Women, Instagram and Calligraphy: Neoliberal Logic in Production of Aesthetic Objects Essay

Introduction

The contemporary technology-driven world is drastically impacted by the presence of diverse forms of social media that dominate the domain of communication. However, in addition to serving the purpose of the connection, social media has become a place for commerce and self-promotion. Despite the overall positive effect that social media provide equal opportunities for all users to perform as entrepreneurs, it now shows the characteristics and behaviours induced by neoliberal logic. Neoliberalism as a phenomenon that starts prevailing in different spheres of human life, including politics, economy, gender roles, labour and business, pursues self-entrepreneurship and the emergence of precarious work.

Interestingly, the beauty industry and the production of aesthetic objects have occupied a significant place in online commerce and now comprise a substantial part of the content in social media. Calligraphy, as one of the manifestations of aesthetic products, is vastly used by online entrepreneurs as a means of business promotion. More importantly, the majority of entrepreneurs who become actively involved in the sphere of aesthetics production are women. Such a reality imposes the need for the research of a valuable topic that deals with the role of women in the creation of aesthetic content for online commerce on social media. In this paper, it is argued that the behaviours of the producers of calligraphy, as well as other actors of aesthetic objects’ production, are impacted by gender-specific and technology-driven logic of neoliberalism. This argument will be developed within the discussion of neoliberalism and its impact on biopolitics, the following precariousness of labour and the creation of calligraphy as an aesthetic object that demonstrates gendered division of labour.

Neoliberalism and Biopolitics

The contemporary world governments and economies experience the vast influence of the new type of political rationality, which is neoliberalism. The phenomenon that emerged in the second half of the twentieth century, neoliberalism, has expanded its scope of impact to the economy, sociology, social gender roles, labour and other spheres. This issue is at the centre of research and scholarly discussion of many political scientists, sociologists, anthropologists, philosophers and economists (Brown 48). One of the first theorists of neoliberalism was Foucault, who defined it as a globally omnipresent type of political reason that enables regulating “society by the market” (Brown 62). Thus, neoliberalism works under the principle of a free market economy that becomes a new form of governmentality based on competition that generates continuous economic growth.

The ubiquitous character of neoliberal logic in all spheres of modern people’s lives imposes significant shifts in the ways economy, politics and society develop today. Foucault’s ideas on neoliberalism imply its ability to control the economic growth by enforcing its independence and managing inequality not by “achieving equality but managing inequality for the secure pursuit of economic production” (Repo 136). According to Brown, as the result of neoliberalism, labour becomes human capital, “entrepreneurship replaces production,” “competition replaces exchange and inequality replaces equality,” thus fundamentally reforming the economic sphere (64-65). Moreover, under the guidance of neoliberal biopolitics, the lives of people, their health, family relations and other social issues are regulated by the new type of governmentality. Repo states that biopolitics has its immediate impact on feminism due to its regulation of human reproduction in the conditions of overpopulation (135). Thus, the ambiguity of gender equality in labour is induced by the need for women to work as a choice not to create a family.

Foucault’s perspective on neoliberalism does not consider technology as a contributor to neoliberal tendencies in the social and economic domains. However, technological framework and social media algorithms are crucial in shaping the neoliberal labour market by enforcing self-promotion and self-regulating behaviours and skills. The above-mentioned tendencies of emerging entrepreneurship, a competition that produces winners and losers and ultimate inequality, are vividly seen in women’s self-promotion and commerce on online social media platforms. Therefore, neoliberal logic is inherent to the modern labour market and enhances the emergence of precarious work.

Labour Precariousness

Within the realm of neoliberalism, humans are no longer mere labour actors, but independent enterprises on their own who are encouraged to make their individual contribution to economic growth. With the emergence of feminism, the issue of gender equality in labour market has intertwined with the ideas of biopolitics and imposed new roles for females. According to Repo, domesticated middle-class women are regarded as “flexible and creative individuals whose productive capacities” can contribute to the “growth and competitiveness” of the economy (137). Such a tendency of women’s active inclusion in labour market in combination with the neoliberal logic of economic growth, has produced a new type of non-standard employment called precarity.

It is evident that the previously discussed neoliberal technology-driven tendencies of online commerce through self-promotion facilitate the prevalence of precarious and hybrid forms of employment. Overall, neoliberal economic growth generates small businesses and craft-oriented entrepreneurship. Therefore, the craft industry is exposed to a significant level of development within several recent decades (Black et al. 271). Often, entrepreneurs or the actors of online commerce invest their resources, including time and finances, to promote their business and supplement their income. Self-regulating individuals are at the centre of the neoliberal labour market since they are extensively exposed to free-market forces, competition and entrepreneurship. However, there are more disadvantages in such a state of affairs than advantages.

Precarious work implies non-standard employer-employee relationships. On the one hand, it might be considered as a positive type of occupation since it provides flexibility for workers’ time-management and professional behaviour, enabling them to make a living out of their hobbies and passions (Black et al. 274). However, such employment provides no stability or social support, is usually underpaid, does not guarantee sustainable professional growth and imposes increased self-responsibility of an individual.

It is noteworthy that the very nature of precarious work is inherently attributed to women. Indeed, according to Black et al., the majority of such hybrid forms of work generate from craft industries and include such activities as calligraphy, “sewing, knitting, quilting, cooking and baking” (272). Since such types of work are connected with the craft industry and creative businesses, they attributed to women that implies a question of concern for the present research. On the one hand, females are the independent actors on a labour market; but on the other hand, they are subjected to inequality due to the oppressing reality and struggles of precarious work. Indeed, as Black et al. state, “high levels of individualization” exposes precarious workers to a new “culture of risk” and search for “individual solutions to systematic problems” (274). One such solution might be the creative approaches to increasing the level of promotion, which is facilitated by the opportunities of the Internet.

