1

The Technology Enchantment Churn: Technology Adoption and Disenchanted Enchantment

RUSSELL W. BELK, HENRI A. WEIJO & ROBERT V. KOZINETS

Abstract Dominant perspectives on technology adoption and consumption tend to be cognitive, deliberative, and individualistic. We offer a more desire-centered and cultural alternative. Leaning on historical evidence and revised Weberian theories of enchantment and disenchantment, we show how technology consumption became enchanted. Providing an important cultural counterbalance to models such as the technology acceptance model (TAM), the paper outlines a novel process we term the Technology Enchantment Churn (TEC). This process drives contemporary technology adoption and consumption by overtly or covertly ballyhooing a sense of wonderment accompanying the promises of new technologies. We offer current and recent examples of the TEC process before discussing some of the implications it holds for our wider understanding of technology, consumption, and greater consumer culture.

Keywords: Technology adoptation, enchantment, conceptual paper, process theories.

2

A wealth of prior research has theorized technology consumption, for instance, has consumer adoptation of new technologies. The largely been ignored in prior research, despite fields of marketing and consumer research have this orientation otherwise featuring pervasively been dominated by perspectives on technology in studies of the cultivation of anticipation and use drawing from diffusion of innovations desire (e.g., Belk 2001; Belk, Ger, and theory and emphasizing the motivation, skills, Askegaard 2003; Campbell 1987; Hartmann and characteristics, and interests of innovators (e.g., Brunk 2019; Kozinets, Patterson, and Ashman Gatignon and Robertson 1985; Rogers 1962). In 2016; Ritzer 1999; Williams 1982). information science, the Technology Acceptance Furthermore, prior works do not discuss the Model (TAM) emphasizes perceived usefulness continuous reproduction and transmutation of and perceived ease-of-use by consumers (e.g., the technology ideologies that frame our Venkatesh 2000; Venkatesh and Davis 2000). expectations for the new. These models have received increasing criticism This paper situates technology consumption for emphasizing the utilitarian and tool-like alongside its contemporary expectations and elements of technology adoption while desires in a sociohistorical context. Our research overlooking its expressive, ludic, and has three aims. First, we offer a more temporally interpersonal aspects. In doing so, these grounded view of technology consumption that approaches ignore the social, cultural, and incorporates the cyclical renewal of consumer emotional elements underlying technology desire for new technologies. Second, we relate consumption and adoptation (e.g., Bagozzi less to hypothetical rational decision-making and 2007; Hedman and Gimpel 2010; Antón, more to the social, emotional, and cultural Camarero, and Rodríguez 2013). factors that seem critical to understanding Conversely, cultural consumer researchers technology consumption (e.g., Downs and Mohr have focused more on the social, historical, and 1976; Venkatesh and Morris 2000). Third, and ideological aspects of technology use that shape most importantly, we ground our theory in the consumption subjectivities (Mick and Fournier cultural and historical marketplace realities of 1998; Thompson 2004; Kozinets 2008; Belk what we call disenchanted enchantment – a 2016; 2017). Yet these works only begin to jaded, distanced, and ironic seduction in which develop the historical elements and temporal we buy into the next technological disruption progressions involved in technology adoption; even though we know it is likely to fail to satisfy they lack an account of how consumer hyped expectations. The ideology of subjectivities evolve from a technology’s disenchanted enchantment expands current introduction to marketplace proliferation historical ideological framings of technology (Robinson 2019). The future orientation of consumption (Mick and Fournier 1998; Kozinets 3

2008) by introducing the dubious consumer. Brunk’s (2019) recent study usefully links This consumer is skeptical, but ever-susceptible enchantment to nostalgia and retro, but does not to yet another magic show (During 2002; Saler focus on technology, nor the future. We, on the 2012). other hand, contend that enchantment in Enchantment is frequently evoked in consumer culture is irrevocably linked to, and consumer research (e.g. Belk, Wallendorf, and exacerbated by, the consumption of disruptive Sherry 1989; Firat and Venkatesh 1995; technologies. When such technologies come in Kozinets 2002; Ritzer 1999; Thompson and close temporal proximity they may beget belief Coskuner-Balli 2007), but rarely as the explicit that we are living in an age of miracles, even if a target of inquiry (for notable exception, see true apocalypse does not seem eminent (Geraci Hartmann and Brunk 2019). Theoretical 2010). discussions of enchantment invariably begin This is a conceptual paper informed by with Max Weber’s (1964) famous die theory and history. We begin by reviewing prior Entzauberung der Welt–the disenchantment of literature on the technology adoptation the world brought on by the Enlightenment and processes. We then revisit the Weberian Modernity that rid the world of magic, religion, disenchantment thesis and review the history of and enchantment, stripping the world of technology production and consumption. We mystery, wonder, and surprise. Some work has then outline our model of Technology revisited Weber’s grand theory and argues that Enchantment Churn (TEC) that unfold through the relation between modernity and enchantment four cyclically repetitive stages: 1) the paradox has been mischaracterized (Jenkins 2000; Gane of the impossible realized; 2) the promise of 2002; Saler 2006; 2012). These studies see gratification; 3) ludic satiation; and 4) new enchantment as being very much alive, but in a normalization. We provide historical and recent form only possible in a late modernist world: a examples to illuminate the evolution of these disenchanted enchantment relying on spectacle, processes. We conclude our investigation with and, more importantly, wondrous technologies current and emerging examples of disenchanted imbued with promises of progress and liberation enchantment and discuss directions for future of human potential (During 2002; Ritzer 1999; research. Saler 2012). Although these scholars powerfully illustrate the historicity of enchantment and its PROCESS THEORIES OF relationship to technologies, they do not explain TECHNOLOGY CONSUMPTION the specific processes of consumer appropriation Everett Rogers (1962) provided an early and of individual technologies and how it plays into highly influential theorization of technology technological enchantment. Hartmann and adoption processes via his innovation diffusion 4 model. Rogers theorized that the population example, research found that the longer could be divided into distinct groups based on technologies were on the market, the more their psychological makeup and general favorable the perceptions of their ease of use and willingness to appropriate new technologies: usefulness (Venkatesh and Morris 2000). Social innovators, early adopters, early majority, late norms and peer perceptions moderate majority, and laggards. Not included, but technology acceptance, underlining the social implicit are non-adopters. In Rogers’ view, these construction of technology perceptions groups display relatively consistent behavioral (Thompson, Higgins, and Cowell 1991; and attitudinal traits; a person who is an