Check out the New York Times profile on JeongMee Yoon’s Pink and Blue Projects and the accompanying multi-media slide show.

via (the group blog for the 2007-2008 Photojournalism and Documentary Class at ICP… and special props to the author for using the word “dipped”.)

This came up a few years back (can’t remember if I posted it) but I called someone at the office Grimace today and that led to a discussion of the origins of Grimace. Back when he debuted in 1971 he was actually referred to as “Evil Grimace,” was to shakes as Hamburglar is to hamburgers, and sported 4 to 6 arms.

Evil Grimace

I want read/see the origin story of the “Evil Grimace.” I want to know how he found redemption and became Ronald McDonald’s Robin.

Apparently the young girl in this commercial is Jodie Foster. She totally sells her “No Shakes…” line. I get sad contemplating the lack of shakes in McDonald Land.

This post and the one before it stem from a post I read this morning by Charlie O’Donnell about the future of the calendaring industry. While Charlie raised many important points, I was struck by the quote below:

I hardly know anyone who uses any calendar other than one their job forced them to… and less than half of the Outlook users I know put personal items on their work calendar. (italics mine)

We have different identities based on the various relationships we have. And software isn’t designed to help us easily maintain these identities. It is painfully evident in the calendaring space but is a problem in many areas of digital life.

I have a Google calendar that tracks my birthdays, social engagements, doctors appointments, Browns games, and other goings ons about town. I will have a work calendar when I start my new job in a few weeks that will be dominated by meetings (and my secretary). And never the twain shall meet. This is primarily due to the fact that the existing software can’t easily handle the problems of trust levels and interoperabilty. It can be done, but not seamlessly.

I face the same bifurcation issue with email. In a few weeks I will have a new work email address to add to the host of personal addresses I maintain. Again, the software isn’t up to the challenge of easily handling correspondance with various constituencies from one interface. I want the work address and boilerplate to be used when I contact a client or a colleague. I want my personal address to be used when I contact a friend. And I don’t want to have to manually adjust these settings with each message.

When it comes to this blog, I feel the push and pull of these competing parts of my life. There are stories I would tell, thoughts I would share, if not for the fact that this blog is in the words of Stephen Dunn, “open on all sides, in cahoots with thin air.” Setting up a second blog would only make thebifurcation more permanent. I want to present a public blog and filter certain posts for friends and family. I am sure I can set up some sort of pass protected site, but no blog software has made it easy as far as I can tell.

I guess in the end, I want technology that works the way I do (and, I surmise, we all do). I may be asking too much, but any company that can create software that changes identities - seamlessly - depending on the relationship involved, will come out on top.

Charlie O’Donnell of Oddcast has a thoughtful post about the changing dynamics in branding and marketing that are afoot. According to Charlie:

When the brands woke up from being dazed, it seemed that they began to like us… to want to get closer to us. They wanted to be in our networks, to be friends with us.

At first, I started calling this phenomenon “Brand Association.” The things I buy wanted to be closer to me.

Then I realized that, even more than that, they wanted to be me, and me to be them… and to a large extent, I am them. I don’t drink, so when I’m out at bars, I’m Sprite guy. Its become a running joke, but ask any of my friends who they think of when they see a Sprite, its probably me. I am a Mustang and Jamba Juice, and Macy’s, too… I am self identifying with a number of brands. I have a relationship with brands that I am committing a part of myself to.

At first this sounded scary, reminiscent of Single White Female (Allie’s new room-mate is about to borrow a few things without asking. Her clothes. Her boyfriend. Her life).

Charlie notes that lifestyle marketing is not new, but that he is seeing a new trend where brands are “opening up and becoming vulnerable to form a stronger tie to consumers.” I struggled with the notion of a brand becoming “vulnerable.” It makes me think of lovers sharing intimate secrets with one another in a quiet whisper.

But he is on to something here. Brands have lost control. The dynamic has shifted. Brands once managed the terms of their relationships with consumers. You were cool because you wore Guess Jeans (do they still make those?). But that model is quickly being tossed out the window. A brand is now only as influential as its consumers. In that sense, brands are extremely vulnerable. You are no longer what you wear. But what you wear (the brand) is increasingly becoming you.

Charlie has come up with an interesting term for what he sees as a blurring of one’s own identity, brand association, consumption, and the like. He calls it “MeVertising.”