The Project

So as I’m sure (or at least hope) those of you who frequent the Squeeze blog have heard of the project Lewis Nicholson’s 4th year think tank has begun. Robin encouraged me to start a blog about what we are up to, and to give those of you familiar with the project an update on where we stand and where we are planning on going.

In our think tank class we are examining the question “How can we make environmentalism the norm?” We spent the first few weeks discussing many possible ways of trying to tackle this question (as you can see on our forum). Coming from an advertising background, my mind jumped straight to the idea of branding. I think we can all agree that environmentalism could do with an image overhaul. How can we make it cool and sexy so that everyone would want to be associated with it. We soon realized that it’s a bit tricky branding a concept that doesn’t really belong to anyone, making it tough to keep a coherent brand message. I just finished reading Flock and Flow by Grant McCracken (blog) and in his book he writes about brands that had lost all meaning, which had remarkably been brought back to life by those in-the-know (hipsters). He reasons that once brands have lost all their meaning they are essentially empty vessels whose meaning is waiting to be formed. We explored the idea of trying to strip environmentalism of all it’s meaning and associations thus giving it to contemporary environmentalists to reshape into something new, but again, when this is not a product that you have control over trying to strip the word of it’s meaning is an impossible task (and possibly in this case undesirable).

This is where it gets interesting. When your first idea doesn’t work, try the opposite.

There are a few words that pop into my head (and more often then not slip of my tongue) when I see some one idling alone in their Hummer downtown, but they always felt much to generic to have the impact I desired. Calling the driver an asshole (although momentarily satisfying) never felt adequate in describing my feelings. There is a need for this word.
When you hear someone say something derogatory about someone’s race you don’t feel at a loss for what to call them. They are racist. We need a word that can be used in the same tone as racist, but in an environmental context.
Because branding environmentalism didn’t work, we found ourselves going down a much more interesting path of trying to brand the opposite.
In our research we found that the word racist didn’t even exist until 1933 (it was not in an english dictionary until 1936). We found this very surprising. We found that the idea of racism has been around for a very long time, but it wasn’t until 1933 that we had a tool to define this form of thought / action. By no means can the word racism claim responsibility for the drastic transformation in our society since it’s introduction, but I think it’s fair to argue that it was an essential tool to the civil rights movement. It gave activists a tool to label those who were against their cause. It gave that thought a life. Now there was a concise definition for what the civil rights movement was fighting. The villain now had a name.

We have named our villain.

Depletist
1. An individual or group demonstrating apparent negligent or reckless disregard for the environmental consequences of their actions.
2. An individual or group that exhausts non-renewable resources and rejects positive environmental strategies.

The interesting thing about words like racist and sexist is that they have no antonym (other than generic words like tolerant). This leads us to believe that they are the exception. Either you are a racist or you are normal. We want to do the same for the environmental movement. Either you are a depletist or you are normal.

In psychology we find that the amount of time between action and effect is directly linked to how strong a connection we form between the two. When it comes to environmental issues the cause and the effect can often be a lifetime apart, which forms a very weak link between driving your SUV and global warming. This word can be used as an effect. Calling someone a depletist, which is undesirable, can be used to shortening the time between doing something that harms the environment (cause) and the effect (being called a depletist) which will strengthen the bond.

Robin asked me something that sounds very familiar to what I hear in my advertising classes. Now that you have this idea, how do you actually change behaviour?

Good question. We are still trying to figure this out, and there really is no easy answer, but here is my attempt at one, for now any way. It is very subtle, but since the word has been formed I’ve noticed that it has effected my behaviour. In the past when I would do something that I knew was bad for the environment, like getting my coffee in a styrofoam cup as opposed to my thermos, I would be conscious of it, but it ended there. Now when I do it, the word depletist pops in to my head, there is nothing ambiguous about what I am doing now. I am being a depletist. It is the same feeling I get when I think a sexist or racist thought, I regret it immediately and feel guilty about it, and because of those feelings, the thoughts never become more than just thoughts. We all make conscious efforts to not come across as prejudice. I think the same will happen with the concept of depletism. We may still have a depletist thought, but hopefully the guilt associated with the thought will stop it from manifesting itself. Also, looking at the word racist, we see that the word was necessary to form laws and policies to fight it, now we have a word to use in forming environmental laws and policies.

To recap, our class has created and defined the opposite of an environmentalist. Our hope is that it can be used as a tool against those who fit the definition (which currently applies to practically all of us). We hope that it will become an essential, yet invisible, tool in the environmental movement, just as the word racist was in the civil rights movement.