eager Venkatesh et al. 2003). In response to revisions innovator in car shopping should not be a and criticisms, TAM pioneers Venkatesh and hesitant laggard when buying a television. colleagues (2003) went on to synthesize a Younger consumers are generally thought to be Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of ahead of the curve, as evinced by more recent Technology (UTAUT) that also incorporated discussions relating to so-called digital natives social influences, hedonic orientation, gender, (Prensky 2008). Rogers’ model still enjoys age, and voluntariness of use as key new widespread popularity and has had a great variables (see also Venkatesh, Thong, and Xu influence on, for example, lead user theories that 2012). follow similar psychological profiling (von Even with these revisions TAM and Hippel 1986). UTAUT models implicitly or explicitly define Rogers’ work inspired research that asked technologies as tool-like, not personally why are some technologies more readily adopted meaningful or expressive. Notions of matches than others. Particularly in the field of with personality or self-image congruence have information sciences, the Technology only recently been added to TAM discussions Acceptance Model (TAM) became highly (Antón et al. 2013). Bagozzi (2007), a one-time influential and soon proliferated into other TAM scholar himself, sees the incremental fields, including marketing and consumer revisions into TAM/UTAUT research as research (Gatignon and Robertson 1985; Davis relatively obvious and merely underlining that 1989; Mahajan, Muller, and Bass 1990). Early the models clearly lack explanatory power TAM research found that technology adoption regarding the social, cultural, and emotional through intended and actual use could be factors behind technology consumption. As explained by two functional factors: the Hedman and Gimpel (2010) point out, the perceived usefulness and ease of use of the shortcomings of these utilitarian and technology (Davis 1989). Follow-up research functionalist perspectives are all the more further revised and refined the model. For evident in an era of increasingly personal, ludic, 5 and hyped technologies. TAM research also reviewing the model, we elaborate on the struggles to explain the appeal of retro historical developments that put this churn into technologies, as exemplified by the sales motion. resurgence of vinyl records and cassette tapes (Fernandez and Beverland 2018), or the HOW TECHNOLOGY BECAME continued strength of printed books. ENCHANTED Mick and Fournier (1998) provided a Revisiting the Weberian Thesis of cultural twist to technology adoptation theories Disenchantment by illustrating how new technologies elicit Gane (2002) succinctly summarized paradoxical reactions from consumers. They Weber’s grand project on enchantment as a story also draw attention to Western myths of “the elimination of prehistoric forms of surrounding the introduction of technologies. magical religiosity with the rise of universal Technology meanings are situated between the religion, and the subsequent disenchantment of extremes of freedom, control, and efficiencies in universal religion with the emergence of modern time and labor on one hand, and the internal ‘rational’ science and the advanced capitalist contradictions of dehumanization and order” (p. 15). Weber (1964) bemoaned the environmental and human lifestyle degradation Enlightenment’s (and especially Protestantism’s) on the other. Most of their eight paradoxes, such “iron cage of rationality” that eviscerated both as efficiency-inefficiency, competence- religion and magic and replaced them with incompetence, and freedom-enslavement relate bureaucracy and the pursuit of economic gain. almost directly to these tensions. Others have Weber saw modernist rationality making built on Mick and Fournier by further exploring constant gains at the expense of enchantment, the historically constructed meanings, magic, and the sacred, which were all at odds ideologies, and discourses around technology with the grand Enlightenment project of solving that shape consumers’ technology expectations the world’s mysteries through scientific and consuming subjectivities (Thompson 2004; explanation (see Sengers et al. 2008). Magic was Kozinets 2008). However, these works do not particularly at odds with Enlightenment elaborate how consumer views of technology modernity by insisting that ritualistic evolve when technologies mature in the incantations have causal effects on nature and marketplace or when consumer attitudes change was quickly branded as misguided superstition as they engage with technologies. or pseudo-science (e.g., Freud 1918; Frazer This manuscript presents a new process in 1959). Although religion was never totally technology adoption that we call The eradicated, it became secular and less sacred, Technology Enchantment Churn (TEC). Before magical, and enchanted. Weber (1964) himself 6 saw enchantment surviving in its last defensible Elements of enchantment that proved useful for position, high art (see Lyotard 1984). the emerging modern order—and especially for Weberian discussions in the social sciences its culture of consumption (see Campbell 1987; often attempt to reinvigorate lost forms of Bataille 1988)—survived and thrived. This enchantment such as mystery, emotionality, paper spotlights an enchantment that is both a surprise, and connection with nature (Arnould, pervasive and a defining feature of Price, and Otnes 1999; Firat and Venkatesh contemporary consumer culture: what we term, 1995; Thompson and Coskuner-Balli, 2007). following Ritzer (1999) and Saler (2012), a Speculation about re-enchantment featured disenchanted enchantment. Unlike prior, purer heavily in postmodern consumption discourse forms, this type of enchantment is consistent (Bauman 1993; Firat and Venkatesh 1995). But with the dominant logics of modernity, this optimism seems to have died almost as capitalism, and modern consumption ideologies: quickly as it emerged (Cova, Maclaran, and [M]odern enchantment often depends Bradshaw 2013). Postmodern re-enchantment upon its opposite, modern never seemed to escape the fringes of society disenchantment. A specifically modern (Arnould et al. 1999; Thompson and Coskuner- enchantment can be defined as one that Balli 2007), or provided only temporary, local, enchants and disenchants performative, and largely unsuccessful escapism simultaneously: a disenchanted from modernist regimes (Cova et al. 2013). enchantment…. Modernity remains What supposedly remains is an enchantment like enchanted in a disenchanted way, the broad and retail-oriented definition of (re- rendering the imagination compatible )enchantment that Hartmann and Brunk (2019) with reason, the spiritual with secular appropriate from Badot and Filser (2007, p.167): trends. (Saler 2012, p. 12-3) “a set of practices initiated by both We define consumer enchantment as manufacturers and consumers to incorporate follows: a deeply felt yet fleeting set of non-functional sources of value in goods and emotional and psychic commitments involving services, and turn them into sources of hedonic, wonderment, anticipations of joy, and an symbolic, and interpersonal value.” expanded sense of human potential that is We argue that there is much more magic left nonetheless tempered by an ironic consumer in enchantment than this. We build on newer imagination. Consumer enchantment allows us readings of Weber that argue that while to be caught up in wonder, swept away by modernity greatly ravaged the spheres of magic imagination, being spellbound, having our and religion, enchantment had a different fate notions of