words. It says more about the author than the shoppers. This article is the worst kind of lifestyle trend engineering.
Slaves to an imagined Costco lifestyle? That's not the vibe I picked up from the article at all.
I enjoyed reading about the writer realizing he's turning into his father and taking photos of things his dad used to buy to share with his mom. He spots people that may be falling in love. Clumsy people apologizing to nobody. He counts eight different languages.
I thought it was charming and a little nostalgic.
I would agree. The implicit (or actually pretty explicit in a couple of sentences) class disdain is so tiring.
You should probably read the whole article. Those sentences are dripping with irony that is entirely wrung out of them when they are quoted here.
But there's a cult following for various Costco products including food. The frozen croissants, the ~$5 rotisserie chicken, the vodka. The generic clothes items, shirts, socks etc. The pizza.
I don't even have a Costco membership! Maybe this is a Socal/urban thing?
In any case, I think you're overthinking it, people love Costco.
[dead]