The Peers of High Profile Urban Centers

Lately, many have asked me if I plan to return to New York any time soon, to which I answer "I'm not sure, but I don't think so." Then many follow up with "Why not?" to which I rarely respond beyond a few remarks. In attempt to better explain my reasons for avoiding the Empire, I am posting some thoughts.

The acute smell of hot, rotting trash seeping through the bus window was enough to wake me up, aggressively informing me that the bus had entered Manhattan. While only a ten minute walk from the stop to the apartment, I managed to encounter four conflicts (one physical), a man complaining that his bike had been stolen, and a dead kid tucked between a cab and the curb - blonde, maybe 30 years old. That was creating quite a scene at 3PM.

It's no secret that the country's premiere cities are swollen with aspiring this-or-thats, where "starving" is a more common adjective than "successful" when qualifying "artist," "actress," or "curator." These cities' demands on often limited resources of "Starving X" expose the individuals' great dedication to these locations that require so much energy and capital, but provide such small rates of success. The commonness of the phrase "starving artist " begs the question:

Why subject yourself to the financial demands of a high profile urban center when the success rate of artists and entertainers is so small?

Surely, these individuals could seek gainful, sustainable employment somewhere where the financial requirements are much less demanding, therefore maximizing the gap between monthly living overhead and income, and perhaps quality of life. However, the closet-sized apartments of New York and LA stay packed with the cycle of aspiring Starving Xs, whom come from small towns across the country only to struggle to pay the rent.

The common and obvious answer is that "you can't make it in (small town)." This is the essential qualifier, or divider between "successful" and "starving." Being known. The calculable difference between a successful artist or entertainer and a starving one is simply how many people know your name (then, much further down, your work). This qualifier requires a maximized pool of individuals that operate in art and entertainment, which have become vast, incestuous networks inhabiting the small geographical footprints of the premiere cities. This density of the audience required to become known in art and entertainment is the draw, or value, that calls upon aspiring Xs across the country to descend upon the premiere urban centers for a shot at success. There, they try to make it, but many don't. Many immerse themselves so deeply in the love/hate struggle of trying to make it in the city that they often lose sight or estimated value of endless alternatives. The dedication to existence in city itself becomes a laborious endeavor.

Maintaining the abundance of Starving X, we can assume that the tangible rewards are proportional to the success rate of the high profile urban centers; little. This requires that there be more than solely tangible rewards sought by Starving X. The tangible fruits of success (leading to sustainable employment in art and entertainment) are sought, but as we have acknowledged, these rewards can often be scarce - think of a photographer showing work at your local bar. If the value of level of financial sustainability via such sporadic reward is challenging, as should be assumed in light of the abundance of Starving X, a second type of reward would be necessary. This second type will be not tangible, but personal or emotional.

If The Dignity of the Human Person is fulfilled through his vocation, and rooted in his deliberate actions as to make his own contribution to his interior growth, the second type of reward must satisfy Starving X's interior. And if "ego" is defined by a person's sense of self-esteem, or self-importance, and "success" in art and entertainment is the level of how known (esteemed/important) you are, we can assume that the personal-type reward available in high profile urban centers, which boast maximized audience density, operates on a sliding scale - the photographer at the local bar may be very pleased with himself through showing work there. But, if the success rate in art and entertainment is little, then both the tangible and personal rewards must be little.

So how can such a limited opportunity of reward satisfy the countless egos of the vast pool of Starving Xs? If the tangible (financial) and personal (esteem/importance) rewards are the only type of rewards that can be squeezed from the struggle for success in art and entertainment in the hugh profile urban centers, we should assume that the true value of the experience of Starving X lay more heavily the personal rewards than the tangible rewards as those afford little comfort and pleasure. Now we can assume that regardless of the financial struggle required of aspiring artist and entertainers in high profile urban centers, Starving X perseveres fueled by a certain amount of satisfaction of ego.

Of course, the sustainable level of satisfaction of ego is case-by-case. Individuals fall somewhere on the sliding scale of success, from the pinnacle of achievement in your category of art and entertainment (most recgonition) to the bottom (no-recognition). Perhaps Starving X is satisfied with the local bar show, or perhaps the level of satisfaction of ego is not enough. If the current level of success of Starving X does not satisfy his ego, he will engage in further activities to maximize his sense of self-esteem or self-importance through the level of esteem and importance acknowledge by his audience. A personal modification of Veblen's theory can be applied to read " the accumulation of recognition becomes the basis of popular esteem, therefore, it becomes the also a requisite to that complacency which we call self-respect"

Each individual requires a certain amount of satisfaction of ego here, but if most everyone is trying to become as known as possible, many must face failure. The upper levels of success in arts and entertainment are defined by specific sets of galleries, museums, movies, record labels, etc.. The populations of the most successful groups of artists and entertainers is small compared to those aspiring to reach such levels - but it is obvious that the aspiring individual must believe success is possible. Otherwise, Starving X would forego the struggle and seek a more sustainable endeavor.

