IKEA costumer appears to be forcibly removing roots from her craft constructed chair in advertisement of ‘modernity. Crispin Porter + Bogusky (2004).
IKEA in India: The Colonial of International Retail
IKEA has become a rite of passage for every step of our lives. Designs such as the BILLY bookcase have become so universal, we see the same models scattered around our everyday. As the retailer expands, so does the prolificacy of their designs. Our environments may change, but our furniture has stopped. IKEA’s takeover of the furniture industry has grown across 52 countries with the same product range. This has transformed the retailer into a universal aesthetic for interiors. Advertising the complete refurnishing of interiors based on IKEA design, local furniture and craft are marginalized and associated with high prices and heritage.
IKEA´s products are organized under the IKEA brand. It is as representations of the IKEA brand that products benefit from its unique signification. Products in their distinct style and construction have an IKEA look, but the signification of this look, the associations which the retailer’s products have, is the result of the work of the brand, its positioning and revelation of itself. This dissertation focuses on the construction of this signification. Especially, it focuses on the brand as a means to promote IKEA in non-Western markets, and shows how IKEA interacts with previous colonialist value systems. It is not because IKEA recreates colonialism that it resembles it. It is because IKEA presents an altered but renewed form of cultural domination, through the ‘soft power’ implicit in design and brand (Nye, 2004), and because of the separation of this power from political responsibility.
The absence of distinctly Indian elements in IKEA’s furniture and brand image is consistent with globalization and the neutrality of goods in international economic ‘flows’. It is also consistent with the practices of colonialism. Even IKEA’s assertion of a unique capacity to define and rationalize itself - the characteristic of its brand - establishes the connection with the colonial world. It was especially the ability of colonial regimes to set the terms of their interaction and to create mythology about themselves which defined their power. According to Said: it is characteristic of cultural dominance to “.... ascribe reality and reference to objects (other words) of its own making, mythic language and discourse, that is, it cannot be anything other than systematic; one does not really make discourse, without first belonging - in some cases unconsciously, but any rate involuntarily - to the ideologies and institutions that guarantee its existence” (Said, 1978:321). The formidable network of signification which IKEA brings to its expansion in India, when seen from a certain distance, strongly resembles the autonomy and self-sufficiency of colonial regimes. In this case however, the state and its institutions are not the main object of takeover. The object of takeover is the consumer, the individual whose identity provides the key to the success of the brand. It is through the conversion of individuals and their aspirations to its brand that IKEA replicates the authority of colonial power.
-
Nye , J., 2004. Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics , New York : Perseus Books.
Said, E., 1978. Orientalism. New York.
IKEA has become a rite of passage for every step of our lives. Designs such as the BILLY bookcase have become so universal, we see the same models scattered around our everyday. As the retailer expands, so does the prolificacy of their designs. Our environments may change, but our furniture has stopped. IKEA’s takeover of the furniture industry has grown across 52 countries with the same product range. This has transformed the retailer into a universal aesthetic for interiors. Advertising the complete refurnishing of interiors based on IKEA design, local furniture and craft are marginalized and associated with high prices and heritage.
IKEA´s products are organized under the IKEA brand. It is as representations of the IKEA brand that products benefit from its unique signification. Products in their distinct style and construction have an IKEA look, but the signification of this look, the associations which the retailer’s products have, is the result of the work of the brand, its positioning and revelation of itself. This dissertation focuses on the construction of this signification. Especially, it focuses on the brand as a means to promote IKEA in non-Western markets, and shows how IKEA interacts with previous colonialist value systems. It is not because IKEA recreates colonialism that it resembles it. It is because IKEA presents an altered but renewed form of cultural domination, through the ‘soft power’ implicit in design and brand (Nye, 2004), and because of the separation of this power from political responsibility.
The absence of distinctly Indian elements in IKEA’s furniture and brand image is consistent with globalization and the neutrality of goods in international economic ‘flows’. It is also consistent with the practices of colonialism. Even IKEA’s assertion of a unique capacity to define and rationalize itself - the characteristic of its brand - establishes the connection with the colonial world. It was especially the ability of colonial regimes to set the terms of their interaction and to create mythology about themselves which defined their power. According to Said: it is characteristic of cultural dominance to “.... ascribe reality and reference to objects (other words) of its own making, mythic language and discourse, that is, it cannot be anything other than systematic; one does not really make discourse, without first belonging - in some cases unconsciously, but any rate involuntarily - to the ideologies and institutions that guarantee its existence” (Said, 1978:321). The formidable network of signification which IKEA brings to its expansion in India, when seen from a certain distance, strongly resembles the autonomy and self-sufficiency of colonial regimes. In this case however, the state and its institutions are not the main object of takeover. The object of takeover is the consumer, the individual whose identity provides the key to the success of the brand. It is through the conversion of individuals and their aspirations to its brand that IKEA replicates the authority of colonial power.
-
Nye , J., 2004. Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics , New York : Perseus Books.
Said, E., 1978. Orientalism. New York.