The cultural relevance of the Bic Maxi lighter

The cultural relevance of the Bic Maxi lighter

According to William J. Thomson, the natives of Easter Island’s “method of obtaining fire requires considerable preparation of material and patience on the part of the operator. A pointed stick of hard wood is rubbed against a piece of dry paper-mulberry until a groove, is formed, which finally becomes hot from the friction and ignites the lint or fiber thrown up at the end of the groove. This is blown into a flame, and dried grass added to it until the fire is sufficiently established.”1 Society is still dependent on fire today. If not for bare survival, fire is used for some simple enjoyments of life: candle lights, barbecues, fireplaces, etc. But contemporary methods of obtaining fire often simply require a flick of the thumb. The portable disposable cigarette lighter is a very ubiquitous tool used by many of us who require a flame once in a while. This paper will discuss the Bic Maxi lighter (fig. 1 soon) and its relationship with some of western culture’s contemporary issues, mainly: branding, individual responsibility, the mainstream and ecology. It will illustrate the Maxi’s cultural relevance by presenting the implications of its belonging to the Bic brand, some background issues related to the Child-Guard mechanism, its popularity and omnipresence, and its impact on the environment. Will follow a discussion of the eminent disappearance of the Maxi as a product dependent on a socially deviant behavior.

It is branded

Although they are regarded by many as threatening to our health, destructive to our environment and corrupting our children, brands are an important part of the postindustrial commercial life.2 Many recent books have been chanting an anti-brand rhyme: Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation (2001), François Dufour and José Bové’s The World is Not for Sale (2001), and most importantly, Naomi Klein’s No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies (2000). But still, brands are everywhere: “products, people, countries and companies are all racing to turn themselves into brands — to make their image more likeable [sic] and understandable.”3 Madonna, Canada, Starbucks, Martha Stewart, The European Union, Microsoft are all selling the greatness of being alive, surrounded by their music, culture, coffee, craft, money, software, etc.

Historically, brands were “a form not of exploitation, but of consumer protection. In pre-industrial days, people knew exactly what went into their meat pies and which butchers were trustworthy; once they moved to cities, they no longer did.