So if it is so hard to "make it," why do so many believe that they can?

Maybe the answer lies in the qualifiers of success and entertainment themselves. Unlike the endeavors of homo faber, where talent or ability is calculable and objective, talent in art and entertainment is less easily defined. Rather, it is less easily calculated or awarded, but is defined by the audience and population itself. This means that unlike an engineer, success does not come from creation itself, but perceived value of creation by the audience. Further, satisfaction has less to do with the creation than it does with the perceived value determined by the audience. Therefore, the path required to satisfy an artist's or entertainer's ego must seek the maximal value of his or her creation awarded subjectively by the audience.

We can see that just as different individuals fall on different points of the sliding scale of success, they land in smaller scales of different levels of success - museums, or this set of galleries, or that set. Now, the satisfaction of ego derived from Starving X's endeavors can be magnified by its esteem and importance in the smaller set simply by focusing the audience, while part of the bigger scale. Magnification of esteem and importance through sectioning the total audience is how groups continuously strive to satisfy their egos as they continue to seek their goal of increasing fame.

The defined audience itself provides the aspiring individual with the personal rewards needed to justify the financial struggle, and the level of satisfaction of ego relies on the opportunity to maximize audience, and these audiences are most populated and dense in high profile urban centers.

Of course, some artists and entertainers simply like what they do and are not concerned with becoming known - they can live anywhere. The rest of them, however, are destined for the homes of thickly-webbed social structures which provide the sought approval.

Kasprowy Wierch, Zakopane, Poland

Wapack Thru-Hike

Tuck's & Boott Spur

Scout II

Northern Evening

Cathedral

Butler

Breakneck Gull

aa's Guerrilla Site ROI Evaluation

This is a follow up to "Mortgage Rate Spikes as V-Necks Dip Low"

It has been brought to our attention that the success of American Apparel's marketing program may not have been realised solely through in-house endeavors, but perhaps an alleged guerrilla marketing party-picture site founded and run by the Director of Photography of The (esteemed) Journal. While The Acknowledger will not say that such allegations are true, we wish to explore the possible effectiveness of this site as if it was actually intended to promote American Apparel and boost sales.

If the party site's average weekly readership projection is equal to the site's unique hits per month divided by 4 weeks, we find a staggering 3,141,592 projected visitors. After accounting for a generally accepted 8% casual readership variance, we reach the sites true weekly readership projection; 2,890,264 true unique hits per week. To evaluate the effectiveness of this marketing channel on our current 3rd quarter, we must then multiply the real readership per week by the 12 weeks of the second quarter, when promotion began for the launch of aa's summer line.

Astoundingly, we have found that if this party-pic site is truly a guerrilla marketing project, it would have reached 34,683,175 potential customers.

Furthermore, if half of these vistors do in fact purchase a Unisex Deep V-Neck at $14 msrp/unit, American Apparel can attribute $242,782,232.00 USD to their investment in the site.

Mortgage Rate Spikes as V-Necks Dip Low

Is Charney Planning a Real Estate Take Over?

The Acknowledger has noticed an unequivocal correlation between the recent spike in the 30-year fixed-rate home mortgage average and the sudden drop in V-Neck cuts. While the 30-year mortgage rate has been climbing towards 7.00% during these past summer months, V-Neck cuts have been dropping steadily. These recent trends follow the quick and dramatic shocks (albeit, opposite) that took New York by surprise in June.

The reason behind this direct relationship may slouch atop L.A.'s American Apparel Inc., producer of the summer-smash Deep V-Neck. While this revealing piece is obviously the perfect choice for these sweltering summer months, providing unmatched ventilation and rule-bending sex appeal, there may be more function to this form than we notice at first glance.

Dov Charney, Founder and CEO of American Apparel is considered a marketing champion within the garment industry, but his ability to successfully outfit New York's hip in his Deep V-Neck may be indicative of another prowess; strategic real estate planning.

Perhaps it is not just a coincidence that while the 30-year mortgage rate soars, American Apparel's summer must-have is made of just 70% of the material of a standard T-shirt. As Charney's variable production costs drop, his profits soar, resulting in a new wealth that may be the first step in an American Apparel real estate take over.

Judging by the popularity of these tees, Charney might make what it takes to buy in Manhattan.

Two girls talk at Houston & 1st Avenue

How was the party last night?

It was so good.