By and large, branding literature provides a view of global brands as primarily signifying, semiotic devices. This semiotization of brands is due to a cultural bias that favors the discursive world of signs over lived practices and experiences. Taking Best Western global brand and using Lefèbvre’s tripartite conceptualization—spatial practice, representation of space, and spaces of representation—it is argued that global brands can be seen as generic spaces. However, whereas generic spaces are most commonly regarded as disembodied spaces, in this article, it is argued that they actually are lived, embodied, and specific experiences.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aaker, D. (1996). Building strong brands. New York: Free Press
2.
Aaker, D. A., & Joachimsthaler, E. (1999, November-December). The lure of global branding. Harvard Business Review, 137-144
3.
Apéria, T. (2001). Brand relationship management: Den varumärkesbyggande processen. Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University School of Business
4.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
5.
Casey, E. S. (1997). The fate of place: A philosophical history. London: California University Press
6.
Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell
7.
Derrida, J. (1976). Voix et phenomène [Speech and phenomenon]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France
8.
Feldwick, P. (1996). Defining a brand. In D. Cowley (Ed.), Understanding brands by 10 people who do. London: Kogan Page
9.
Frabotta, D. (2000). Brands gain global clout. Hotel & Motel Management, 215(9), 1, 12
10.
Friedman, T. (2000). The Lexus and the olive tree: Understanding globalization. New York: Random House
11.
Harvey, D. (1992). The condition of postmodernity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell
