Idea Transcript
zt5
Editorial
Postmodernism and the marketing lmaglnary Alladi Venkateshu, John F. Sherry,Jr. b and A. Fuat Frrat " o Uniuersityof Califumia-Iruine, Iruine, CA 92717,USA and OdenseUniuersiu, DK-5230 OdenseM, Denmark b Northwestem Uniuenity, Euarcto4 IL ffi201, USA 'Arizona State Uniuersity West,Phoenix,AZ 85069,USA
The year is 1961.Michel Foucaulthasjust publishedwhat would later become one of the most influential books of the postwar era, Histoire de la folie a I'age classique (Madnessand Ciuilization).Foucaultwas accompaniedby severalcontemporarythinkers many of whom are now householdnamesDeleuze, Guattari, Derrida, Lyotard, Baudrillard, Kristeva,Harraway,Debord, Jameson and others.In their writings,we see the beginningsof the postmodernistand poststructuralist revolution. The world .hasn't been the same since then-except in fields like marketing and managementwhich have been slow to awakento this revolution. Much can be said of a special issue on postmodernismand marketing,but nothing standsout more fittingly than the fact that the lead has been taken by a scholarlyjournal from Europe-fittingly because,Europe Correspondence to: Alla(f Venkatesh, University of California-Iwine, Irvine, CA 9271,7,USA, or Odense University, DK-5230 OdenseM. Denmark. Intern. J. of Researchin Marketing10 (1993)215-223 North-Holland
was, after all, the cradle of modernism,and is now of postmodernism.In desperationas much as in justifiable confusion,somebody recentlyremarkedthat we seemto be living in an era of "post-everything," therebyimplying that any attention paid to anything that has the prefix "post" shouldbe viewed with suspicion.Alas, this may be true of many"posts,"but, certainly,not all of them, for some "posts" deserveto be taken seri(1991,Ch. 1) so eloously.As Featherstone quentlydemonstrated,anyonewho considers postmodernisma passingfancy will do so at considerableperil to oneself and needs to examineone's intellectualposition before it is too late. This is particularly applicableto thosein the marketingprofession,for isn't it a fact that the marketing discipline prides itself in being the vanguardof changeand new ideas? We believe that the postmodernist discourseprovides such an opportunity. It is no mere coincidencethat the three of us, editors of this specialissue,have joined together in bringing out this issue.Our recent writings have delved into postmodernism and its relevanceto marketing and consumer behavior (Frrat, 1990, 1991, 1992; Frrat and Venkatesh,in press;Sherry,L990; Venkatesh, 1989, 1990, 1992). (See also Mourrain, 1989; Ogilvy, 1990; and Scott, 1992.)We havearticulatedits basicpremises, conceptsand applications,but thesewritings are scatteredthroughouta varietyof publica-
0167-8116/93/$06.00 O 1993- ElsevierSciencePublishersB.V. All rightsreserved
A Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary Table I Relative emphases in modernism and postmodernism Modernist emphasis
Postmodern emohasis
Object C a r t e s i a ns u b j e c t Cognitive subject Unified subject Centered subject
Image, symbol Symbolic subject Semiotic subject Fragmented subject Decentered subject
Signified Objectification Representation Truth (objective)
Signifier Symbolization Signification Truth (constructed)
Real Universalism Society as a structure
Hyperreal l-ocalism, particularism Society as a spectacle
l,ogocentric reason Knowing
Hermeneutic reason Communicating
Economy Capitalism Economic systems Production Shift from use value to exchangevalue Science/Technology Mechanical technology
Culture Late capitalism Symbolic systems Consumption Shift from exchangevalue to sign value Science/Technology Digital/Communicative technology Humanities Globalism Feminism/Genderism Multiculturalism, globalism
Sciences Euro-American centrism Phallocentrism Orientalism, colonialism
tion outlets. For reasonsof space we are unable to repeat all the ideas discussedearlier, but urge interestedreadersto become familiar with them for they providethe foundational ideas for the various articles included here. This does not mean that the uninitiated readerswill get no help from the articlesincluded in the presentissuewhich, of course,contain many of the central ideas. It is just that their understandingwill be made richer through a wider exposure.For easyreference,basedon previousliterature and the articlesincludedhere,we havesummarized some important distinctions between modernism and postmodernism in Table 1. We have also includedExhibit 1 to familiarizethe readerswith some frequently used terminologywithin the postmodernist
