Nikezation

Diary Entry: October 14, 2024

I barely dragged myself to the faculty workshop today, as it is another of those obligatory events I have never much cared for. The entire faculty typically gathers to welcome a visiting scholar who presents their latest paper to us.

The atmosphere is always somewhat stilted. For us JSD students, it serves as an observational lesson, so we mostly sit in silence and listen while the professors ask questions and drive the discussion. I usually claim a seat somewhere in the back row, trying my best to feign a deep interest in the proceedings.

But today... today’s meeting was different. The speaker discussed how massive corporations are “appropriating” holidays and festivals — a phenomenon where companies attempt to claim intellectual property rights over details as granular as a festival’s colors, simply by virtue of sponsoring the event.

I was already beginning to drift off when a particular phrasing jolted me awake. She argued that companies are not merely participants in culture, but actually act as its “creators.”

I suddenly sat up straight in my chair. “What?”

I had always considered culture to be something organic — born of human endeavor. It is the domain of individuals: artists, musicians, and writers. I have certainly never thought of Nike or Amazon as “artists.”

Reconciling the idea that a corporation — a mere legal fiction, a machine engineered for profit — could be a “part of culture” in the same way a living person is, proved difficult to swallow. Are we truly arguing that a marketing campaign is as much a “work” as a painting or a song?

I can accept the premise that companies influence culture (which is obvious enough), but to argue that they create it? That they themselves are culture? That felt like a step too far.

The concept deeply unsettled me, lingering in my thoughts all day. Yet, when I thought about it, I realized the event wasn’t even a workshop, but a “job talk.” I don’t even remember it well.