3 Comments October 15th, 2008

Blog Action Day: Poverty

Tagged: , ,

Today is Blog Action Day and this year’s topic is Poverty. Since I’ve recently written about poverty directly, today I’ll be more lateral:

Today I am wearing:

  1. Cotton American Apparel T-Shirt (with print-design from Woot!)
  2. Denim Banana Republic Jeans
  3. Saucony Synthetic Running Shoes
  4. Old Navy Underwear
  5. Hanes Cotton Socks
  6. Leather Belt purchased from Brooklyn St. Fair with Levi’s Metal Belt Buckle
  7. Penguin Lambswool Sweater

Undead hd Swarmed film

Discussion Set 1: What types of information have I included in this list? What have I omitted? What types of information would you have included (or omitted)? Why?

Discussion Set 2: In my clothing, what could I have done differently, within the broad context of poverty? Why?

Discussion Set 3: How have you approached this exercise: Realistically, Positively, Pessimistically, Cynically, Pragmatically, Comprehensively, Reductionistically, etc? How did the context or presentation of this exercise affect how you did (or did not) perform it? How might someone else approach this exercise and why?

Discussion Set 4: Is this an appropriate exercise for addressing poverty?

Related posts:

  1. Academia on the experience of poverty It takes a lot of words for academia to say “We’re can’t describe the experience of poverty”. This is from...
  2. Poverty mythology Two beautifully worded comments from Gift Hub on Wage Theft: the first because of its vulgar revelry; the second for...

3 Responses to “Blog Action Day: Poverty”

Denise on October 15th, 2008

ps: bullshit because it’s such a one-dimensional approach to environmentalism in particular, ethics in general.

Cheryl on October 15th, 2008

one thing you’ve omitted: how you obtained the clothes. i am wearing banana republic pants today too. mine came from a thrift store, maybe yours did too. or were a gift.

Denise on October 15th, 2008

Thanks, Ben. I’ve always wanted to know what brand of underwear you wear.

On a more serious note, if I didn’t know you’re probably not making a billionaire’s salary at the CTC Vista Project, I would say that your threads on this one day of 365 shows you’re quite the spender. But because I do, I think it’s a pretty good example of Americans’ tendency to be conspicuous spenders.
Probably the best we could do as Americans to address poverty while also feeding consumption is really just to research the companies we go to. My theory as to why even the most conscientious of us don’t is that more often than not, we bargain so much of ourselves (staking out personality, status, economic wealth) with brands rather than quality or craftsmanship. We project and equivocate meaning with brands, and researching our producers limits our expression. If given a choice, we’d rather that our companies had ethical business practices (i.e.: Banana Republic’s green collection, bullshit of course), but otherwise the whole thing reminds me of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” There’s a suspicion that so many companies don’t have ethical business practices that researching and making personal decisions about companies takes on the same weight as seriously considering religion.
I recently heard that when visiting a nonprofit’s page asking for donations, Americans are more likely to donate if the picture and caption is of one person instead of thousands. Why? Because Americans relate to individuals rather than masses. It’s an interesting idea to project into clothing and global poverty: Maybe the reason we don’t wonder about how our choices affect poverty is because we find it easier to relate to and relay ourselves through clothes than the tailors behind all our brands.
To end, I do wonder if that whole “they would have done the same” argument would fly if we were the impoverished country and a more community-based country were the superpower.

Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)