<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Avatar Thoughts: Dances with Avatars in the Mist</title>
	<link>http://kozinets.net/archives/364</link>
	<description>Professor Robert Kozinets on Marketing Research, Social Media, and Marketing Strategy</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 11:44:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: idnca</title>
		<link>http://kozinets.net/archives/364#comment-5879</link>
		<author>idnca</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://kozinets.net/archives/364#comment-5879</guid>
		<description>As I was watching the movie, the ethographic dimension of Avatar seemed clear to me. However rather than taking it from the point of view of the ethnographer, I was struck by the "client" approach to it: They sent them to study the Na'Vis but nothing got out of it - or rather no one seemed willing to pay attention to the learnings: on the one hand we have ethnographers' whose mission is not clear : are they not on this planet only to justify any decision that the corporation is going to take anyway as some sort of PR caution ? (Had the fielwork taught anything, they would not even have bothered to try giving them blue jeans and coke...) On the other, the "client" does not care about learning about their consumers' (the Na'Vis)in order to come up with some meaningful proposition to them.
 
What is indeed surprising is that in today's XXI century capitalism any BtoC compagny would actually be much more intentional, patient and careful in building a solid undertsanding of their consumers than humans are in the movie.

This limitation is where the moralist ambition of the movie falls short: it assumes an incarnation of power or colonialism that is too simple, if not stupid, as embodied by the figure of the Marine and its opposition to that of science. As you point the Robert, the key question is what those researchers came to do on Pandora in the first place - Are they present to participate in alienating the natives but by using different means (cultural understanding instead of force) but for the same goal (eg. maximization of profit) ?
In fact, it seems to me that any modern company like the one in the movie would be much more clever in colonizing Pandora through usage of ethnography (sophiticated consumer research)as they do today.

The second point is I think what the movie, from an anthropological standpoint reveal about those who watch it (and made it) - the myth of lost Garden of Eden transpires all along the film and Jake Sulley, as much as Neo of Matrix, rememends me of Jesus Christ, coming to save us from our original sin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I was watching the movie, the ethographic dimension of Avatar seemed clear to me. However rather than taking it from the point of view of the ethnographer, I was struck by the &#8220;client&#8221; approach to it: They sent them to study the Na&#8217;Vis but nothing got out of it - or rather no one seemed willing to pay attention to the learnings: on the one hand we have ethnographers&#8217; whose mission is not clear : are they not on this planet only to justify any decision that the corporation is going to take anyway as some sort of PR caution ? (Had the fielwork taught anything, they would not even have bothered to try giving them blue jeans and coke&#8230;) On the other, the &#8220;client&#8221; does not care about learning about their consumers&#8217; (the Na&#8217;Vis)in order to come up with some meaningful proposition to them.</p>
<p>What is indeed surprising is that in today&#8217;s XXI century capitalism any BtoC compagny would actually be much more intentional, patient and careful in building a solid undertsanding of their consumers than humans are in the movie.</p>
<p>This limitation is where the moralist ambition of the movie falls short: it assumes an incarnation of power or colonialism that is too simple, if not stupid, as embodied by the figure of the Marine and its opposition to that of science. As you point the Robert, the key question is what those researchers came to do on Pandora in the first place - Are they present to participate in alienating the natives but by using different means (cultural understanding instead of force) but for the same goal (eg. maximization of profit) ?<br />
In fact, it seems to me that any modern company like the one in the movie would be much more clever in colonizing Pandora through usage of ethnography (sophiticated consumer research)as they do today.</p>
<p>The second point is I think what the movie, from an anthropological standpoint reveal about those who watch it (and made it) - the myth of lost Garden of Eden transpires all along the film and Jake Sulley, as much as Neo of Matrix, rememends me of Jesus Christ, coming to save us from our original sin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

