Below is my conference draft that is used during office hours with Professor Van Kley.

Chrysler’s Detroit: Defending Place in Regionalist Advertising

In the 2011 Super Bowl ad “Born of Fire”, Chrysler advocates its interest in preserving local regionalism by proudly featuring Detroit’s superior qualities in a compelling two-minute video. Through powerful images of architectural splendor, Eminem’s refreshing native presence and a luxurious tagline, the advertisement succeeds in presenting Detroit’s rebirth through a positive and noble lens. Chrysler’s advertisement strives to highlight the regional qualities of Detroit using critical regionalism, a reactionary process that attempts to surmount the placelessness of modern design while also rejecting the eccentric nature of post-modernism. In particular, Chrysler’s message sits in line with critic Keith Eggener’s theory of critical regionalism. Eggener asserts that the purpose of critical regionalism is to not only to “foster a sense of place and address issues of personal and cultural identity” (Eggener 230), but also to serve the interests of local constituents. Chrysler’s commercial accomplishes just this by highlighting the key points of local Detroit culture. Eggener, however, criticizes the incorrect use of critical regionalism to resist and oppose Western culture and recognizes a conflicting paradox within the theory: “how to become modern and to return to sources; how to revive an old dormant civilization and take part in universal civilization” (Eggener 234). Eggener distinguishes the struggle to resolve underlying tension between local and universal civilizations as the cause of unnecessary strife, more so than its eventual resolution. This unnecessary conflict is observed in the advertisement, highlighted by Chrysler’s attempts to accentuate both local and universal qualities of Detroit. Thus, as Eggener would conclude, it is in our best interest to support local voices and culture. As he notes at the end of his essay, “heeding the voices of those responsible for building particular cultures” is the essential ingredient to representing critical regionalism (235). What Eggener fails to consider is that by only focusing on one specific viewpoint, the advertisement unintentionally simplifies its message by resorting to cultural stereotypes and prevents change. In the case of “Born of Fire”, Chrysler’s zealous dedication to heeding local voices reduces the potential for Detroit’s cultural diversity to be used as an engine for change, revealing inherent loopholes within the rhetoric that Eggener advocates. In contrast to Eggener’s analysis, Reichert Powell justifies retaining critical regionalism as a tool for advancing regional culture through its lasting influence on a larger audience. He remains optimistic of critical regionalism as a social invention, a set of rules for interpreting and advancing culture. Powell recognizes that although conflict arises when considering many different perspectives, this distinction is essential for change. After all, he suggests, the value of critical regionalism lies in the audience’s reactionary response to this tension. This theory is directly applicable to Chrysler’s Super Bowl advertisement. Although it at first seems like the ad oversimplifies Detroit’s regional conflicts in order to resist universal culture and ideas, in actuality the ad serves as a tool for advancing critical regionalism because ultimately the audience’s cultural response is more valuable then the document itself in instigating change.

Through patriotic images and icons that are so uniquely Detroit, the advertisement without a doubt supports promoting local regionalism. However, in its quest to prove that Detroit and the automobile industry still have a unique place in the world without conforming to universal stereotypes, Chrysler overemphasizes certain themes and elements to a degree that breeds defiant regionalism. For example, the narrator aggressively questions the audience’s knowledge of Detroit, particularly from “folks who have never even been here” (“Born of Fire”), and fiercely stands by the city’s underdog story of rebirth. By utilizing edgy rhetorical questions and answering with a matter-of-fact “Well I’ll tell you”, the advertisement advances its belief that Detroit’s distinguishing “hard work and conviction” lead to a life of luxury (“Born of Fire”). The sheer defiance against the rest of the world serves to reclaim the idea that Detroit has made it “to hell and back” with better, more resilient ideas and challenges the ignorant folks who question otherwise (“Born of Fire”). Indeed, in the last scene of the advertisement, Eminem stares defiantly at the camera and points his right index finger for emphasis, finishing with the challenging statement “This is what we do” (“Born of Fire”). This underlying aggression in a way bolsters support from local regions, but is alienating to outside audiences. The result of this conflict is not only cultural segregation, but a misunderstanding between the center and peripheral populations caused by “impulsiveness and lack of analysis or reflection” (Eggener 232). In addition, the narrator adopts a resisting critical regionalist attitude in asserting “this isn’t New York City. Or the Windy City. Or Sin City”. In this case, resistance is negatively implied as a marginal practice, again alienating Detroit from the country by criticizing those who categorize the city carelessly. As Eggener notes, resistance should not be seen as a rejection of modern universal themes, but rather, as an “affirmation of local culture within the general movement of history” and should be used with less intention to fight and more to teach (233).

