Here you are.
- The Matisse Aesthetic
Before heading off to burning man a couple weeks ago… I put the finishing touches on a blog for my friends Nicole and Zanetha Matisse and their company, Matisse Design Studio. It’s definitely still a work in progress… The look they wanted meant that I finally got to play around with watercolors (heavily inspired by Stina Persson, whose painting appears as the thumbnail image for the Matisses’ first post). Take a look: The Matisse Aesthetic.
A quote they have chosen from the Slow Food Manifesto as their first blog post pretty much sums up what the Matisse Aesthetic is about:
“May suitable doses of guaranteed sensual pleasure and slow, long-lasting enjoyment preserve us from the contagion of the multitude who mistake frenzy for efficiency.”
Good luck Matisses!
- SoupCycle Logo
I’m graduating this weekend from Bainbridge Graduate Institute.
Also graduating are Jed and Shauna, co-founders of Portland-based SoupCycle.
“Think delicious, warm, buttery saffron risotto soup personally delivered by bicycle to your front door. SoupCycle delivers locally-sourced, freshly made soups to homes and offices.”
It has been my privilege to have gotten to work with them on a logo for their new company:
Good luck Jed and Shauna!
- Small is the New Big
Small is the New Big is a book of blog posts by Seth Godin on marketing and keeping your story relevant (whether you’re a musician, an entrepreneur, a politician, etc.). Themes I noticed:
Blogging: Do it early and do it often (but not too often) and stay on top of the technology. Blogging is a conversation, he says, and can make or break a brand. It is also a great equalizer, leveling the playing field to the point that only ideas that are “remarkable”-that are worth talking about-get any air time or get spread. Godin has been blogging for a while, and has provocative tips on blogging. He distinguishes three types of blogs:
1) Cat blogs - where you talk about your boyfriend, your cat, etc.
2) Boss blogs - where your audience is clear and limited for a purpose (within an organization, for instance.
3) Viral blogs - blogs that are spreading ideas, linking to each other, and, according to Godin, “changing the face of marketing, journalism, and the spread of ideas.”Metaphoring: Godin doesn’t talk explicitly about metaphor, but most of his posts are themselves metaphors. It’s a great, simple tool for coming up with interesting things to write about. He’ll hear about something interesting or mundane, and then talk about how it or is not like (purple cows) (viral marketing) (authenticity) (marketing wants) (technology) (etc…). So simple. His background and his understanding of business and marketing are solid, but it’s how he tells a new story everyday to convey the same basic principles over and over that makes his blog remarkable. Each post looks at something he’s talked about before from a fresh new angle.
Storytelling: By using metaphors to expose new facets of his expertise, Godin is constantly telling stories. Each post is a story, and connects to the larger narrative of his work. By reading it for just a few days, you feel like you have a pretty good grasp of his voice, his punkish character, and yet you want to keep reading. And storytelling is key for companies in the new economy. Being authentic, being remarkable, and then telling your authentic story in a way that consumers find remarkable is the best way to compete.
Wanting: Over and over, Godin says things like “sell me what I want or I’m leaving.” Marketing is not about needs. It is about wants. It is about finding out what people want and giving it to them, nothing else. People want to be a part of a story. They will want to be a part of your story, if it’s a story worth telling.
- Connecting Buyers and Sellers Locally = Protectionism?
David Hsu at Complexcities recently pointed me to a dialog happening over on Grist on the whole “local” thing. It (along with its long trail of attendant comments) deserves some attention.
Doing this would leave America and the world desperately poor.
I’m not going to go too deep into analyzing Avent’s arguments, which are fairly well-reasoned but seem to miss the point.
First, few people are saying we must produce absolutely everything locally.
Second, there is a world of difference between putting barriers on trade and catering to consumer demand for locally produced goods while reaping the benefits of local production. While Avent admits the issues are “complex”, he conflates the very idea of “free trade” (which in our already very-planned economy means as few as barriers to trade as possible, but enough as necessary) with a style of production that is an intentionally myopic, globalized race-to-the-bottom. He implies we can’t have one without the other. . . If we’re “buying locally”, then we’re supporting “a world of regional trade blocs,” he implies, and giving up specialization of labor entirely.
