Wisdom from the Web: "owning a Mac = getting owned"

I don't like to be manipulated. I try to be wary of the ways that ads and commercials seek to shape my attitudes and choices. But Apple totally has me in its back pocket. I love Macs for their performance, but I have to admit I also love the "metaphysical mystery of cool" (113). Even before reading Nakamura's chapter 3, I had often discussed with my husband the new Apple ads, which began after Nakamura submitted her final manuscript (reference our discussion last week) and which are entirely predicated on the "cool" factor. Some of the ads don't actually say anything about the performance of Macs, but they make other computers look silly, old, uptight, unhip, and boring simply by juxtaposing young, nonchalant, hip-without-trying-too-hard "Mac" against bland, suited, older "PC." After reading Nakamura's discussion of the "'mojo' of blackness" and "Afro-futuristic visual culture" of The Matrix and Apple's iPod ads, I wondered if the "Mac vs PC" commercials would have worked or worked better with an African American playing the role of "Mac." Would this have critiqued whiteness in a similar manner as the Matrix movies? Are white Americans ready enough to align themselves with black "mojo" for the commercial to work? Buying into an idealized (and stereotyped) image of African Americans in order to enjoy a movie is one thing; identifying with and acting upon this identification (to go buy a Mac) is another. (By the way, I am by no means uncritical of this use of race to entertain and sell.)

This issue of identification is interesting to consider in relationship to race and interactivity. I wrote last week about examining the choices we make as we use/browse/manipulate the internet, and Nakamura writes about online communities that are formed by people who identify with one another on the basis of, for example, race (alllooksame.com) and gender/physical condition/life stage (pregnancy websites). How often are our choices as consumers and producers of digitality driven by our identifications? In what ways might this limit and/or increase the subversive potential of the internet? Apple.com encourages identification by asking its viewers, "Which Mac are you?" and by claiming, "Leopard has over 300 amazing new features. But most impressive, it just works the way you want it to" (italics added). But what if this backfires: What if the viewer doesn't identify? (keep reading)

When I couldn't get all the ads to play on the Apple website, a quick YouTube search revealed not only many of the original (pirated) commercials but also numerous spoofs, including one shown on David Letterman. Most interesting, in light of Nakamura's chapter 5 on the "Asian or Gay?" controversy, is a spoof entitled "Mac vs PC Parody: The Unspoken Message." (The beauty of this medium is that I don't have to explain it: Just click the link and watch it!) The poster, maddoxaom, explains, "I feel like I have to be gay to own one." The first few responses are fascinating, with such comments as: "iGay" from AcePilot101; "owning a Mac = getting owned" from noisecape; and a thread about Australian, Japanese, and American computers, which I couldn't follow. The most recent post (which is, minutes later, no longer the most recent) attempts to engage the parody on a more critical level as well as on a technical production level:

I own 6 PC's and 9 Mac's and just cannot find any humor or wits in this clip.

Is 'GAY'(hihihih, uptight, hihihi)still a topic for grown-up's? (hihihi 'GAY' hihihi)
Is it a topic still supposed of being capable to carry a funny plot? (hihihi 'GAY' hihihi)
Have I overlooked essentials?
Lousy below the line production, not less, not more, weak command of text. 10/5 on boredom. (hihihi 'GAY' hihihihi)

These parodies and resulting comments are producing, as Nakamura calls for, but what are they producing? And what are they reproducing? Are they producing openings for subverting the dominant consumer model of "cool" or are they reproducing other dominant systems of oppression (such as homophobia)? If I had more time and space, I would talk more about Kenneth Burke's definitions of identification, as well as Krista Ratcliffe's call for disidentification and non-identification as spaces in which to engage difference and practice genuine cross-cultural communication (Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness).

I think, by the way, that Apple is doing some of the "reenvisioning of what constitutes a 'major life activity' or salient 'information'" (182) that Nakamura suggests after outlining the Pew Foundation study that said minorities engage primarily in "Fun" activities. Several of the "Mac vs PC" ads juxtapose highly visual, highly social iLife activities—iChat, iPhoto, iMovie, etc.—against the business functions of Windows.