10.14.2008

Evaluate the Mack: Chi-City Man Part 4

See other posts in the "Evaluate the Mack" series.

Firstly, great debut post, Matt. We need this sort of focused thought on the mack.

Regarding the various theories about Chi-City Man, or CCM as I'll be referring to him from henceforth, I remain dubious.

While I found Mr. Sherrill's postmodern exploration of CCM's mack-as-mack to be brilliant, the convoluted conspiracy theory that followed was pure fiction. A corporate pawn? Viral advertising? Preposterous. I hardly see how CCM could be, in fact, getting money and getting paid for his video. I heartily agree with Newman -- who, as I might remind our readers, has the business credentials to support his claims -- that this theory is ridiculous. Indeed, Newman provides a much more compelling framework: "What was seen as a '7-minute commercial' is in fact a 7-minute slice of a mack based entirely on commerce." To borrow a hipsterrunoff concept, CCM has carved out a personal brand for himself, as well as identifying which products mesh with the personal brands of his would-be lovers -- all to achieve an efficient mack.

As these conspiracy theories appear, however, it becomes clear that CCM has some serious explaining to do. Newman is the first to bring up the central mystery of his video: Why does he cover the camera lens when walking around the house? What does CCM have to hide? Unlocking this secret will reveal the true nature of his mack.

While I've supported Newman to this point, his assertion that the fridge must belong to a mother-with-child is untenable. No responsible mother with kids would brazenly store alcoholic beverages throughout -- especially the delicious juice-mimicking ones. In addition, the alarming lack of food should make this argument suspicious. Most importantly, NO fridge in a household with kids stays that tidy and stocked. It's simply not possible. This fact alone should be enough to metaphorically defenestrate the mother theory with much force.

But clearly CCM doesn't want us to see his house. I can think of only two possible explanations:

1) CCM is actually married, and both he and his wife have boring corporate jobs. Their house is filled with potpourri and kitschy junk that has accumulated over the years. CCM's only refuge is his PS3. This leads us to the alarming realization that CCM actually has NO MACK, because he is married. He attempts to escape his suburban midlife ennui by making ridiculous claims as to his prowess with women via YouTube, the haven for idiots who would be impressed by just such a video.

2) OR, perhaps CCM is actually sixteen years old, and is house-sitting for family friends. He is stoned out of his mind (thus the pizza), and spends all afternoon clearing out their fridge, pulling out all their fancy drinks, and filming a video.


That being said, I'm open to alternative theories.

8 comments:

Gabrielle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gabrielle said...

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22chi+city+man%22&rls=com.microsoft:*&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1


i was amused by this

jessica said...

in the video Lazy Sunday, Wit Ice Cream Sam' iches and Internet Porn, we learn that he only makes $7.63/hour. that's why he doesn't have silk sheets. but he can still afford all those beverages! and air jordans! how does this factor into your analyses?

jessica said...

that first link should take you here. oops!

Andy said...

excellent point... this other video really complicates things. why is his room so juvenile? why does he never show his face? 7.63 an hour? and he has ITALIAN tile? i think not. strange things are afoot

Newman said...

I think jessica's reaction brings up an interesting facet of how one evaluates the mack, indeed an echo of an earlier series of posts. Can we evaluate a Mack in a vaccuum? Or is it necessary to examine the entirity of C-CM's vlog oeuvre?

uhh said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
uhh said...

i'm pretty certain it's an office fridge or something, that explains why it has so many beverages. Covering up the camera is a good way of cutting between the office and his (or someone else's) house whilst giving the illusion that the entire thing was filmed in one place and in one go.

  © Blogger template Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP