reciprocity

This week’s readings talk about power: who has power and how do they use it. Zukin describes Westchester County’s growth and development, which was planned and based on an upper middle class slant. Here, those in power have created developments that cater to higher socio-economic rungs, but are driven and operated by the working classes. There seems to be a general ‘look’ to the design of the infrastructure and business organizations that “hides the volatility of transnational corporate consolidation in a service economy (Zukin 177).” One social class is taking advantage of another, pushing them out to increase land values, while the business of Westchester County, because of the changing economy, is at odds. What will the new economic structure do to the design of this area? Apparently, the culture of the area has changed from a production-based economy to a consumption-based economy. The two groups that have a stake in this county will either become increasingly separate or will need to negotiate.

And in the end, the relationship between the two parties is reciprocal. Each influences the other. In the “Science of Shopping,” both parties are responsible for the physical designs of retail spaces. The shopper’s attributes affect the retail designer and the designer affects the shopper. Underhill’s studies don’t seem that scary to me. Sure we’re being watched and analyzed and stores are being designed to ‘capture’ us, but don’t we want to shop and don’t we want to find the items and goods that we like? And anyway, his analysis generalizes about groups of people and therefore, almost homogenizes the shopping experience. The look and feel of the store is based on market types (like with Calvin Klein, etc.), but the basic layout is similar. Sure, we have preferences and can be grouped into types; to sell as much as possible, companies market towards these types and design stores that take advantage of human nature. But we gladly fall into their retail wonderlands.