Here: If consumers demand local stuff, so be it. Producers will then produce locally. But consumers can’t afford to buy local stuff if no one is working on ways of producing local stuff cheaply. But producers won’t work on ways of producing locally cheaply if consumers don’t demand it.
Demand = willingness + ability to pay. Businesses should say to their customers, “You work on the ability to pay part, I will try to make something you’re willing to pay for. I will devote myself to this place and time and do my damnedest to make something of lasting value.”
PSFK.com’s Guy Brighton puts it reasonably from a consumer’s perspective:
Maybe what we need to do is apply a level of common sense: ensure that we import enough to maintain a decent diet, avoid foods that would be out of season locally and choose local when offered the choice. ::link
The question is, then, is there inherent value in local production and local buying/selling. In other words, does it help your business do what it set out to do in the world to make, sell and buy locally? If your
business exist to serve a place and its people (financially and otherwise), then yes. You will have a deeper connection to your customers, grow their trust and loyalty, know their wants, and be able to respond more agilely to market changes (before your distant competition can bring something to market). You will know the cities and the lands around them, what is good or bad for them, and how it affects the people.
You will be the first company in your industry to go carbon neutral, and it will be cheaper because you don’t have to buy offsets for shipping. You will take advantage of the urban landscape, you will commute less, your designers, engineers, and manufacturers will know each other and communicate better, face-to-face. You will know where your materials come from, where they are taken and who assembles them into value-added goods. You will never accidentally have a sweatshop in your value-stream.Businesses serve their workers and their communities by serving their customers. They do a better job if all their workers and all their customers are in their communities.
Which leads me an open-ended question, posed by Avent:
If the world would be better off, if production would be more efficient, with more localized industry, then why aren’t companies already doing it?
American Apparel almost fits the bill, but they just have half the equation (in that they manufacture in the U.S. but ship worldwide). I’m going hunting for other success stories.
In summary: I’m definitely not saying we shouldn’t buy things from other countries. We will. And if we can make money making it better here, we will do that too.
(painting: Soutine)
- “Vanity + Sanity”: Tracking the Locally-Grown Clothing Movement
A couple days ago, I asked the question, “In what ways could we ‘grow clothing locally’?… What does a ‘100-mile closet’ look like?”
Sarah Rich at Worldchanging was asking the same question a year ago:
All of this ranting has led me to the question: What would a “100-mile wardrobe” look like? Most likely the fashion analogue wouldn’t actually be confined to a 100-mile radius, but how small a circle could we draw and still get the goods that make us feel good? It might not be a circle, since an apple is wonderful due to proximity and freshness while a sweater is wonderful due to the vision and inspiration of the designer. But even if the equivalent system is a more globally-distributed one, how can it decrease impact in a more whole-systems sense?
This echos some good feedback I got from Graham over at Transpacifica on my first 100milecloset post:
Now that doesn’t mean it’s ideal or ecological for us to ship in all our clothes from thousands of miles a way, but just like a 100-mile food radius, this works better in bountiful agricultural zones—say, California.
If we were to imagine widespread adoption of the locally-grown clothing concept, there would need to be some changes in the global economy. For one thing, subsidies and/or consumer choice would have to make it cost-effective to pay locals to work in textile factories. Textile industries that are key to the employment of large numbers of people in a variety of Asian countries would need to be replaced by other business.
Looking at ways to make clothing more environmentally friendly is a valuable pursuit. Since we can pretty much guarantee no huge number of U.S. consumers is going to jump on the train right away, this effort will likely help raise awareness and serve as a model that could pressure other clothing manufacturers to reduce shipping-based emissions. All the same, if this is too successful, it could have vexing (and fascinating) global repercussions. ::link
In my googlings on “100-mile wardrobe” I came across another instance of fashion following food: “slow fashion” (paralleling the “slow food” movement):
Slow Fashion is to clothing and design what slow food is to cuisine – natural, organic, ethical, local (where possible) and one-off designs with an emphasis on quality, and of course – taste. Slow Fashion means you can look fantastic and feel 100% guilt free. ::link
Vanessa Richmond at the Tyee’s got some good stuff on local clothes:
While reading the 100-mile diet series, I got to thinking about my other material indulgences. If food typically travels between 2,500 and 4,000 miles before it ends up on our plate, clothes are even farther wanderers. Hong Kong, where many of BC’s clothes are made, is 6378 miles (10,265 km) from Vancouver, and that’s not even counting
the distance the fabric travels to get from the mill to the factory, or the distance the fibers travel from their source to the mill.
