tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post2865961693554228487..comments2024-03-18T16:55:31.971+00:00Comments on This Space: No fog: Naomi Klein wins the Warwick Prize for WritingStephen Mitchelmorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01658772259307446873noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-23601078375231613802009-03-11T14:41:00.000+00:002009-03-11T14:41:00.000+00:00What did Adbusters do first, Nigel? Talk about pol...What did Adbusters do first, Nigel? Talk about politics and advertising? That hardly seems like a subject that can only be handled once. Adbusters is just a glorified design mag anyway.<BR/><BR/>I agree with Richard. What impressed me about No Logo was the way that Klein tried to tie the whole system together: globalisation, branding, sweatshops, unemployment, consumerism, cultural appropriation... Say what you like about Adbusters, but it's a magazine, not a single structured work of analysis. And the metaphoric relationship that she sets up between the consumer's relationship with products and brands and the use of sweatshop labour was very strong, I thought. <BR/><BR/>But you should really read The Shock Doctrine, Nigel. It's a fantastic piece of journalism. With excellent metaphors, again.Stephen Crowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18366410380175795901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-48169955976162632792009-03-02T21:10:00.000+00:002009-03-02T21:10:00.000+00:00Richard, you can't have paid much attention to Adb...Richard, you can't have paid much attention to Adbusters.NigelBealehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06094387597632333192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-85836688353238753132009-02-28T19:00:00.000+00:002009-02-28T19:00:00.000+00:00Nigel, you can't have paid much attention to No Lo...Nigel, you can't have paid much attention to <I>No Logo</I> if that's all you can say about it.<BR/><BR/>Sure, those smug assholes at <I>Adbusters</I> covered some of the same ground, the chief difference is Klein marries it to an actual political analysis, with concrete details about the workings of global capitalism, sweatshops and the like. Or maybe you didn't read that material? <BR/><BR/><I>The Shock Doctrine</I> is in many respects a companion volume to the excellent <I>No Logo</I>. Though perhaps, with other critics, you may dismiss it as naive or, as Steve says, little more than a conspiracy theory. Such a reading is way offbase. (Klein's remarks in the posted video clip are right on point, with regard to these kinds of charges.)Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014014605639738887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-32400673635925143192009-02-28T05:27:00.000+00:002009-02-28T05:27:00.000+00:00Some years ago I read No Logo. It contained nothin...Some years ago I read No Logo. It contained nothing particularly original, comprised as it was mainly of warmed-over Ad Buster magazine content. It certainly wasn't complex. Can't comment on The Shock Doctrine since I haven't read it. I assume it must contain something of merit, however, I must say I'm a bit surprised by your choice.NigelBealehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06094387597632333192noreply@blogger.com