I know this is not new, but I find it quite amazing how the entertainment industry can breathe new life into certain ‘brands’ when the creator has died.
Actually let me rephrase that … I find it quite amazing how the entertainment industry leverages the name of certain ‘brands’ creators, even when they are long gone.
A perfect case in point is the new[ish] Jason Bourne book …
Yep … despite Robert Ludlum dying in 2001, we have a book that isn’t just based on the character developed by the author, but is supposedly written in the style of him as well.
What next?
William Shakespeare to release “Romeo & Juliet 2: This Time It’s Personal”?
The issue I have with this approach is that ultimately it is dependent on a serious amount of post rationalisation … and in my experience, when someone tries to understand the reasoning and rationale of another person’s actions and decisions, they often fail to recognise the little details that either drove much of its development or gave it its uniqueness or – worse still – is a rationale for something that had no rationale for it.
____________________________________________________________________________
“Our most beloved products were developed by hunch, guesswork, and fanaticism, by creators who were eccentric – or even stark raving mad”
Jack Mingo, How the Cadillac Got its Fins
____________________________________________________________________________
There’s many examples however there’s two I’d like to talk about … AXE/Lynx and Singapore.
I am a massive fan of the AXE/Lynx work.
It’s not just because it’s one of – in my opinion – BBH’s best campaigns, it’s because it literally revolutionised the category.
Previously to AXE/Lynx, it was all about 24 hour protection … and whilst at HHCL we did try and do something similarish with SURE … their campaign just clicked.
Now whilst many people may think it was all about ‘Spray On Sex’ it was much more subtle than that – it was about seduction and the ability to turn good girls naughty – however over the years thanks to different agencies getting involved in different territories, the subtlety that made the campaign so good has slowly but surely been wittered down to the point that it’s now seen as ‘SHAG SPRAY’ … and whilst many will say that change is a reflection of the different time and the different cultural cues, the reality is the people who developed this unsubtle version either failed to spot the little details that made that campaign so good or wanted to be indulgent with an idea that basically writes itself.
The other brand that I feel has suffered because of simplistic rationalisation is my beloved Singapore.
As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, I believe LKY had a dream for Singapore that was driven by vision, passion and pragmatism … but if you were to ask people today, they’d credit him with the ability to attract business – and whilst that was part of the strategy – it was a means to an end, his goal was never for Singapore to be the bitch of Western business and yet now, if you look at the things that the Government is spending it’s time and efforts on, they often fail to have the depth, sophistication and down-right ingenuity that their founding psychological genius utilised to kick start the country to where they currently enjoy.
Post rationalisation exists in most industries – especially adland – but if you only look at the output of the work created and ignore the backgrounds and circumstances of the people who developed it, you may find you have failed to include the secret herbs and spices that enabled good to be awesome.