What is cool, and how does one know it? Who decides it and who produces it? Few dictionaries do a good job defining the phenomenon to its degree; nonetheless, it is unmistakable yet supremely elusive. Those that exemplify it cannot pinpoint it, and those that imitate it cannot tell for sure that they have it right even when the resemblance is impeccable. Cool seems like a masterpiece that only fits its origin; leaving the fakers condemned to their insecurities. Cool would be great merchandise if only one could buy it, but then that will not be cool anymore. This remains one of the puzzling elements of cool - just a little more or less, and it loses its cool. So what is cool?
The November 2001 issue of Wired magazine highlights cool as a revolutionary force in the history of cultural and technological production. “Attempting to capture cool is a trap,” the section begins. "Cool has emerged as a series of movements, an unwavering stance of individuality, and more recently, a flash of red-hot radiation.” Even though one supposedly cannot name cool, the pages that followed map an ideal that included items as distinct as James Dean, television, cocktails, and Miles Davis' Birth of the Cool (Rice). The same holds true with the experience during my personal interviews on the subject. Everyone described cool with examples rather than a definition. One of them said, “Cool is a beautiful car or limo,” then when I asked if every 'beautiful car or limo' is cool, the answer was obvious and even facially expressed, no. Andrei Santos, a good friend, explained that cool was not that easy to pinpoint. The case is true with PBS's 2001 video on 'The merchants of cool'. The narrator, almost as though puzzled, said, “… cool keeps changing so how do you map it - pin it down?” Cool is indeed that difficult to snap into one definition, but the attributes of cool keep it distinct. For one thing, cool beautifully exudes and communicates inspiration.
Something so glorious will indeed attract hunters. Thus, everybody wants to be cool. PBS logically calls this search 'Cool Hunting', which Malcolm Gladwell, a writer for The New Yorker and best-selling author, defines as structured around the search for a certain kind of personality and player in a given social network. This search of cool is why the Internet is full of tips and nuggets on how to be cool. Cool has become the epitome of self-esteem and confidence; the one everybody wants to know; the ideal personality - and most of all, the one virtue that commands a craze in every cranny of the earth. Every ethnicity, class, and people know, understand, and respect Cool, even though its appearance in diverse situations and cultural context differs. Cool remains that rudimentary quality that inspires admiration. One of such inspirations, as at least morphed by good marketers, is that many buy their products. Hence, many marketers have tried and still try to use cool as the final commuter of their finished goods or services because, as one would imagine, when cool has it, everyone wants it. This especially comes to mind because of the generation we live in today - the pop culture generation. Consequently, big corporations trying to transcend into unchartered territories, like the teenage mind, have found it imperative to accept and study the foreign overlord Cool.
Cool, nonetheless, remains elusive. One only knows it when he or she finds it, but the paradox of cool hunting is that it kills what it finds. As soon as people and marketers discover cool, it stops being cool. Thus, Malcolm Gladwell's statement, “By discovering cool, you force cool to move on to the next thing.” In effect, the faster one shares cool, the more one forces the person who has it to move on. This is the life cycle of cool, but an interesting twist is that just as in bush fallow or shifting cultivation, a previous cool sometimes relives but dies out again. Thus, the slogan is simple: “If your neighbors are in on it, it can't be cool” (Rice). The earlier discussed Wired magazine article from November 2001 concluded the advertisement with a homage to technology. “Media multiplied. Technology shifted gears” (Rice). These media help beam and replicate cool from one location into hundreds of million homes, tracked and data-processed. This makes the spread of cool extremely fast, perhaps with its imminent death. When cool dies, its artifacts, such as our aforementioned car and limo, gadget, party, etc., starts to lose their inspiring cover.
So who determines cool? Big businesses work tremendously hard to be the dominant influence of cool. This has led to the creation of firms now known as Cool hunting firms that Malcolm Gladwell describes in his March 17th 1997 article entitled The Coolhunt:
“A coolhunting firm is a marketing agency whose exclusive purpose is to conduct research of the youth demographic in the areas listed above. They then compile their data and produce reports detailing emerging and declining trends in youth culture as well as predictions for future trends. These reports are then sold to various companies whose products target the youth demographic. They also offer consulting services. Coolhunting firms often provide services for some of the largest corporations in the world.” (gladwell.com)
Therefore, from this research, corporations learn about the life of the regular youth in his or her natural habitat or environment. Armed with this information, the business makes and then promotes new products that will appeal to the youth. Brands like Sprite and Reebok have even married a culture, pop-culture, with their brand under the commonality of cool. These cool hunting firms enable the corporation to feed, literally, the youth with what they really want, but not without its downside. Gladwell also asserts, “This is the first rule of the cool: The quicker the chase, the quicker the flight.” In other words, the act of discovering what is cool is what causes cool to move on, which explains the triumphant circularity of coolhunting: because we have coolhunters, cool changes more quickly, and because cool changes more quickly, corporations need coolhunters (Gladwell). This remains true because of the paradox of cool, if everyone is cool, then it ain't cool. Cool is not a philosophy. Cool is even a difficult thing to quantify because it is not a science; “it is really a question of how much you trust the one doing your interpretation and how good their instincts are…” (Gladwell). Thus, the fine gamble line remains for corporations to dare.