discourse.Readersare further encouragedto make note of the referencesunder various articles included in this issuefor additional reading. Postmodernism, alongwith poststructuralism, representsthe most fundamentaldevelopment in the history of ideas in the recent decades.Although its origins can be traced to the fields of architectureand art during the 1920sand 1930s,it is only in the last decadeor two that it has gained a momentum of a revolutionarynature and made an impact on numerousdisciplines.During the late sixties and seventies,the explosion of postmodernistand poststructuralist ideasfirst occurred in areas such as literary theory, cultural studiesand philosophy,and, consequently, the fields with which we are most concerned,the social sciences(economics, sociologyetc.), managementand marketing have remained largely unaffected by the forces of postmodernism(for an exception, see Journal of OrganizationalChangeManagement,vol. 5, no. 1). These fields can no longerremain immune,and what is now perceivedas inevitablecan be explainedby the fact that postmodernismdealsboth with the basicphilosophicaland culturalpremisesthat underlie social scientific assumptionsand with the foundationalideas surroundingour notionsof socialand economicreality (ontology).It treatsour knowledgestructures(epistemology),as well as our conceptualizations of the individual subjectivity(e.g., the consumer).It is also concernedwith social formation (e.g.,markets).Further, the international impact of the postmodernethosgrows with each passingyear. On the free-floating level of massmediatedglobal consumerculture proper (Featherstone, 1991),on the locally anchored dialectical extremesof such hyperindustrialsocietiesas Japan (Miyoshi and Harootunian, 1989), and on Islamic countries in the throes of "development" (Ahmed, 1992),postmodernityexercisesits influence. It is no longer, and may never
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
have been, strictly speaking, a principally Western phenomenon.The transmutations that it undergoesas it passesthrough customs,reflectingand refractingoff of the hall of mirrors that is intercultural communication, pose a challengeto marketingresearch. As it will becomeevidentfrom the articles included in this issue,postmodernismis not a synonym for postpositivismor interpretivism for these two conceptsare very much embedded within the discourse on modis not a methodology ernism.Postmodernism nor is it merely a set of techniquesfor research.It is a cultural and philosophicaldevelopmentthat has far reachingimplications for our notions of ontology and epistemology. Naturally, we will be forced to develop new methods and tools based on new conceptions of reality. While the debates on postpositivismand interpretivism are certainly relevant,they fall within the generally acceptedparadigmsof modernism and the establishedcanons of social sciences,and thus cannotbe consideredas offering fundamental shifts in our visions or world view. Postmodernistdebates,on the other hand, haveoriginatedoutsidethe socialsciences, in literary theory, linguistics, feminist theory, art and architecture,cultural studies,intellectual history, continental philosophy and other sub-disciplines within humanities,and hence have largely been excludedfrom the purviewof our familiar boundariesof debate within marketing. Postmodernismis closely related to poststructuralismand deconstructionism. each of which form the basis for somereigningcontemporarypositionsin philosophyand cultural studies. The implicationsof postmodernistdevelopments for marketing and marketing researchare severaland profound. First, postmodernismis concerned with lived experiencesand fragmented realities, spectaclesand visualizations,non-linearcontours in time and space,none of which can be captured in the objectified formulations
217
of establishedresearchin the socialsciences. Besides objects and objectifications,postmodernismrecognizesthe existenceof symbols,images,myths,narratives,fantasies,and micro-levelpractices-a world rich in possibilities, all of which are equallyimportant in understandingour lifeworlds. Second, postmodernismemphasizesculture over economy,and consumptionover production as the site of contemporarydiscourse and human behavior.As a result of this emphasis,marketinghasbecomea prime topic for socialscientistsand philosophers.It is imperative that marketing and consumer researchdisciplinesbe reevaluatedand reconstructedfrom within, by their principal practitioners. As Featherstone(1991) obseryesin connectionwith his analysisof consumer culture and postmodernism,"[The questionis], how is it that the study of consumptionand culture-both incidentallyuntil recently