what is possible seemingly (e.g., Jenkins 2000; Gane 2002; Saler 2006). heightened, being transfixed, mesmerized, and 7 dazzled, as well as feeling a profound sense of machines, infrastructures, labor, and consumers euphoric pleasure (Bennett 2001; Gell 1992; (Marx 2010). These systems became dominant McCarthy and Wright 2003; Sengers et al. in Western economies between 1870 and 1920, 2008). Yet at the same time, the fleeting nature which altered the discourse around technologies of our excitement also forces us to remain towards a “technocractic commitment to cynical and jaded, as if to proclaim that we are improving ‘technology’ as the basis and the only playing along so we do not to feel left out. measure of – as all but constituting – the The fleeting nature of enchantment will always progress of society” (Smith and Marx 1993, p. leave us yearning for more. This is why 20). Technology became complex, ephemeral, marketers also promise enchantment to and uncontrollable – a “virtually autonomous, consumers (e.g., Williams 1982; Ritzer 1999). all-encompassing agent of change” (Marx 2010, As we show next, new technologies have p. 564). What followed is an ironic twist for become ideally suited to create these fleeting modernist rationalism: on one hand working sensations of wonder, awe, and surprise. hard to rid the world of magical enchantment and its ambiguity, while simultaneously infusing How Technology Became Enchanted technology with ambiguity and wonder (Pels Ample historical evidence links technology 2003). Modernity enchanted technology by to enchantment even before modernity. Pre- reimagining it as miraculous and wonderful—a Enlightenment Christian thought had already new God for manking to worship (Nye 1994; embraced mechanical devices and technological Davis 1998; Stivers 1999; During 2002). disciplines as central means for humanity to This view technology as an enchanted overturn the “lack” caused by the Fall and means for societal progress would not last. Two sought to achieve a “perfected state” through devastating World Wars granted technology a technology (e.g. Harrison 1999; 2008; Kozinets “declining status amid a growing 2008; Robinson 2019). Others see the Christian disenchantment with material success and with embrace of technology as an essential all forms of social and political engineering” precondition for the modernist project altogether (Segal 1994, p. 3). The rise of the military (Botez 2017; Harrison 2008; Peters 2011). Yet industrial complex and related fears of the key cultural changes behind the enchantment technology spinning out of human control made of technology took place during the industrial technology an instrument of destructive power age. Starting from the mid 19th century, the sheer more than a societal good (Ellul 1964; Smith scope of emerging technologies like railroads and Marx 1993; Segal 1994; Nye 1994; 2007). and telegraphs necessitated complex systems The resurgence of technological enchantment in that bound together corporations, institutions, contemporary consumer culture owes itself to 8 technology shedding its large-scale, industrial, enchantment called the Technology corporate, governmental modernist “grand Enchantment Churn (TEC), outlined in Figure 1. project” baggage (Firat and Venkatesh 1995) We elaborate our model next. and a relocation into the realm of personal and expressive consumption objects. And the proliferation of personal computers and digital technologies starting from the early-mid 1970s marked another turning point for enchantment. The Apple I computer in 1976 proved seminal. The birth and early history of Apple and Steven Jobs has no doubt been mythologized (Belk and Tumbat 2005). Yet, Figure 1: The Technolgy Enchantment according to Streeter’s (2011) analysis, it Churn sparked a romanticist humanist revolution. The computer became a source of delight and THE TECHNOLOGY ENCHANTMENT surprise, imbued with the enchanted promise of CHURN: THE CYCLE OF self-expressive, creative, and autonomous TECHNOLOGICAL ENCHANTMENT consumption (Turkle 1995; Black 2002; Streeter The Paradox of the Impossible Realized 2011). With Steve Jobs and Stephen Wozniak as Technologies do not fall from the sky. They chief among the swashbucklers of the new era, have legacies and developmental histories. Their computers also became rebellious (Turner arrival is often foretold: the gadgets we use 2010). Popular culture also embraced consumer- today were usually prophesized in sci-fi or oriented technological enchantment. Comic fantasy novels, comic books, and even fairy books, sci-fi, fantasy, and superhero movies tales—influences that their contemporary linked technologies to the promised unleashing marketplace editions often allude to or explicitly of an enchanting new “super” self (Possamai reference (e.g., Dinello 2005; Kozinets 2008; 2006; Morrison 2011). Las Vegas, theme parks, Rose 2014; Robinson 2019). Thirty years before and other extravagant consumptionscapes made the iPad hit the marketplace it was a standard technologies central to their production of tool for Starfleet officers in Star Trek (Foresman enchanting consumer spectacles (Ritzer 1999). 2016). The iPad’s AI-based personal assistant, Today, the continuous enchantment of Siri, dates even further back and Apple technologies results from the participatory work acknowledged this heritage via a humorous of various marketplace actors, as captured in our Easter Egg embedded in its code: Siri will reply cyclical process model of technological 9 in mock outrage if you ask it to “open the pod deluding” (p. 30). These spectacles were bay doors, HAL” in reference to the scene in the invariably highly sensorial and drew from movie that revealed that the supercomputer HAL counter-modernist Romantic ideals that 9000 had turned on its human masters in 2001: privileged the imagination, captivation, and A Space Odyssey (Kubrick and Clarke 1968). charismatic visualization as a means for re- But as long as technologies remain the stuff of enchanting the world (Black 2002). Particular mere fantasies and science fiction, their expositions such as the Columbian Exposition of imaginary quality does not escape us—they do 1893 and the Century of Progress Exhibition of not enchant us, at least in a way that would make 1933, both in Chicago, appropriated the legacy us desire to possess them. Furthermore, many of these magic technology shows and their spirit technologies transition from the imaginary into of newness and amazement by celebrating “the the marketplace incrementally and without much novel in the guise of the eternal, and of the fanfare. For a technology to become enchanting, technological in the form of magic” (Gunning its transition from fantasy to reality has to be an 2003, p. 40). The 1939 New York World’s Fair event—an arrival that changes everything. explicitly evoked a connection between The introduction of technologies through a technology and mysticism with its Hall of spectacular and enchanting reveal was cultivated Science (originally planned as theTemple of between 1840 and 1920 at popular events such Science) (Rydell 1993). as stage illusions, magic shows, and World’s Contemporary events draw on the legacy of Fairs (e.g., Cook 2001; During 2002; Debord the staged magical reveal. Just as the 1970; Rydell 1984; 1993). These events used technologies of the past excited passions in their technologies like magnetism and electricity to day, there is a giddy excitement seen in the press spotlight the applied scientific production of coverage of annual events like Consumer what seemed like modern marvels. They evoked Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas and wide-eyed amazement, but also invited Apple’s Macworld. Observe the following pre- participants to engage in participatory conference coverage for the 2018 CES (aptly guesswork to understand what had just titled “Tech faithful gather to worship at mecca transpired. As Saler (2012) remarks, these of innovation”): technological shows bore all the hallmarks of As tech industry players converge in Las disenchanted enchantment’s dominant Vegas for the 2018 Consumer sensibility of ironic imagination, a double- Electronics Show, an overriding theme minded consciousness and a deep engagement is that gizmos, artificial intelligence, within an imaginary world that “yield[s] a form cloud computing and superfast internet of modern enchantment that delights without connections hold answers to many if not 10