It took 33 years from the first time the word racist was used until the UN created the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Now you know where we are, now let’s talk about where we are going.

front

inside

We are spending the remainder of the semester trying to come up with innovative and meaningful ways of introducing the language into culture. One example, that has been posted on a few websites already is the package we created for the guests who attended the Juice conference at OCAD a few weeks ago. The package contained a five dollar bill with the definition on depletist printed on it. The concept was that we were giving the recipients two tools. One being the word, the second being the money. In the package we quoted Joel Makower “Every time you open your wallet you cast a vote – either for or against the environment.” By placing the definition on the money we forced the owner of the bill to think twice about what they were buying. This was also a great way to spread the word, while at the same time creating no waste. We also created stickers with the definition printed on them (which were sized to fit into your dictionary), and to continue with the mandate of no waste we printed instruction on how to add the word to your computer’s dictionary on the back.

We are continuing to look for smart ways of getting the word out, please comment if you have any ideas.

We are also going to be spending some time documenting the spread of the word. We hope to create a case study of how a word becomes part of our language. I am posting all the links on del.icio.us tagging them with the word depletist, feel free to do the same. If you have any information about the spread of the word that you think we would find interesting please post a comment or get in touch with me. To share what I know about it’s spread thus far…There are 31 unique google hits, up from zero a week ago. It is in the Wiktionary. It is posted on blogs across Canada (from Toronto to Victoria) It was posted on Core 77 design blog. There are now two videos on YouTube. Robert Ouellette (a Juice speaker and editor of Reading Toronto) introduced the word at a United Nations Symposium on sustainable design in New York to some of the worlds most influential academics and politicians, and he reports that it was well received. Mary Jane Braide, who was in attendance at Juice, passed the word on to some of her colleagues at Bruce Mau Design and they intend on using it with some of their environmentally minded clients. Greg Van Alstyne (currently a Professor and Researcher at OCAD and former Director of The Institute Without Boundaries) mentioned to me that he used the word at a new media conference in New York over the weekend.
And all this happened only 7 days after the word was first used in public.

I think saying we are amazed at the incredible pace at which this is happening wouldn’t even come close to describing it. We’d like thank all those who have been using the word, and have as a result become a part of this exciting project.

-Chris

Advertisements

8 responses to “The Project

  1. Here is a list of students participating in this project:

    Nathaniel Archer
    Christopher Braden
    Jonathan Chetner
    Jan Drewniak
    Michael Daniel Gagne
    Michelle Erin Glass
    Monica-Anne Hunter
    Ken Sakata Murphy
    Andreea Omat
    Nicole Louise Ostonal
    Mark Poon
    Philip Rae
    Pamela Ramirez
    Aisha Sheikh
    Jeffrey Tappenden
    Beau Turner
    Andrea Wang
    Mike Dudek

  2. thanks for posting the background here via word and video. nice work.

  3. Pingback: Meme 2 [we are all cells] « Think Tank

  4. Dear Chris;

    I have only just now been introduced to your ideas and you project. As a neo-luddite for many years it has only been this past week that I got “wired up” as they say and am still learning how to use a computer.
    the point is that your Blog is the first thing I’ve seen to make me believe in the future and that there can be a future for your generation. Thank you for that.

    Marshall mcluhan may be able to help you out as you try to think your way through the many valuable questions you are raising. he talked about the “Four Laws” of media . perhaps you have already learned about these as your article demonstrates some of these laws. I f you are not aware of McLuhan’s
    insights in this regard I think you would find it very useful to do so as you continue your research.

    You are on to a VERY BIG IDEA. Run with it. i wish I could enrol in your class.

    sincerely,

    Philip chester

  5. Hi Philip,
    Welcome to the internet! Glad to see you found us. Thank you for the extremely complimentary comments. You don’t have to be enrolled in the class to participate, by having read this you are already a part of the project.
    Thanks again for the comments, and keep checking back to see our progress.

    best,

    Chris

  6. I have just posted this on my blog and have begun to drop the word into my conversations.

    http://jakejakob.blogspot.com/2006/11/depletist.html#links

  7. great idea! here’s a quick initial response: i would add a note on the comparison with calling someone racist. it is indeed a powerful word, and receives strong reactions. i wonder, however, if they are the reactions that lead to sustained change (or change at all), or do they lead to protracted stances with heels dug as deeply as possible? having worked with that concept i have found (and so have many others) that it is more useful–when change is our goal–to separate peoples feelings/ideas/beliefs from them as people. being called a racist is a personal attack. being told your ideas are racist is an attack on those ideas, not you (true, many people do not make this distinction consciously, but it allows the person to have a different relationship with those ideas, because, after all, most are passed on to us from others. being called out on them allows us the chance to reflect on what we actually believe. If the attack is personal we are much less likely to really look at what our reaction should be).

    does this view come off as apologetic? at times. does it always work? no. is it important to reflect on? yes.

    words, as you say, are powerful. keep up the good work!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s