Ironically, however, despite the focus on proudly defiant regionalism, it took a merger with Fiat, a European company, to help tackle Chrysler’s problems (Kiley, “How Chrysler Chief Olivier Francois Is Selling Detroit”). And yet there is no recognition of Fiat in the advertisement at all. Furthermore, out of the $7.5 billion bailout of U.S. loans, $9 million (about 12%) was used on Chrysler’s two-minute ad (Waldman, The Unpopular, Successful Auto Bailout”). For a city that boasts of unique regionalism, it seems to be trying extra hard to claim a spot in the hearts of Americans. Detroit Free Press critic Phelan further questions the validity of Chrysler’s American name brand when already “two of the brand’s three vehicles…are built in Canada”, causing outsourcing of American jobs and opportunities (“What’s Wrong with America’s Import”). From this evidence, it can be inferred that Chrysler’s use of defiant regionalism generates a questionable byproduct- it veils the global status of the company in favor of promoting local regional spirit. This consequence of defiant regionalism reduces the value and productivity of regionalism itself, supporting Eggener’s stance that critical regionalism used as a means of resistance may do more harm than good.

Chrysler emphasizes use of local regionalism techniques to a point that promotes defiant regionalism. In accordance with Eggener’s analysis, Detroit’s regional image is constructed from a native inside perspective and thus viewed as a valuable one. However, it is limited in that regard. While striving to highlight local culture, identity and the means of resistance to achieve these native states, Chrysler romanticizes almost primitive qualities of Detroit. In doing so, the advertisement overlooks the current social, economic and cultural structures of the region it is advocating and causes unnecessary conflict between people’s views of the region. By shunning an outsider’s perspective of the region, Eggener’s emphasis on a native insider perspective becomes synonymous to segregation and limits the potential for social activism. In particular, the retreat back to compelling, nostalgic cultural history produces a “totalizing view…which is likely to be at odds with the meanings which the inhabitants” place on the region themselves (235). In other words, the advertisement ignorantly categorizes all of Detroit’s inhabitants as a resilient working class with a history of economic suffering, as inferred from “the hottest fires make the hardest steel” (Born of Fire). Yet it’s impossible for everyone to have recovered completely from the crisis: many have still unemployed or have left the city altogether (Moreland, “Detroit Is an Example of Everything That Is Wrong with Our Nation”). The underlying motive to display Detroit as strong and unique serves as an example of how critical regionalist theory segregates its own views and devalues its significance. By seeking to be more particular, as Eggener encourages, the advertisement limits its horizons for representing different perspectives and cannot engender change effectively as a “social invention” (Powell 8). The declarative statement “And we’re certainly no one’s Emerald City” goes further to suggest Detroit’s regional independence. It is an entity separate from modern uniform qualities, a prideful “state of mind” that utilizes slightly idyllic and nostalgic images to qualify its own regionalism (233). Indeed, this value is what Eggener preaches- by heeding the particular voices of those who help build a culture we may better understand the richness and complexity of local discourse. However, critic Reichert Powell cautions on just listening to a particular set of voices and with good reason. Interpreting Chrysler’s commercial through his analysis, Powell encourages the audience to value critical regionalism as a tool for change through the cultural response it fosters rather than the document’s qualities itself. Instead of shying away from conflict, embracing conflicting discourse allows potential for people’s values to evolve. A 2012 Forbes article proves this theory statistically. Before the commercial was aired, a Chrysler 200 only sold 788 units; however, half a year after the commercial aired at the Super Bowl, 11,205 units were sold (Muller, “Do Chrysler’s TV Sermons Really Sell Any Cars”). Furthermore, the article articulates, Chrysler’s CEO Francois is most proud of the fact that Chrysler’s ad has resonated within the hearts of the American people. In his words, his company is not just selling cars, but “selling into people’s values” (Muller, “Do Chrysler’s TV Sermons Really Sell Any Cars”), parallel to Powell’s argument that critical regionalism is a tool that “self-consciously shapes an understanding” of the cultural, political and social values of the people (Powell 8).

As Powell and Eggener affirm, critical regionalism is a dynamic construct built upon conflicting perspectives. Chrysler’s advertisement depicting Detroit’s revival certainly hits the spot on affirming the resilience and fluidity of critical regionalism; however, its tendency to rely underlying nostalgia, a particular set of voices as Eggener advocates, is a hidden loophole in the system. Although the patriotic images highlight Detroit at its finest, they walk a thin line between just enough representation of a region to irrational nostalgia that points to an ideal future without considering social, political and economic consequences. Built long on a conflict between race, class and cultures, Detroit’s regional comeback cannot be manifested as easily with just sheer willpower. Rather, as Powell observes, the conflict between locals to overcome racial tensions and blue-collar culture serves as a starting point towards generating change that will embrace the richness and complexity of the city.