all ills -- the new religion…. As the excerpt makes clear, consumers must Technology will continue to improve first possess a certain baseline knowledge of the communication, enchanting us with technology to appreciate it as a breakthrough bolder and brighter screens, exhibitors achievement. Drawing on Simmel’s say -- but it additionally vows to end (1902/[2004]) theory of desire and distance (see urban congestion, treat cancer and also Belk et al. 2003), Gell (1992) argues that depression, and help us live fitter and the apparent difficulty in achieving an effect more productive lives. (Lever 2018) corresponds to its value for an audience. That is, The narrative links technology to things that are easily achieved are neither enchantment and calls it “the new religion.” The mysterious nor miraculous. But things that anticipatory future-orientation of technological appear difficult or impossible can be both. enchantment is also plainly visible at the end of Second, the technology must convey a promise the excerpt. The contagion of hype is also of an enhanced self (Macdonald 2005; Rose palpable among the many consumers who 2014). This promise is less liminal than eagerly await accounts of the latest gadgets liminoid—a jump not into the next ritualistic revealed at these shows. transition in the identity journey but a leap into Obviously, not all technologies enchant the unknown, a place of discovery and upon arrival. A successfully enchanting reveal uninhibited play (Turner 1982). produces genuine surprise and changes The best-known contemporary case of such consumer conceptions of what is possible—both a reveal is the launch of the first iPhone in 2007, in terms of scientific achievement as well as for which Campbell and La Pastina (2010) the consumers themselves. McCarthy and document in detail. Though Apple’s intentions Wright (2003), design scholars who have to introduce a phone were widely rumored, theorized technological enchantment, describe it Steve Jobs’ reveal surpassed expectations both thusly: among the press and consumers. Jobs even Technology that enchants: a computer promised the awe-struck crowd that the iPhone that allows me to question what it is to would “work like magic” (Block 2007). The be a computer; textual communication, tech blog Gizmodo coined the term “Jesus the limitation of which, requires me to phone” in mocking the iPhone’s frenzied be creative and expressive; objects or reception (Campbell and La Pastina 2010). Yet installations that are sensitive to the the term proliferated and was used in earnest in moment and to my sense of wonder and post-launch hype. The appropriation of the emotional integrity. Technology that ironic term reveals the functioning of the ironic enables me to change. (p. 90) imagination (Saler 2012) and the willing 11 suspension of disenchantment and disbelief in to write, facilitate shopping from home, and the consumer marketplace (Morgan 2009). reduce anxiety, nervousness, and fatigue (Martin If the technological reveal is indeed like a 1991). It would eliminate the need to dress up in magician’s prestige, the audience will be left order to communicate with others, eliminate the yearning to know how the magical deed was need for face-to-face meetings, and spawn done. In the next stage of our process, democracy because everyone is equal on the consumers transition to a form of collective telephone (Mosco 2004). Radio was similarly sensemaking of the new technology that fans the acclaimed as another means of achieving world flames of collective desire (Belk et al. 2003). peace, a vehicle for virtual education, and as a force capable of revolutionizing culture (ibid.). The Growing Promise of Gratification It was forecast to be an antidote to war, a Once a technology has been revealed, but guarantor of free speech, and a promoter of the prior to its market entry, consumers quickly free exchange of ideas. With the development of channels their collective astonishment into cable television even greater benefits were speculation of the technology’s meanings and forecast: capabilities (e.g., Gell 1988; Stivers 2001). Such Cable TV…had the potential to connect speculation often turns into hype and rising people like no other technology. It consumer expectations of the technology’s would bring about ubiquitous two-way transformative potential (e.g., Jun 2012; communication, and it would likely Rotololo, Hicks, and Martin 2015). The notion is usher in a Wired Society governed by cleverly captured in Gartner research’s “peak of Electronic Democracy. The inflated expectations” in their Hype Cycle multichannel universe would revitalize theory. In the process of fanning and communities, enrich schools, end demonstrating this building desire, the long poverty, eliminate the need for queues at Apple Stores full of devout piltrims all everything from banks to shopping aiming the among the first to be blessed by malls, and reduce dependence on the acquiring each iPhone edition are a automobile…. In short, cable TV would quintessential illustration. transform the world (Mosco 2004, p. 1). We can identify historical examples of such It is not ony marketing hype that helps to technology hype and growing expectations create such marvel; media also play a key role. already during the industrial revolution. The In a detailed analysis of popular press coverage telephone, for example, was touted as a device of personal computers during the 1979–88 that would save businesses, liberate women, period when the machines were being provide safety for the family, eliminate the need introduced, Stahl (1995) found that 36 percent of 12

175 Time magazine articles reporting on impenetrability also helps shroud technologies in personal computers contained explicitly magical mystery. Or, in the words of Stahl (1995): or religious language, and younger consumers “when a technology is a ‘black box,’ it becomes using computers were often referred to as magical” (p. 252). When the intended purpose of “computer whizzes,” “magicians,” or “wizards.” a technology is elusive, consumers’ Religious terminology used included consumers imaginations take over and they conjure new being in “communion with their machines,” meanings and purposes for these technologies. “computers were gospel,” new users were Yet, for Borgmann (2000) this impenetrability “baptized,” and users found themselves in “high and facile joyfulness of contemporary devices tech heaven.” Aupers (2002) did a thorough makes them simultaneously disenchanting—they analysis of the content of Wired magazine from alienate consumers from their preferred 1993–2000 and found more evidence of activities rather than supporting immersion into religious reverence as the internet was them. introduced. Articles evinced feelings of fear, The release of the iPhone again exemplifies fascination, and awe, and the technical the development