Do we really need trends dictated to us?

When I first started scrapbooking, I wielded my craft with a blissful ignorance of what was "in" and what was "out". I used what felt good and the ideas were plenty free flowing. I would actually sit down and do 3 or 4 pages in a night and I would be pleased with the work I was doing. My sole focus was on doing what felt right to me.

My ignorance of scrapbooking magazines and the online arena allowed me to find comfort in doing what I liked and following my own aesthetics prerequisite.

Then I discovered the online world. Shortly after that, I discovered magazines. Shortly after my discoveries, scrapbooking became a bit more difficult. I discovered that there were trends and styles of scrapbooking. The idea of publishing capabilities was introduced to me, the prospects for being a part of a design team entered my sphere of conscious reasoning. Suddenly, there was a right and wrong way to scrap (despite what people were telling me, the magazines were sending an all together different message) and I wasn't doing it right.

It took 2 years to break away from the sticky grasp of the trends and I have no desire to venture back in that direction. That is part of the reason why I chose to walk away from Design Teams and Publishing. I am much more comfortable doing my own thing and if that means that I only scrap for myself and my family, then so be it. Recently, I walked away from magazines because what they were offering by way of inspiration was really trend pimping...and my whoring days were over. Now I seek my inspiration through galleries and my past work. Now, I'm finally happy again.

***********************************************************************
I don't like trends. Well, I don't mind trends that are left to their own volition. Unhampered trends burn out and move on. Unfettered trends exist without denouncing the existence of past trends and those who don't choose to follow the trend. Those are the only trends I can stomach.

The trend wave of scrapbooking is anything but free flowing and natural. The way that the magazine editors select one person's way of scrapbooking and then commence to shove it down the consumer's throat is disconcerting at best. When I first saw Elsie's work, I thought it was fun, whimsical and somewhat of a signature to her way of viewing the world. That's it. I didn't want to adopt it, I didn't want to pull aspects of it into my own work. I wanted to appreciate her unique style and move on. CK had other plans in mind. Suddenly her work was labeled and featured and declared the hottest thing. It was the hottest thing and the masses ran with it until the industry was over saturated with Elsie-like layout offerings. The magazines gobbled up the 'freestyle' work that was being submitted (mind you by the same people that they'd been publishing before freestyle came on the scene) and the viewing public perceived that if they wanted a shot at 15-seconds of fame, they'd have to step up to the plate. Suddenly scrappers were 're-inventing' their style to resemble the latest trend. Some succeeded and they turned out spectacularly designed layouts, others weren't so lucky.

Why do we need this? Why do the magazines have to pimp trends to us? Why is it that one person can present a new way of doing things and it becomes the current style?

I would be much more accepting of a magazine that featured, for the most part, different styles of layouts, from different scrapbookers first and foremost. This magazine could feature the unique styling of a scrapbooker like Elsie in an "Outside the Box" section that would encompass a relatively small portion of the magazine. By doing things this way, the various styles of scrapbookers would still be able to gleam a little industry acceptance. There would be little need for people to 're-invent' themselves with every new thing because there would be a general acceptance of all types of scrapbooking styles. The public would be able to see the works of someone who is doing things a little 'differently' and decide whether they can take anything from it. If a trend is going to catch, let it be because a majority of the viewing public liked what they say and chose to emulate it, not because a magazine has declared that we should all strive to "be like Mike".

The way that things are going now in the industry has resulted in an over saturation of the products market because the manufacturers are trying to keep up with the dictated trends. Everyone has to have some sort of flourishing in their product offerings. Everyone has to offer buttons in their product lines. Something has to be made of chipboard. Something has to be a rub on for of product. The industry lives, breathes and poops the trends, whether we all follow them or not.

The dark side of all of this trend surfing is that it the announcement of a new trend chums the waters with money making prospects. The magazines and manufacturer's beat the proverbial dead horse to make that dollar. For the duration of this frenzy, a major demographic of scrappers is being left behind and/or disregarded. The people who don't worship the magazines or self-proclaimed scrap celebrities are stuck on the sidelines looking at product that they don't really care for. People who do follow the magazines but don't care for the trend are forced to wade through row after row of trend specific merchandise (and magazine pages) in search of anything that will support their non-trend way of scrapbooking. The work of these scrappers is mostly disregarded by magazines/manufacturers and are crudely labeled 'outdated' by those who are nose deep in the trends. The trend is not allowed to die, not until something else comes along that the magazines deem to be worthy.

What will it take for the magazines to take a good hard look at the way the public is reacting to the trends? Do they even consider the views of those who don't follow the trends to be valid? If the majority of scrapbookers scrap their own way, then why is it so necessary to declare a 'hip' way of doing things? How signature is a style if it's going to be pimped to the general public to an extent that facilitates it being non-signature? How would you like to see the magazines restructure their offerings?