previouslydesignatedas derivative, peripheraland feminine, as againstthe more masculine sphere of production and the economy-are granteda more important place in the analysisof social relations and culturalrepresentations? ...This problem... is central to the understandingof postmodernism." (p. viii) That postmodernismprovides the framework for studying consumerism while at the same time consumerismbecomesa metaphorfor postmodern life is the intriguing idea raisedin these specialissues. Third, our basic assumptionsof what a consumeris and how he or she is constituted require a radical modification. So do our notions of "markets" and "products" and other basic categoriesthat we deal with in our daily discourse.We have to begin to addressthe issue of consumersas cultural and historical productsconstitutedby institutional mechanismsand power relationships in which marketingactorsand actionsplay a vital role. Theseactorsincludepractitioners who are busyconstructingand creatingcon-
218
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
sumersand marketswhile proclaimingat the samethat they in no way shapeor influence consumerwantsand needs.Marketing scholars-many of whoseintellectualpositionsare ideologicallymotivatedbut are concealedbehind the facadesof disinterestedpursuit of knowledge-and marketing researcherswhose relentlesspursuit involvesthe discovery of new methodsand technologiesto disassembleand transform the consumerwhile they are ostensiblyengagedin objectiveanalyses of "pure d2[n"-21s also included givesall of amongthe actors.Postmodernism us an opportunity to be honest with ourselves,to discard our pretenses,to climb down from our pedestalsand be both selfcritical and celebratory. Fourth, we need also to examinethe nature of marketingresearchitself, both as an activity of information gathering and in its relationshipto other institutionalmanifestations of control, persuasionand marketing seduction. If we are (following Jameson, 1991) to redeem the critiques of consumption and commodificationfrom the realm of the merely moral and restore them to the properlyradical,and push beyonda nihilistic assault(Miller, 1987)on the globalizationof consumption,we will require researchinto all the processesand stakeholdersthat comprise contemporarymarketing. Fifth, marketing researchneed no longer be confined to the presentationof tables, equations and figures, or remain obsessive about reliabilitiesand validities.Its presentational forms could range from poetry to scientific discourse,from narratives, descriptions,story-tellingto visualand symbolicrepresentations.We haveonly to take a moment to examine how imaginatively advertisers promote their products, how packagesare created and semiotically positioned, how consumerimagesare fragmentedand transported the world over, and how shopping environments are displayed and visually transformed(Wernick, 1991).No amount of
scientifictraining alone givesus the capacity to comprehensivelyanalyze these rich and varied marketing practices.We need to exploit language more powerfully and train ourselvesin symbolicforms of communication to understandand representthe world around us. This may be the only available avenuefor exploring in any holistic fashion such issuesas the phenomenologyof retail space(Jukes,1990).No wonder researchers in the fields of masscommunication,literary criticism, and critical ethnography have eclipsedthe typical marketing researcherin depicting and describingthe world of marketing.They not only seemto be sayingmore significantthings but their writings are certainly more interestingto read. The typical marketingresearcheris in dangerof becoming an agent of drudgery, a dry and an unimaginativeanalyst,wilfully fossilizedby a misguidedviewof significantresearch.Hasn't Holbrook (1990)askedus to be more lyrical? If we in marketing do not acceptnew challenges,we risk stagnation,fragmentation,and absorbtion into other disciplines.We certainly relinquishour claimsto relevance. Finally, in our modest effort to bring out this issue,we want to open up the possibilities for marketingwriters to think of alternative forms of representation,to exploretheir avenuesfully and without fear. We hope to encouragemarketers to adopt the multidimensional, multiperspectival approach to theory and practicethat the lifeworldsof our postmodern condition demand (Best and Kellner, 1991;Sherry,1990).Someof us are better with mathematicalequations,others are better at narratives. and still others amongus are paintersand poets.Quite a few of us are effective critics. Why should not marketing researchexplore these alternate forms of depiction?After all, isn't that what the practice of marketing is all about? Colors, fictitious imaginaries,impossibledreams and pure fantasies?Let us remember that consumersare much more varied in the tools