of this stage. After Steve Jobs’ community was described as being reveal, various online circles were filled with “technoanimists” and “technopaganists.” speculative discussion that fueled the hype cycle The proliferation of digitally-connected and solidified the Jesus Phone moniker speculative communities have become the (Campbell and La Pastina 2012). Schroll’s primary forum for consumers’ collective (2013) analysis of the Apple-centric MacRumors speculation that supports enchantment (e.g., community further revealed that a large part of Muniz and Schau 2005; Jenkins 2006; Schroll community’s engagement revolved around ludic 2013). These communities tap into known speculation and what-if fantasizing about yet-to- enchantment mechanisms like the suspension of be-released products. In addition to excitement disbelief (e.g., Schneider 1993; Morgan 2009; and fun, it provided a communal salve: “For Saler 2012). The sophistication and design of passionate Apple fans, the wait for a new Apple contemporary technologies increases the product release is pure pain” and that collective likelihood of such speculative reactions. speculation about product features “is a way of Borgmann (2000) writes that consumer culture releasing this tension” (Schroll 2013, p. 414). is now dominated by the paradigm of devices that represent “the distinctive conjunction of an Ludic Satiation easily available commodity and a sophisticated Once the technology hits the market, and impenetrable machinery” promising consumers finally get to play with their new toys “unencumbered enjoyment” (p. 420). This and see for themselves if their expectations will 13 be met. Of course, sometimes consumers come Initial use experiences with a new to realize they were victims of hype and inflated technology can equally enthrall. For example, expectations (e.g., Jun 2012; Schroll 2013). But before we took them for granted, there was truly if a technology delivers on its promise, engaging a sense of wonder and enchantment at the power with a technology can sustain the feeling of and potential of Internet search engines and web enchantment through serendipitous discoveries browsers. Streeter (2011) recounts his early of new uses and especially through the sharing encounters with Mosaic—the first graphical user of consumption stories with likeminded peers. interface (GUI) browser created at the Here novel technologies often bear the University of Illinois in 1993—and its hallmarks of epistemic consumption objects enchanting and wizz-bang appeal: whose features and capabilities consumers Mosaic enacted a kind of hope; it did collectively and progressively explore, make not deliver new things so much as a sense of, and narrate (Zwick and Dholakia sense of the possibility of new things. 2006). Surfing the web using Mosaic in the Even getting your hands on a new early days shared certain features with technological device can prove enchanting. A the early stages of a romantic affair or number of researhers have analyzed the the first phases of a revolutionary ritualistic practice of consuming unboxing movement; pointing, clicking, and videos on YouTube. As Belk (2016, p. 208) watching images slowly appear describes it: “The unboxing ritual video consists generated a sense of anticipation, of of the consumer opening unpacking, and possibility. To engage in the dreamlike, displaying the contents of a box containing the compulsive quality of web surfing in the latest consumer electronics gadget….” early days was an immersion in an O’Connell (2013) sees the unboxer as “a kind of endless what’s next? (p. 127). priest in the polytheistic faith of merchandise, a There are several important insights here. mediator between the congregation of consumer First is the role of anticipation and possibility. It subjects and the numinousobject itself. The task is not simply the abundance of accessible that he sets himself…is the task of revelation” information that excites, it is also the potential (p. n/a). Mowlabocus (2018) unpacks for surprise and delight to have this wealth of unboxing’s serendipitous excitement as a genre sites at our fingertips—at our beck and call. that is not only resonant with desirous sexual Secondly, the analogy to a romantic affair or a innuendo, and pornographic alignment, but one revolution suggests the heart-stopping thrill that that is fully committed “to discovery and is created by this access. And thirdly, we are revelation” (p. 4). aware that Mosaic, which later morphed into 14

Netscape, has now been superseded by Google, hidden delights which the magic of the machine broadband, and other new “new things” that throws at [you].” One of Bull’s (2007, p. 47) would render the original Mosaic experience own informants similarly related: unenchanting and frustrating. The novelty aspect I find that my iPod ‘colours’ my of digital enchantment means that the experience surroundings quite significantly; as it’s with any given digital innovation will be on shuffle I don’t know what’s coming transient. It can only surprise and delight for so up next, and it often surprises me how long before it becomes normal and we await the the same street can look lively and busy next new thing. and colourful one moment and then – Similar to anticipation and speculation of when a different song starts – it can new technologies, consumption communities change to a mysterious and unnerving enchant technology consumption in the post- place. I like the sensations. purchase phase. This is particularly true for The mysteriousness of the shuffle mode was engaged consumers who explore the limits of boosted in the blogs of early users who claimed technologies and conjure new and surprising that rather than being random, the iPod was uses through creative tinkering (Muniz and sensing their moods and programming or Schau 2005)—a tradition dating back to electric counter-programming accordingly. Apple clubs, ham and citizen’s band radio, “radio insisted that shuffle is truly random, but urban boys,” and computer clubs (Rosner and Turner legends die hard. Similar mysticism has recently 2015). These collectives also become primary shrouded Amazon’s voice-controlled personal arenas for sharing narratives of consumption assistant Alexa after rumors began to circulate experiences with new technologies. And on Twitter that the module sometimes bursts into particularly with contemporary digital devices, an unprompted witch-like cackle (Giesler and new user narratives often feature animistic and Fischer 2018). magical descriptions (e.g., Stahl 1995; Turkle 1995; Davis 1998; Aupers 2002; Carolus et al. Normalization and Rising Sense of Loss 2018). For instance, after Apple released the By definition, enchantment cannot last. iPod, its portable digital music player, Eventually a process of normalization and then consumers reactions often focused on its disillusionment takes place for each new seemingly magical shuffle play mode as an technology (Gitelman 2006; Nye 1994; 2007) endless source of serendipity and surprise. after “the pixie dust settles” (Davis 1998). After Michael Bull, as one of Kahney’s (2005, p. 21) their normalization, technologies establish a new informants, described that the iPod’s music baseline of what technology can do. The next collection became “a treasure trove full of technological marvel must surpass this it if it 15 wishes to enchant us. And given our constant Is it an analog phone call? Is it a quality desire for both the new and the enchanting (Belk of celluloid film, a multi-volume et al. 2003), such a technology is sure to come. encyclopedia, or a leather-bound The process of normalization also produces datebook? Is it a way