No doubt. But do we need toys to play? And a stream of new, different toys? What is novelty’s relationship to play? How much if any novelty is essential to that experience?
Synths and laptops are actually not very haptic. Especially compared to graphite wearing against the tooth of paper, or slicing a lemon. Synths rarely vibrate and the texture of knurled plastic/smooth aluminum is relatively homogenous. And many module manufacturers are also using the same components, at that!
I wonder if the acquisitiveness associated w gear for many is that the haptic ludic experience is actually not sufficiently nourishing.
I know when I eat a bag of Doritos, I just want another bag. Until I feel sick.
[skips off to spread jam on synth knobs and replace faceplates w scrap leather]
I read a book on finances I liked called “Going Broke.” One of the author’s suggestions to avoid spending needlessly is limiting exposure to advertising.
Despite its psychologically compelling and nearly irresistable temptations, sometimes there are choices we can make that help us steer clear of ads (both formal and informal). The catch is we may have to make perceived sacrifices and tolerate our urges without acting on them.
I noticed a thread running through a lot of these posts re: the implicit social aspect of gear. Maybe that’s part of what drives the acquisitiveness.
“Click ‘add to cart’ in case of loneliness”?
15 Likes