Indeed, the emergence of technological innovations and social media platforms has amplified the scope of precarious employment prevalence. The newly generated profession of a blogger is entitled to social media algorithms and provides multiple opportunities for diverse types of creative content (Black et al. 273). Digital devices make it possible to bring work home and blur the lines between a workspace and home space, thus only increasing the level of hybridization of online entrepreneurship. Since the majority of women are still responsible for domestic welfare, they engage in such non-standard activities out of necessity and not a choice. Consequently, as Black et al. state, active female inclusion in crafts industry and beauty-related content creation is framed by “feminist desire to have the domestic arts and crafts recognized as legitimate” (274). Therefore, the production of aesthetic objects within online platforms is the result of neoliberal influences.

Production of Aesthetic Objects

Within the framework of the above-mentioned issues, aesthetics became a marketing tool and a business product, the manipulated creation of which forms an alternative idealized reality. Instagram is one of the most popular online platforms for commerce and self-promotion today. Fashion, beauty advice, interior decorations, crafts, calligraphy and many other activities occupy the leading place in blogging themes. Thus, these spheres are drastically left to women who are perceived experts in these fields.

The presentation of created images, which are usually personalized and deal with blogger’s life, adhere to the rules and Instagram algorithms impose particular behaviour form the side of aesthetic objects’ producers. Indeed, using “impression management,” bloggers create a non-realistic, idealized image of their life, thus reinterpreting the reality alternating the perception of femininity (Black et al. 284). The dichotomy of independent and creative work of a woman on the one hand and the subjectivity of the non-realistic image created by her is a problem of gendered labour division imposed by neoliberalism. Moreover, Elias et al. emphasize that the emergence of the crafts industry and its representation in aesthetic content on Instagram implies the opposition between subjectivity and aesthetic desire of “styling the self” (10). Such ambiguity is formed under the influence of the mechanics and self-promoting principles of Instagram and other social media platforms.

The production of aesthetic objects, as well as any other content online, has a significant influence on the formation of social ideals and the perception of reality. The very framework of Instagram imposes users to improve their content and make it less realistic and more appealing to enable promotion and ultimate success under the growing competitive rates. As the case of an Australian teenage blogger Essena O’Neill shows, to be popular on Instagram, one has to use filters for images, employ particular types of clothing and posing to protrude feminine bodily features (Elias et al. 3). Thus, the Instagram algorithm, although it works within the paradigm of the neoliberal idea of free market and competition fostering equality, imposes gendered labour and objectification of females.

Calligraphy on Instagram as a Gendered Manifestation of Neoliberalism

Continuous creation of content is the means of social media commerce. As it has been identified earlier, calligraphy, as well as other activities dealing with aesthetics and beauty, are inherently feminine. At the same time, the very design of social media platforms’ algorithms implies self-promotion, devotion, resources investment and specific kind of behaviour that generates consecutive income. Thus, women who use calligraphy or the production of other aesthetic objects as a way to earn money develop a set of self-entrepreneurial habits imposed by Instagram algorithms. Since blogging and online commerce are reliant on project-based and freelance labour, they provoke significant complications for the entrepreneurs (Duffy & Hund 2). Self-branding entails “emotional labour,” underpayment, need to search for solutions independently and “induce or suppress feeling in order to sustain the outward countenance that produces the proper state of mind in others” (Duffy & Hund 3). Calligraphy is one of the ways to both increase the promotion rate by introducing aesthetics to a blog and build blogging activity around it.

Interestingly, men also actively participate in calligraphy, as well as in other types of creative work; however, their inclusion is not perceived as inherent to this kind of occupation. As a consequence of neoliberal influences on economic growth, women are exposed to being the main actors in the precarious labour market. Such a tendency provokes further precariousness of work and an extensive gendered division of labour.

Conclusion

In summation, the global neoliberalization tendencies imply vast shifts not only in politics, governance and economy but also in the social, demographic, and labour issues. Theoretically pursuing equality, it imposes the growing role of entrepreneurship, competition, and inequality for economic growth. Competition and free market in combination with technological advancement and the emergence of social media platforms provoke precariousness of labour. Such a non-traditional type of employment prevails in the female part of the population due to domestic roles played by women. Thus, beauty blogging, calligraphy and the production of other types of aesthetic products are attributed to women. Significant difficulties of income generation, objectification and underpayment imposed by Instagram algorithms diminish the role of females in the growth of the economy and worsen the issue of the gendered division of labour.

Works Cited

Black, Shannon, et al. “Gender, Precarity and Hybrid Forms of Work Identity in the Virtual Domestic Arts and Crafts Industry in Canada and the US.” Gender, Place & Culture, vol. 26, no. 2, 2019, pp. 272-292.

Brown, Wendy. “Foucault’s Birth of Biopolitics Lectures: Charting Neoliberal Political Rationality.” Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution, MIT Press, 2015, pp. 47-78.

Duffy, Brooke Erin, and Emily Hund. “‘Having It All’ on Social Media: Entrepreneurial Femininity and Self-Branding Among Fashion Bloggers.” Social Media + Society, vol. 1, no. 2, 2015, pp. 1-11.

Elias, Sofia Ana, et al. “Aesthetic Labour: Beauty Politics in Neoliberalism.” Aesthetic Labour: Rethinking Beauty Politics in Neoliberalism, edited by Ana Sofia Elias et al., Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2017, pp. 1-49.

Repo, Jemima. “Gender Equality as Neoliberal Governmentality.” The Biopolitics of Gender, Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 133-157.