of thinking or a growing sense of loss. New technologies being or even falling in love? Between displace old technologies, but they also displace two discourses, two languages, two old ways and often highly meaningful ways of regimes, something is always lost. (p. doing (Borgmann 2000). Digital music displaced 18) the necessity of having shelf space for one’s We might argue that technology itself as a music collection but it also destroyed the social concept moves through a normalization and practice of going to the record shop with friends. disillusionment stage. Technologies expected to When we are enthralled by new technologies, offer miraculous new features and designs. We the upcoming loss of these meaningful practices might continue our iPhone example with an is often not evident to us. Yet the sense of loss analysis of the company in recent times. In the always comes, eventually. Heffernan (2011) past several years, especially since the death of describes this in the context of the Internet: Steve Jobs, the mass business press has The Internet is paradigmatic magic. It frequently questions Apple’s ability to innovate. turns experiences from the material A 2019 Forbes story, for instance, offered three world that used to be densely physical— signs that Apple had “lost its innovation mojo” involving licking stamps, say, or (Cohan 2019). The company has not come out winding clocks or driving in cars to with a new platform, and most of its innovation shopping centers—into frictionless, are around style, software tweaks, and new weightless, and fantastic abstractions. colors. Apple’s lost ability to enchant new As Lawrence Lessig puts it, “The digital consumers seems to be reflected in its stock’s world has more in common with the performance, losing almost $300 billion in value world of ideas than with the world of in the 3 months preceding the article. The key things.” And yet it’s still here, the point is that genuinely astonishing innovation persistent sense of loss. The magic of may be very difficult to maintain for any the Internet – the recession of the company, perhaps for any civilization, because material world in favor of a world of expectations continue to rise. ideas – is not pure delight. It seems we are missing something very worthwhile DISCUSSION and identity-forming from our pre- We offer three primary contributions to digital lives. Is it a handwritten letter? theory. First, we advance process theorization on 16 the consumption and adaptation of technologies. complements recent studies on the appeal of Second, we illuminate the role of enchantment supposedly inferior “retro” technologies and for contemporary consumer culture. And third, agrees that their appeal relates to romanticism of we discuss the current historical era of something lost (e.g., Fernandez and Beverland technology consumption. 2018; Hartmann and Brunk 2019). We believe the field is now one step closer to completing the Bringing Culture into Process Theories of picture of technology adoptation. Technology Adoptation Prior theories of technology adoptation The Locus of Enchantment processes emphasize individual appraisals of Theorization on enchantment often relegates technologies’ perceived usefulness and ease of it into a niche role in consumer culture, a feature use (e.g., Davis 1989; Venkatesh and Morris of either marketers’ inflated purchase appeals 2000) and how individual variables like gender, (e.g., Williams 1982; Ritzer 1999) or a age, voluntariness of use, and other personality consumer yearning for simpler times or ways of traits moderate these appraisals (e.g., Venkatesh being through re-enchantment (e.g., Arnould et et al. 2003; 2012; Antón et al. 2013). As recent al. 1999; Thompson and Coskuner-Balli 2007; studies attest, culture has been notably absent Hartmann and Brunk 2019). We show that from these adoptation processes (e.g., Bagozzi enchantment is anything but niche; it is a central 2007; Hedman and Gimpel 2010; Fernandez and feature of technology consumption. Beverland 2018). This study put culture center Furthermore, unlike re-enchantment studies that stage by showing how technologies can become focus primarily on the rikindling of the past the subject of intense collective desires and (Thompson and Coskuner-Balli 2007; Hartmann anticipation through enchantment. and Brunk 2019), we looked to the future for We emphasize the uncoordinated yet enchantment. Here we align with newer readings synergistic work of various marketplace actors of Weber (e.g. Jenkins 2000; Gane 2002; Saler (marketers, influencers, the media, and 2012) that argue that enchantment never consumer collectives) in elevating some disappeared under modernity (there is thus no technologies as the next big thing. In contrast to need for re-enchantment) and instead found new the linear models evident in prior TAM and spheres of influence under market capitalism. UTAM theories, the four steps in our We emphasize that an enchanting Technology Enchantment Churn (TEC) model technology has to be new. After all, if one were cyclical, underlining the continuous follows well-established conceptualizations of renewal of consumer desires for new technology as socio-material arrangements that technological marvels. Our model also serve given ends (Heidegger 1977; Marx 2010), 17 a mechanically hewn wooden table is as much a 2001). This notion goes back to Weber’s technology as IBM’s Big Blue and Watson or disenchantment of the world and helps account Google’s DeepMind. Only novel, disruptive, and for the tech magic, artistry, independence, scientifically sophisticated technologies can renegades, Homebrew, Think Different, I’m a truly captivate the public imagination. Or as Mac-I’m a PC, Steve jobs, quasi-religious, for Arthur C. Clarke (1979) put it, “Any sufficiently the rest of us, anti-bourgeois, anti-capitalistic, advanced technology is indistinguishable from love, joy, genius, mythological, playful, magic.” Yet as the Technology Enchantment LGBTQ, intuition, of the people, Star Trek, Churn model teaches us, consumers likely know childhood, and utopianian feeling associated that, eventually, the enchantment will fade. with romantic technology versus the calculation, When that happens, we will be left searching for rationality, money, positivism, science, serious, the next enchanting thing. This is not merely a numbers, quantification, reason, and mechanics case of serial enchantments, for those of us who typically associated with technology (Dawkins are technophiles and techspressives (Kozinets 1998; Muller 2008). 