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
that they employ to understand the world around them, and there is no reasonwhy we as researchersshould limit our tools. Researchersshould not be restrictedby frameworks, but liberated by frames of mind. We should not be merely writing researchproposals,reports,and findings.We shouldembody our varied understandingsof marketplace phenomenain as plastic an array of media as our talents permit. We must learn to hallow alterity (Harvey, 1989; Taussig, 1993),not merely managediversity.Let us explode the modernist myth and celebrate what we find meaningfulin postmodernism. As in the caseof any discourse,however, one may find it necessaryto tread the space cautiously and critically, yet, as postmodernism invitesus to do, wittily and playfully. The work we have chosenfor this and the upcoming special issue on Postmodernism, Marketing and the Consumer represents a cross-section of theseorientations.We hope that this collectionwill contributeto the rethinking of marketing that momentouscultural transformationsdemand.The two special issuesprimarily representa collaboration acrossthe Atlantic, between North American and European colleagues.Even so, a pictorial contribution from a colleague in SoutheastAsia appearsin the upcomingspecial issue. Clearly, other vehicles must be sought to throw open the discourseto conversationamong colleaguesfrom all around the world. Somewhatparadoxically,new integrativetechnologiesof simulatedpresence and image construction that are currently under control of "advancedtechnology"centers may also present the potential of cultural appropriationby many "capillaries" to be resignifiedin the use of exactlysuchconversation.In fact, future "conversations"may take place on line and on screen,as well as in virtual sharedspace,rather than in print. In this issuewe presentthree poems and six papers.The first poemby Sherryexplores the cultural comminglingof sacredand pro-
219
fane dimensionsof consumerexperience.The paper by Frrat and Venkateshand the paper by Scott both explore the conceptualissues related to postmodernculture with specific implications regarding marketing and marketinglanguage.The paperby Belk and Bryce is another conceptualpiece that investigates modern and postmodernconsumptiontendenciesusingtwo moviesas mirrors for society. The contributionby Cova and Svanfeldt presentstwo case studies which illuminate the potentials for postmodern marketing management,while the paper by Elliott, Eccles and Hodgson is an empirical investigation of the reflectionsof feministdeconstruction of genderin advertisingin the UK. The paper by Thompson addressesthe philosophy of sciencedebatescurrentlytaking place in consumerresearchand marketingfrom a hermeneutic deconstructionperspectiveto explore some postmodernimplications.The issueends with trwopoemsby Schoutenand Sherry.The former poem invitesan intensely personalaccountingof the impact of goods upon our sensibilities,while the latter provides a meditation on the role of commerce in the transformationof cultural geography. A collection such as this is not possible without contributionsfrom someof the most challengingminds in our community.We are greatlyindebtedto thosecolleagues who have agreedto have their work publishedin the special issues.We wish to thank many authors who submittedwork, but whosepapers did not get selectedfor the special issues. The great responsemade the selectionprocessmostdemanding.Our gratitudealsogoes out to our reviewerswho spent much time and energyin providing us and the authors with insightful and substantivereviews and guidance.Again, without their help the special issueswould not havebeen possible. Finally, we wish to extend our grateful thanks to Dr. Giiliz Ger, member of the editorialboard,who first suggested the possibilityof a specialissueto us, to the editor
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
of IJRM, Dr. Piet Vanden Abeele, and to the rest of the editorial board who encouraged and accepted the topic we selected. Our thanks also go to the publishing staff at Elsevier/North-Holland who have made guest editorship a pleasantexperiencefor us.
plain the social, cultural and economic aspectsof modernity.Metanarrativesare principles that attempt to explain particularsof human experiencein terms of grand themes such os, capitalism, Marxism, rationality, truth, unified science,harmony,orientalism, and the like.