Richmond points us to Angela Murrills, who coined “Slow Clothes” in 2004 in this article:
Take the freshness issue. There’s no question that when you buy Vancouver-grown, you’re getting concepts and ideas hot off the drawing board, designed last night and stitched up this morning. The new crop of designers just emerging from the schools is not just in lockstep with what’s happening, it’s ahead. This is design still with the dew on it, and, as with those Okanagan peaches, you know where it comes from. Buying mass-produced labels means you have no way of being sure that that T-shirt or pair of jeans wasn’t made by preschoolers in a Third World country. I’m not saying that there isn’t sweatshop labour in Canada–there is–but seeking out locally produced fashion does up the odds that the person who stitched that lapel or pocket (often the designers themselves) wasn’t working for peanuts.
Lastly, it turns out that Fashion High, part of the B.C. chapter of BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies) just hosted a “dress local” event, and has come up with the “dress local report card”:
Participating stores have to answer positively to three of the following questions to qualify for the Dress Local Campaign.
- Is your business locally owned?
- Where is the local content manufactured (B.C., Canada, China, etc.)?
- Are at least 50% of your store’s products designed locally?
- Are at least 50% of your store’s products made in Canada?
- Are the products created from sustainable or organic fabrics?
The Stranger’s Line Out reminds us that Vancouver, Seattle and Portland (a.k.a. “the realm of the three kingdoms”) should “be experienced as one urban realm”…
…but I may have to host a “dress local” event here in Seattle (with BALLE Seattle, of course)…
- Mankiw’s Economics: Translated, and Animated
Yoram Bauman, one of my economics professors at BGI last year, is the world’s first and only stand-up economist. Watch him talk about Greg Mankiw’s “Principles of Economics: Translated”:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVp8UGjECt4[/youtube]
Relatedly, I’ve been watching Mankiw’s blog, and came across this, by a group of Harvard students, called “Principles of Economics: Animated”:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSaFAEJHJKw[/youtube]
- carrot/rope
“Finally, fresh, organic and locally grown clothes!” says Alex Lau (sarcastically?).
Consumers demanded fresh food before they understood what organic food was. Then we wanted local and fair trade food, or better yet, direct trade. Now we’re starting to see that clothing can be organic. But “locally grown” clothing? Even when the Economist tackles the question of whether ’tis nobler to shop locally, it’s just talking about food.
If what we eat is good for us and also our community, shouldn’t what we wear also be?
Just because most of what we wear is grown and manufactured overseas doesn’t mean it has to be that way. American Apparel has branded itself as “brand-free, sweatshop-free,” “made in downtown L.A.” and “vertically integrated manufacturing,” and at least some of their organic cotton comes from California. As the largest textile manufacturer in the U.S., the impact would be huge if they supported California agriculture by sourcing local (think of all the green-collar jobs). But if they’re going public, will that be an option?University of Vermont associate professor of environmental studies Stephanie Kaza, in describing a project by then-student Stevia Morton, says:
“‘Buying local’ is now a common phrase among those concerned about sustainability, but usually we think of it as applied to food,” explains Morton’s advisor, Stephanie Kaza, associate professor of environmental studies. “Stevia’s project raises the possibility of buying local in clothing — something almost impossible in the United States. Her work is on the forefront of what I hope will be an emerging values movement in support of locally grown clothing. Offering this alternative is one way to voice concern for sweatshop labor, corporate control of production and fashion homogenization.” ::link
Playing on the “100-mile diet” (the idea of only eating foods grown within a hundred miles of your table), Obviously.ca gets credit for coining the phrase “100-mile closet.” And just as the 100-mile diet is an impossibility for most of us on the planet, but serves as a standard to measure against, the 100-mile closet (the idea of a wardrobe packed with locally sourced and manufactured clothes) gives us the mental framework on which to “hang up” all the clothes we’ve ever owned. It gives us something to look for when we shop that we’ve never looked for before.