If the cool hunters are the determinants of cool, the media is a leading producer of cool. Networks and Television channels like Viacom and Disney have become the trendsetters of cool, shrines where consumers turn to know the next cool. These cool makers idealize celebrities which, in turn, show or tell their audience what clothes to wear; what beverage to drink; and even how to talk. The fad catches on and the ball starts rolling with the innovators and early adopters until it spreads to the early and late majority and becomes uncool. By this time, the media, through further research, would be talking about the new cool, and the hunt continues - for both consumers and producers. Hence another paradox of who influences whom; is it the media by its consumer research, or the consumers who facilitates the research?
Certainly, the appreciation of cool has evolved from James Dean's rebellious image in 'Rebel Without a Cause' to today's sophisticated media and culture. No person or agency has successfully boxed it. The addictive spectral element continues to elude all that hunts it, and its effect for finders are short-lived. Marlene Connor in her book entitled “What is Cool?” states about cool, “It means everything and nothing at once.” How can anyone attain something that is both “everything” and “nothing”? Perhaps hunting is a close answer. Nonetheless, cool shows itself in every field and industry. It is like an allusive piece of life that is both scarce and ubiquitous. Perchance, the delusion might be from how it is both recognized and commonly perceived. However, certain kids like those at Harlem, the Bronx, and others immersed into culture are undaunted by the concept. This is probably because of cool's connection with art and culture. Such kids are often trend-setters; always with the new cool or just fabricating it for the early adopter and then the early majority that eventually forces these kids to move on to the next cool. I remember going to shop with a friend of mine. Shanna was the kind of girl that looked good in everything she owned. As we walked down the sports section, she picked up a headband and stood still - obviously absorbed. Then, trying to remain composed, she started with a voice that gave her thrill away, “oh Dili, isn't this the coolest band ever?!” Her 'ever' was strong and emphasized, her eyes still glazed on the band. I nodded. She then gave me a quick gaze as though not buying the act. “This,” she started, but was then interrupted by another woman who suddenly appeared in the section we were at, accompanied by a store assistant. The woman pointed to the same heap of headbands that had impressed Shanna. It turns out she wanted to buy a good quantity of the bands. “My students look adorable in these,” she said turning to us, “we are going camping, and these would make an outstanding theme for my class.” As we all politely smiled, Shanna slid away. When I finally caught up with her I asked, “Hey, how about your headbands?” In a reproving manner, she slurred, “That's is soo 30 seconds ago.”
Gladwell, Malcolm. "Gladwell Dot Com - the Coolhunt." Gladwell Dot Com - Malcolm Gladwell, Blink, Tipping Point and New Yorker Articles. 17 Mar. 1997. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.gladwell.com/1997/1997_03_17_a_cool.htm>.
Connor, Marlene K. "What Is Cool?: Understanding Black Manhood in America." Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.amazon.com/What-Cool-Understanding-Manhood-America/dp/0972456236>.
Rice, Jeff. "What Is Cool? Notes on Intellectualism, Popular Culture, and Writing." CTheory.net. 5 Oct. 2002. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=338>.
"News Public Affairs Player: Video." The Merchants of Cool. PBS. Frontline, 27 Feb. 2001. PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. Web. 01 Dec. 2010. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/video/flv/generic.html?s=frol02p70&continuous=1>.
"Wired Magazine." A Special Advertising Section. November (2001): ix-xv.p. ix. Print.
Lasn, Kalle. Culture Jam: The Uncooling of America. New York: Eagle Brook, 1999 pgs.xiii-xiv.
"What Is Cool." Interview by Dilinna C. Francis. Andrei Santos. Live.
"What Is Cool." Interview by Dilinna C. Francis. Wendy Akeru. Live.