Exhibit 1: Some basic terminolory
Postmodernity:Generullyrefers to the current period in world history signiffing the changeof courseof modernityif not its end.
At the risk of simplification, the following definitions and descriptions are offered as a ready guide to postmodernist and poststructuralist terminology. (See Rosenau, 1992, for example, for an additional glossaryof relevant terms.) Modernity: Generally refers to the period in Western history starting from the late sixteenth or early seventeenthcentury till the present. Modernism: While modernity refers to the period, modernism refers to the social-cultural-economic idea systemsand institutions. It signifies,among other things, the development of science as the basis of universal knowledge,secularismin human thought, the preeminence of individual reason, and the emergenceof rational structuresin the social and economic order. Modernism is coterminous with the rise of capitalism and liberal democracy (and Communism), the rise of the bourgeois subject, the separation of mind and body and the premise of superiority of mind over body in human affairs, the separation of subject from object. All these developments have a unifuing principle of rational, technical system of beliefs and are considered the metanarratives of modernism. The logic of modernism is that it liberates the individual from superstitiousbeliefs and religious excesses. Metanarratiues / Grand Narratiues.' These are the universal concepts designed to ex-
Postmodernism: A cultural condition and philosophicalpositionthat questionsthe fundamental assumptionsof modernism while exposingmodernisttendenciesas socialconstructionswhich are arbitrary and self-serving. It critiquesmodernismas an oppressive developmentin Western history and argues that insteadof truly liberatingthe individual as modernismclaims,it has, in fact, turned out to be as oppressiveas the systemit has displaced.The central ideas of postmodernism can be found in related themesbearing labels such as deconstructionism,poststructuralism,feminism,orientalism. Structuraliy .' Structuralismis the practice of studyingphenomenaas different as societies, minds, languages,literatures, and mythologiesas systemsor connectedwholes -that is, structures-and in terms of their internal patterns of connection,rather than their historical sequenceor development.It is an offshoot of Sausseriantheory of language, later elaborated and adopted by Levi-Strauss.Although structuralism refers to any phenomenologythat views societyin terms of structures,structuralismin this context refers to the semiologicalstructuralism, a model of languagewhich rejectsits historical development(diachrony)and establishes its synchronism.This particular view of language (and reality) was later adopted by Levi-Straussas a universalisticbasisof culture. To the extentstructuralismrepresentsa
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
diachronousdevelopmentof language and therefore, history, and looks for universal principles,structuralismembodiesmodernist metanarratives.Social and literary theorists associatedwith structuralismof relevanceto postmodernistdiscourseare Marx (analysis of socialstructures),Levi-Strauss(analysisof cultures), Saussure(linguistics),and Freud (the structureof the unconscious). Poststructuralism:Stands in opposition to structuralism, denies the universality of structuresand the transcendentalnature of sign. Poststructuralismtries to undermine large-scaleformal systemsin the human sciences,structural tendenciesin literary formulations and philosophic discourse.Derrida questionsthe notion of sign as a transcendentalcategory,attacks modern metaphysicsas groundedin a systemof signs,and rational processes.Poststructuralismtakes different forms: o the deconstructionof Western logocentric principle in the work of Derrida, o the deconstructionof the Cartesiansubject in the work of Foucault, o the emergenceof the schizophrenicsubject in the works of Deleuzeand Guattari, o the extensionof these principles to the gendered subject, in the works of feminists,Kristeva,Butler, Harraway,etc. Feminism: Is a reaction against the modernist notionsof the "subject" which is interpreted to be a "gendered" subject, representinga cultural constructionbasedon male ideology.Feminismarticulatesthe condition of the '"other" (the most problemizedaspect of the modernist thought) through its discourseon gender.Severalforms of feminism exist, Liberal Feminism, Radical Feminism, Marxist Feminism, PoststructuralistFeminism etc. Orientalism; The argument that the "oriental" is the constructionof the Western