2008) are polymorphously perverse enough to Take the computer for example. Prior to the be simultaneously enthralled by multiple Mac and the famous 1984 commercial, the technologies. It is an old process, perhaps an computer was big blue -- IBM mainframes, ancient one. geeks with pocket protectors and glasses taped at There is a certain infantilization to this state the bridge, bureaucracy, do not fold, bend, of technological readiness, just as is likely the staple, or mutilate utility bills in the form of case when we enter the Las Vegas strip, Disney punch cards, the Borg, lemmings, and monster World, or the conspiracies behind characters tech. In effect, despite the march of technology, such as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the magical tech is nostalgic, utopian, pre-industrial, Tooth Fairy (Belk 2000; Clark 1995; Ritzer post post-modern, reenchantment (Gallardo and 1999). Though the market is often a co-creator Russell 2014). It is an inversion in which the of this enchantment, it is also usually the source boy Pope rules, master and servant change of the agents who also plant the seeds of places, and the rules do not apply. In Kozinets disenchantment, whether they are seasoned (2008), we can see how ideologies of reviewers, online critics, or competitors. We productivity, work, logic, and efficiency give might also see the enchanted view of technology way to those of self-expression, pleasure, and as a necessary, and not necessarily negative, connection. In similar vein, Belk (2001), neo-romantic counter to the technical, scientific, Kozinets and colleagues (2017), and Stevens and quantified calculation traditionally associated Maclaran (2005) detail and link the role of the with technology development (Löwy and Sayre vast technology-human assemblages in 18 contemporary life to the amplification of desire market itself as a “community” based upon and the polarizing of human cultural positions. “sharing” (Birchall 2017). Cloaked in utopian Our paper points out the historical developments guise, Facebook sold new technology as a form behind these transformations. of personal and communal empowerment. However, after numerous scandals, including Bursting the Enchantment Bubble Cambridge Analytica, popular sentiment As Turner (2010) and Streeter (2011) regarding Facebook soured, and calls have remind us, the rise of Silicon Valley and its begun for regulation of such collosal technology mythic startup culture since the late 1970s companies—and perhaps even their breakup moved technology away from the clutches of big using antitrust laws. Behind Facebook’s rosy government and into the sphere of consumption, utopian rhetoric was a powerful business model recharging technology with excitement and based on personal surveillance and the atomistic wonder. From peer-to-peer markets to social targeting of consumers. Other Silicon Valley media, autonomous vehicles to smart home giants have faced similar charges of both devices, the world has never been more deluged consumer exploitation and collaboration with by high technology affordances (Gibson 1966), big government—a betrayal of the Valley’s nor more dependent upon them. As our brief founding ideologies. Time will tell whether overview of the history of technological these scandals will be enough to change the enchantment is intended to suggest, there are, course of technological enchantment itself. At and have always been, historical and cultural the very least, we can expect competitors and cross-currents that question the newness of these new enchanting projects to arise that promise to developments; only their pace has changed. fix the ills of these lapsed behemoths. BitCoin, Another implication of our Technology for example, has gained a loyal and even Enchantment Churn model is that any enchanted following for its libertarian and anti characteristic of technology, and perhaps our big brother mythology (Humayun and Belk particularly modernist fascination with 2018). technological devices and solutions itself, might It is possible that consumers themselves will be subject to an enchantment churn in which want to escape the technology enchantment amplified expectations eventually yield to churn simply out fatigue. Led by capitalist disillusionment and disappointment. production directed into a commercial consumer Consider the social media, advertising, and culture, human civilization has been enchanted personal data warehousing behemoth Facebook. and astonished by technology for over a century. As van Dijk (2013) explains, Facebook Being enchanted is tiring. If we are increasingly originally used prevalent online discourse to becoming cyborgs wed emotionally and 19 physically to our digital devices, we might pervasive surveillance of their society’s Social rightly fear that we are becoming less human Index system (Botsman 2017; Kostka 2019)? and more machine-like (Belk 2017). As Speed is of interest as well. Is the Pondsmith (1988, 21) warns in Cyberpunk, The acceleration of innovation more of a subjective View from the Edge, “Each time you add a sense than an actual phenomenon? Are cybernetic enhancement, there’s a corresponding technologies actually developing more rapidly? loss of humanity.” Sherry Turkle (2011) is but Is our civilization’s need for enchantment in one voice speaking for the need for people to be decline? Is the speed of social life accelerating more contemplative about disconnecting from as some have suggested (Husemann and their technologies. The abuse of social media, Eckhardt 2019; Rosa 2003)? Or perhaps these online surveillance, cell-phone and EM radiation apparent occurences are all artefacts of increased are gaining increasing attention in popular media exposure to technological news in a media, and all seem to be leading to globalizing world. As Rosa (2003) notes, disenchantment with these now-ubiquitous periods of rapid technological development are technologies. In fact, Silicon Valley is one of the usually followed by a subsequent rise in the centers of an unplugging movement that rejects “‘discourse of acceleration,’ in which cries for technology use and favors more traditional deceleration in the name of human needs and approaches to day-to-day life. values are voiced but eventually die down.” (p. 6). Lingering Questions for Future Research Finally, we believe that there is still much Our model reveals only basic processes, but more to investigate behind these cultural and says little about how they might differ by historical processes. We agree with Max Weber, disposition, by culture, or by time. We have little David Noble, and Erik Davis that technological idea thus far about whether these stages might enchantment derives from a secular society in take moments, months, or years although we which wonderment is displaced into the material contend that the length of the periods is world and away from imaginative and spiritual inversely correlated with the speed of worlds. Can humanity in its current state turn technological change . Future research is needed away from technology as a source of to investigate these elements. For example, we enchantment without some power -- religious, could envision studies that examine the speed at spiritual, or even existential – as a counter- which new technologies are appropriated into source of enchantment? In our current culture or the degree of disruptive effects from environment of ecological devastation, human new technologies. Are there cultural difference, beings seem to be continually disenchanted by for example as Chinese consumers adapt to the what our enchantment with Technology, in the 20 aggregate, has bequeathed. Technological Technology Enchantment Churn catch up with solutionism, the hope that new technologies can technology itself? Is this an ongoing cycle of solve the problems that technology has brought, enchantment and disenchantment, or does it may produce more technological enchantment. have some logical endpoint? We hope that our But it is also possible that the mood towards manuscript opens some space and establishes technology eventually takes a new turn in some conceptual terminology that may be useful mankind’s fight for survival. Yet as individual for additional research, contemplation, and consumers we continue to seek enchantment in discussion of these vital issues for our times. our numerous devices and purchases. Will the

