Conclusion

This thesis has had the purpose of investigate the actions and objects consumers make use of in order to (de)construct the symbolic boundaries, which help classify themselves and others and form the desired affiliation and distinction for their identity-constructive consumption. This conclusion will show exactly how I have answered the problematization of this thesis.

Initially I determined the paradigmatic frame of this thesis, and following the argumentation for the choice of the constructivist approach and even more accurately the social constructivist approach, with a set off point in Berger & Luckmann, I discussed the key themes of this thesis and the interpretations of these themes under the social constructivist paradigm. Furthermore I discussed the consequences these definitions of key themes under the social constructivist approach, would have for the interpretations of certain phenomena within the analysis of this thesis. One of the most important remarks in this instance is the understanding of identity, identity as a question of who you are. The notion of identity for this thesis is understood as a result of a continuous symbolic negotiation and interaction between the individual and society.

Furthermore the notion of identity as an “I” belonging to a plethora of “we”s (Mead, 1934; Tajfel

& Turner, 1982) is important, as it is in this identity as group belonging perspective that we find the problematization of the (de)construction of symbolic boundaries.

The symbolic nature of consumption is also a very important notion for this thesis, in this regard the interpretative consumption perspective useful and served to show consumption as one very important source of identity. For this consumption a universe of meanings exists, and

subsequently the choices of consumer electronics have meanings in this universe. These meanings are negotiated when a consumer asks himself the question of who he is in relation to his choice of consumer electronics.

Both individual and society take part in the responding of this question, the individual by attributing the electronic products and thus himself meanings. Society does this as well amongst other things by attributing stereotypical meanings to electronic products but also through

advertising, trendsetting famous people and very importantly for this thesis reference groups.

The analysis shows the following:

77

 There are clear differences in answering the question of who am I or who is (s)he, in relation to whether their choice of consumer electronics is an Apple branded product or another, commonly referred to as PC branded products (even though there are several thousand different PC product brands). However there are also differences in answering these questions between the Apple users themselves, there seems to be at least four groupings or reference groups maybe even identity forms giving meaning to the Apple brand. These consist of hipsters, creatives and trendsetters who are being chased by the followers. An interesting finding in this regard is that though the creatives and

trendsetters are usually discussed with positive connotations the hipsters are more

ambiguous in their appearances in the discussion of the interviewees and sometimes have undesirable connotations.

 The societal negotiation and response to the identity question is amongst other things seen in the stereotypical ideas of which type of Apple user you are. This is dependent on several different things here amongst, the clothes you wear, the bike you ride, the variety of Apple products you own, the café you zip your coffee at etc. Thus societal image of the hipster is a person who has a creative job perhaps as a music producer, likes fashion clothing, drinks his coffee at the most trendy cafes and travels to Los Angeles with his large portfolio of Apple products. While the follower is more aspirational towards the trendsetters/hipsters/creative, wears ordinary clothes, could be a student of a non-creative subject and has only one Apple product which is the cheapest option.

 Thus it is important to notice that it is to a large extent the holistic image of the consumer that answers the question of who am I/who is he. Consequently it is in the holistic context that consumers separate themselves from others and create the symbolic communication and boundaries which serve to show (dis)affiliation from (un)desired reference groups or imagined communities.

 Depending on how the individual consumer interprets the nature of the group or network he feels affiliation to, the need of the consumer towards the brand can be of different characteristics. The groupings found in the analysis can be either of subcultural or community characteristics. The member of a subcultural grouping feels a need for protection from the consumers who in their view possess lower symbolic capita and

78 imitate their behavior. Meanwhile the member of the community grouping feels a need to advocate, develop and share the brand.

From a theoretical point of view, the meanings attached to the Apple products, the stereotypes attached to the users, the groupings or networks consumers feel affiliation to, are all part of the socially constructed culture that fosters our identity and behavior. They appear as objective truths and realities for the interviewees in this thesis and therefore must be understood as part of the culture they are part of. Culture understood as the blueprint of our society, a system of symbols that makes sense of the world, understood, produced and recognized by significant others.

79