221
discourseand practicesand its referenceto the ascendanceof Western-modernistculture through the creationof the "other." Deconstructionism: There is more than one meaning to the term, "deconstruction."To "deconstruct"a text meansto draw out conflicting logicsof senseand implication,with the object of showing that the text never exactly means what it saysor sayswhat it means.To deconstructalso means to rearrange structure and its foundationsusing a scaffolding,as it were,without destroyingthe original structure, but altering it so it has new foundationsand a new superstructure. Deconstruction is a term associatedwith JacquesDerrida who first usedit to examine the foundationsof Westernphilosophywhich he consideredto be rooted in a logocentric view of the world. In the last few years,it has crept into literary theory, cultural criticism, social theory, and feminist theory and has now becomeone of the most powerful and controversialdevelopmentsin contemporary social thought. Deconstructionism,in the hands of its proponents, is an attack on Cartesianism,logocentrism, phallocentrism and other ideologicalpositionsthat havebeen long consideredhallmarksof modernism.In this sensedeconstructionism is a postmodern and poststructuralistmovement. Hyperreality:The idea that reality is constructed,and therefore it is possibleto construct things that are more real than real. What is real is purely contextual,cultural, historical and timebound. Hyperreal questions the myth of the real in modernism. Fragmentation: That there is no unified subject,that there is no need to convergeto a unified truth (for none exists).and that human condition,physical,mental, or social, is fragmented, reassembled, and reconstructedwithout our lookingfor grand meaningsand themes.
222
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
Decentering:That there is no reason to believethat the "individual" is the center of the universe,that it is purely an invention exploitedmaximallyunder modernismto reject competingentities. Feministshave particularly attackedthe centerednature of the modern subjectwhich has tendedto mean in practicethe male subject.Decenteringmeans the unseatingof the subjectas it is presently constituted. Floating Signifier: That there is no fixed object (signified)to which all signifierseventually refer to, that the signified is itself a signifier, and the world is semioticallyconstructedin a chain of signifiers. Cartesianism;Generally attributed to the principlesenunciatedby Descartes,which include the method of doubt, reality as comprehensibleonly through deductivementalistic processes(rational knowledge), the supremacy of humanreason,and the separation of mind (reasoningelement)and body (experiential element).In somecirclesCartesianismalso representsthe logic and philosophicalbasisof modernism. Kantianism; Refers to the philosophyof Kant. Combines Cartesian principles of a prior knowledge (knowledgeby reasoning) and syntheticknowledge(knowledgegained by sensesand experience)to form the basis of modernistepistemology. Interpretiuism; Refers to the notion that understandingis as important if not more important than (scientific)explanationin human and social sciences,and acknowledges the subjectivepositions of authors and researchersas a legitimatebasisof knowledge production. Interpretivism is part of the modernistdiscourseand its implicationshave relevanceto postmodernism.
Logical Positiuism:A particular epistemologicalpositionthat advocatescertain proceduresfor pursuing"scientificwork." Its basic assumptionsare the possibilityof a unified science,correspondence theoryof truth, generalizabilityof knowledge,the possibilityof objectivity through inter-subjective verification. This is only a small aspectof modernity. Postpositiuism;A reaction against positivism and its stringent epistemologicalrequirementsand the scientificbasisof knowledge. Postpositivismadvocatesother forms of obtainingusableknowledge.Postpositivist discourseis part of modernistdiscourseand has no particular significanceto postmodernism. Imaginary:Literally, imaginarymeansthe oppositeof real, therefore,somethingwhich is fictitiousor a fantasy.In a rhetoricalsense, it meansthat what is real is imaginaryand what is imaginaryis real. In this sense,one doesnot worry whether the real existsor not as long as one is able to imaginethe real and realize the imaginary.From a sociopolitical perspective,the imaginaryis the vision that capturesthe meaningsof a lifeworld for a social/political group.
