I do not know if it is convenient to believe in the meaning of coincidences, even in their existence. But I do know that if they occur, it is better not to look for or analyze the possible causes that led to their appearance. Not because we can find surprises or “paranormal” issues, but because it is better to let go and be thankful that they occur when they are favorable or, on the contrary, not to try to attribute them to bad luck when they are unfavorable. In any case, casualty correlations are a matter of chance and not of necessity.
I write this column, whose title would be “The Essence of Marketing”, while social networks boil with the unexpected death of David Bowie. The huge amount of comments, mentions, news, links, videos, messages, quotes ?, have followed one another in an incessant manifestation of admiration and pain from unconditional fans, occasional admirers, artists, media professionals and, also, of opportunists.
In all of them I find a common denominator: reverence for a unique and unrepeatable character. He has long since ceased to be an iconoclastic musician to become a musical Bahrain WhatsApp Number List genre in itself, a role model. Not in something standardizable that could be imitated because it would fall into the ridiculous and absurd parody, but rather it became a reference to learn from and a value to study.
To some extent, it reminds me of the concept defined by W. Sombart and J. Schumpeter of creative destruction, for its capacity for innovation and permanent reinvention. At each step, with each transformation, “the chameleon” opened up artistic and stylist paths that buried the former, made it outdated and outdated while exploring lines of business that grew on the ashes of its previous models.
Bowie could be used as a clear example of the perfect antithesis of the concept of personal brand, which in itself underlines some signs of identity based on permanent mutation, diversity of activities, exploration of diametrically opposed artistic territories and, in the last years, the disconnection of a hyperconnected world and the millimeter dosing of information. In short: he shed the weight of a unique image to create a succession of personal, sophisticated and disconnected images, not evolved but adapted to each moment that he would define as unique.
On one occasion he said, “What I do is very simple, it’s just that my choices are very different from other people’s.” It seems easy, so said, but it is not. Because they were different and also relevant. In other words, the “anti-Bowie brand” stood out ostensibly from the rest of the artists and groups and, at all times, each choice was suitable for his followers and for the market in general. Which could be translated into the strength that guaranteed his future in terms of respect and popularity and, of course, recurring income.
Also the “anti-Bowie brand” enjoyed the esteem of its public and the admiration of the vast majority of people. Not all of them were well acquainted with his work and possibly did not understand it either; however, the level of association of any of his artistic manifestations with his authorship was very high. This signified the dimension that it had as a consequence of maintaining a coherent and consistent plasticity over the years.
Bowie was fully aware of the importance of aesthetics and design, sometimes playing with transgression, others with confusion or with the markedly baroque; from psychedelia to minimalism, all styles had their unmistakable stamp, anticipating trends. Nothing escaped the control of a mind, sometimes tormented, sometimes lucid, but always with a clear vision of its meaning of life and art.
The “anti-Bowie brand” took over a first hallmark: having one eye of each color, although he actually suffered from anisocoria (different size of the pupils) as a result of having received a blow to the left eye. What could have been a weakness, he took advantage of it to consolidate a first enigmatic image, which he later added to the rhythm of each process of stylistic renewal.
He managed to position himself in the mind of each one of us generating a powerful association with as many attributes as people were capable of defining it. For this reason, I refer to the “anti-Bowie brand”, because in order for a brand to be able to position itself strongly, it must manifest a single attribute that is recognizable and associable by the entire set of people that make up its target audience. Instead, Bowie could be associated with as many brand attributes as he fans had, varying depending on each artistic stage. It was the product of the permanent creation and destruction of his own characters and, at the same time, it was the sum of all of them.