I’d love to find out who is actually working on making it happen.
Over the next months, as part of marketing and entrepreneurship classes at BGI, I’ll be exploring these ideas. I’m going to use this blog (the 100milecloset category, to be specific) as a space to explore what it means to start a company focused on “fresh, organic and locally grown clothes.” Between the food system and the clothing system, between textiles and consumables, the line is blurrier than we should think.
Also, I bought 100milecloset.org… now what can I put there?
100-mile music: “By Night into Paradise” by Victoria B.C. band Chet.
- “A club with continuing benefits”
Radiohead caused a stir recently by self-releasing their new album “In Rainbows” online, and charging whatever the buyer was willing to pay. Links and clippings on What Radiohead Did:
• Seth Godin on The truth about Radiohead
1.2 million albums sold, $8 each, no middleman, one week: Radiohead Kicks the Middleman to the Curb.
The thing to keep in mind is this: the value of the permission. The fact that the group now has more than a million people they can go make music for is worth many times over what these people already paid. If they’re smart, they’ll continue to change the way they work. Paying for their mp3s should get you into a club, a club with continuing benefits.
• Radiohead’s Warm Glow in the New York Times
I didn’t pay anything to download Radiohead’s “In Rainbows” last Wednesday. When the checkout page on the band’s Web site allowed me to type in whatever price I wanted, I put 0.00, the lowest I could go. My economist friends say this makes me a rational being… One could argue that rationality isn’t everything.
• NPR’s For What It’s Worth, with Tyler Cowen
It’s about signaling. It’s about proving to yourself that you’re really a fan. It’s as if you would sleep on the pavement to line up for tickets in advance. It’s about conspicuous consumption. So it’s a way of identifying yourself with Radiohead, a cool band, more than ever before.
So if someone this time around is paying 40 dollars for the new Radiohead, if Radiohead were to try the same business model next time, the same person might feel they had already signaled and not pay anything at all or pay a very small amount.
And if consumers felt that every time they wanted music they were asked, how much are you donating?, how much are you donating?, this would get on their nerves. It would be a kind of overload. And what people then tend to do is just shut the whole thing out and they do what they want, and they don’t tend to give very much at all.
To some extent, Cowen is right, consumers will act differently the next time around—they will pay less. But I’d bet they will still pay, even after the novelty wears off.
Radiohead is taking advantage of the Wealth of Networks, which is, to appropriate Godin’s words, already “a club with continuing benefits.” It’s just that members declare themselves unofficially and receive their “warm glow” benefits as they please.
“If they’re smart, [Radiohead] will continue to change the way they work,” says Godin. Giving away your album is the first step. How about giving away some of the profit you made from those who did pay? Would people be more likely to pay for the album (or pay more) if part of the profit went back to a nonprofit or school of their choice? I could pay $0, or I could pay $10 for “In Rainbows”. If I was willing to pay $10 in the first place, I bet I’d be happy to pay $12 if 10% was going to end poverty here in Seattle. Local benefits, distributed philanthropy, and artists get paid for making it happen. A jigsaw falling into place.
[update: stats on What Radiohead Did]
- My b-school is a d-school
“Business Week Names BGI One of the ‘Top Design Schools’ in the World”
BusinessWeek’s full list of top design schools.
BusinessWeek’s profile of BGI alum, David Smith.
BusinessWeek’s full article.
BusinessWeek’s methodology.Press Release after the break. (more…)
- onset of chaos / edge of chaos
School has begun.
Projects are unfolding, vertically integrating, and squeezing novelty out of magic. My notes from the residency are cryptic:
• Idea for a business: Too much change in too short a time
• Idea for a business: Magnificat
• Idea for a business: Recycled conduit metaphors.
• Idea for a business: Value = limits on boundlessness. That is, choices become easy or disappear.
• Idea for a business: 1) Agitate the images. 2) Shaken awake from the restless sleep of images. 3) Decisive variation, novelty, values.
• Essay idea: “Why art and business must consume each other.”• Trust the shape changer (written on a large work in pastels)
• Bona fide (”in good faith”) activist-in-residence Bill Grace: “You can either look good, or learn publicly.” “Form a relationship with someone suffering because of the way things are.”I will need clients and contracts soon.