References Ahmed, A., 1992.Postmodernismand Islam: Predicament and promise.New York, NY: Routledge. Best, S. and D. Kellner, 1991.Postmoderntheory: Critical interrogations.New York, NY: Guilford. Featherstone,M., 1991. Consumer culture and postmodernism. l,ondon: SagePublications. Frrat, A.F., 1990.The consumerin postmodernity.In: R.H. Holman and M.R. Solomon(eds.),Advancesin Consumer Research,XVIL Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. Frrat, A.F., 1991. Postmodernculture, marketing and the consumer.In: T.L. Childerset al. (eds.),Marketingtheory and application,23T-242.Chicago,IL: American Marketing Association. Frrat,A.F., 1992.Fragmentations in the postmodern.In: J.F. Sherry,Jr. and B. Sternthal(eds.),Advancesin Consumer
A. Venkatesh et al. / Postmodernism and the marketing imaginary
Research,X.lX,203-206. Provo,UT: Associationfor Consumer Research. Frrat, A.F. and A. Venkatesh,in press.The making of postmodern consumption.In: R.W. Belk and N. Dholakia (eds.), Consumption and marketing: Macro dimensions. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Harvey, D., 1989. The condition of postmodernity. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Jameson,F., 1991. Postmodernism,or the cultural logic of late capitalism.Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Jukes,P., 1990.A shout in the street:An excursioninto the modern city. Berkeley,CA: University of California Press. Holbrook, M.8., 1990. The role of lyricism in researchon consumeremotions: Skylark, have you anything to say to me?.In: M.E. Goldberg,G. Gorn and R.W. Pollay(eds.), Advancesin ConsumerResearch,XVIII, 1-18. Provo, UT: Associationfor ConsumerResearch. Miyoshi, M. and H.D. Harootunian(eds.), 1989.Postmodernism and Japan.Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Miller, D., 1987. Material culture and mass consumption. Cambridge,MA: Blackwell. Mourrain, J.A.P., 1989.The hyper-moderncommodity-form: The caseof wine. In: T.L. Childerset al. (eds.),Marketing theory and practice.318-322.Chicago,IL: American MarketingAsssociation. Ogilvy, J., 1990.This postmodernbusiness.Marketing and ResearchToday 18 (Feb.),4-22. Rosenau, P., 1992. Postmodernismand the social sciences:
Insights,inroads,and intrusions.Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press. Scott, L.M., 1992.Playingwith pictures:Postmodernism,poststructuralism,and advertising.In: J.F. Sherry, Jr. and B. Sternthal (eds.), Advancesin Consumer Research,XIX, 596-612.Provo, UT: Associationfor ConsumerResearch. Sherry,J.F.,Jr., 1990.Postmodernalternatives: The interpretive turn in consumerresearch.In: H. Kassarjianand T. Robertson(eds.),Handbookof consumerresearch,548591. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Taussig,M., 1993. Mimesis and alterity. New York, NY: Routledge. Venkatesh,A., 1989.Modernity and postmodernity:A synthesis or antithesis.In: T.L. Childerset al. (eds.),Marketing theory and application, 99-104. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association. Venkatesh,A., 1990.Changingconsumptionpatterns.In: R. Kling, S. Olin and M. Poster(eds.),Postsuburban California: The transformation of Orange County since World War II, 142-164. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Venkatesh, 4., 1992.Postmodernism,consumerculture and the societyof the spectacle.In: J.F. Sherry Jr. and B. Sternthal (eds.), Advancesin Consumer Research,XIX, 199-202.Provo, UT: Associationfor ConsumerResearch. Wernick,A., 1991.Promotionalculture:Advertising,ideology and symbolicexpression.Newbury,CA: Sage.