REFERENCES Antón, C., Camarero, C. and Rodríguez, J., 2013. Usefulness, enjoyment, and self‐image congruence: the adoption of e‐book readers. Psychology & Marketing, 30(4), pp.372-384. Arnould, E.J. , Linda P., and C. Otnes (1999), “Making River Magic: A Study of Whitewater River Rafting,” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 28 (February), 33-68. Aupers, Stef (2002), “The Revenge of the Machines: On Modernity, Digital Technology and Animism,” Asian Journal of Social Science, 30 (2), 199–220. Badot, O., & Filser, M. (2007). Re-enchantment of retailing: Toward utopian islands. In A. Caru, & B. Cova (Eds.), Consuming experience (pp. 166–181). London: Routledge. Bagozzi, R.P., 2007. The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the association for information systems, 8(4), p.3. Bataille, G., 1988. The accursed share: an essay on general economy, vol. 1. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Zone Books, 91. Bauman, Z. (1993), Postmodern Ethics, Oxford: Blackwell. Belk, Russell (2001), “Specialty Magazines and Flights of Fancy: Feeding the Desire to Desire,” European Advances in Consumer Research, 197-202. Belk, Russell (2016), “Researching Virtual and Real-World Possessions, Artifacts, and Artifacts,” in Paul Hackett, ed., Qualitative Research Methods in Consumer Psychology, New York: Routledge, 205-218. Belk, Russell (2017), “The Soul and the Machine: Humanlike Machines and Machinelike Humans,” Advances in Consumer Research, 45, 164-169 Belk, R. and Tumbat, G., 2005. The cult of Macintosh. Consumption markets & culture, 8(3), pp.205-217. Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, and John F. Sherry, Jr. (1989), “The Sacred and the Profane in Consumer Behavior: Theodicy on the Odyssey,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (June), 1-38. Belk, R., Güliz G., and S. Askegaard (2003), “The Fire of Desire: A Multi-sited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (December), 326-51. Bennett, J. (2001), The Enchantment of Modern Life: Attachments, Crossings, and Ethics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Birchall, Clare (2017), Shareveillamnce: The Dangers of Openluy Sharing and Covertly Collecting Data, Minneapolis, MN: Unoversity of Minnesota Press. Black, J.D., 2002. The politics of enchantment: romanticism, media, and cultural studies. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press. Block, Ryan. (2007) “Live from Macworld 2007: Steve Jobs keynote,” Accessed February 1st 2019 at: http:// www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs-keynote/ 21 Boon, M., 2010. In praise of copying. Harvard University Press. Borgmann, Albert (2000) "The moral complexion of consumption." Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (4): 418- 422. Botez, A., 2017. Breaking the Limits-Posthumanism, Consumption, and the Future of the Human, PhD dissertation at Aalto University School of Business. Botsman, Rachel (2017), “Big Data meets Big Brother as China moves to rate its citizens,” Wired, October 21, https://www.wired.co.uk/article/chinese-government-social-credit-score-privacy-invasion. Bull, M. (2007), Sound Moves: iPod Culture and Urban Experience, New York: Routledge. Campbell, C., 1987. The romantic ethic and the spirit of modern consumerism (p. 89). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Campbell, H.A. and La Pastina, A.C., 2010. How the iPhone became divine: new media, religion and the intertextual circulation of meaning. New Media & Society, 12(7), pp.1191-1207. Chonchúir, Mórna Ní and John McCarthy (2008), “The Enchanting Potential of Technology: A Dialogical Case Study of Enchantment and the Enternet,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 12 (5), 401-409. Clarke, Aruthr C. (1979), Profiles of the Future, revised ed., New York: Macmillan. Cobb, Jennifer (1998), Cybergrace: The Search for God in the Digital World, New York: Crown Publishers. Cook, J.W., 2001. The arts of deception: Playing with fraud in the age of Barnum. Harvard University Press. Corn, Joseph (1986), “Epilogue,” in Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology, and the American Future, ed. Joseph Corn, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 219–29. Corneliussen, Hilde and Jill Rettberg, eds, (2008), Digital Culture, Play, and Identity: A World of Warcraft Reader, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cova, B., Maclaran, P. and Bradshaw, A., 2013. Rethinking consumer culture theory from the postmodern to the communist horizon. Marketing Theory, 13(2), pp.213-225. Davis, E. (1998), Techgnosis: Myth, Magic and Mysticism in the Age of Information, New York: Three Rivers Press. Dawkins, Richard (1998), Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion, and the Appetite for Wonder, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Debord, Guy (1970), Society of the Spectacle, Detroit: Black and Red Translation. Dinello, D., 2005. Technophobia! Science Fiction Visions of Posthuman Technology. University of Texas Press, Austin. Downs, Jr., G.W. and Mohr, L.B., 1976. Conceptual Issues in the Study of Innovation Administrative science quarterly, 21(4), pp.700-714. Dreyfus, H. L. (1991), Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. During, Simon (2002), Modern Enchantments, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ellul, J. (1964), The Technological Society, John Wilkinson, trans., New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Fernandez, K.V. and Beverland, M.B., 2018. As the record spins: materialising connections. European Journal of Marketing. Firat, Fuat A. and Alladi Venkatesh (1995), “Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchantment of Consumption”, Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (3), 239–267. Foresman, Chris (2016), “How Star Trek artists imagined the iPad… nearly 30 years ago,” Ars Technica, https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/09/how-star-trek-artists-imagined-the-ipad-23-years-ago/. Frazer, James (1959), The New Golden Bough, Theodor H. Gaster, ed., New York: Mentor. Freud, Sigmund (1918), Totem and Taboo: Resemblances Between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics, A. A. Brill, trans., New York: Vintage. Gallardo, Pere and Elizabeth Russell, eds. (2014), Yesterday’s Tomorrows: On Utopia and Dystopia, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars. Gatignon, H. and Robertson, T.S., 1985. A propositional inventory for new diffusion research. Journal of consumer research, 11(4), pp.849-867. Gartner Research, “Gartner Hype Cycle”, Accessed via: https://www.gartner.com/en/research/methodologies/gartner-hype-cycle 22 Gane, N. (2002) Max Weber and Postmodern Theory: Rationalization versus Re-enchantment. London: Palgrave. Gell, Alfred (1988), “Technology and Magic,” Anthropology Today, 4 (April), 6-9. ______(1992), “The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology,” in Jeremy Coote and Anthony Shelton, ed., Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 40-63. Geraci, Robert (2010), Apocalyptic AI: Visions of Heaven in Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Virtual Reality, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Giesler, M. and Fischer, E., 2018. IoT Stories: The Good, the Bad and the Freaky. GfK Marketing Intelligence Review, 10(2), pp.25-30. Gitelman, L. (2006), Always Already New: Media, History, and the Data of Culture, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Gunning, T., 2003. Re-newing old technologies: astonishment, second nature, and the uncanny in technology from the previous turn-of-the-century. Rethinking media change: The aesthetics of transition, 39460. James J. Gibson (1966), The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems, London: Allen and Unwin. Harrison, Peter (1999), “Subduing the Earth: Genesis 1, Early Modern Science, and the Exploitation of Nature,” The Journal of Religion, 79 (1), 86-109. Harrison, Peter (2008), The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science, New York: Cambridge University Press. Hartmann, Benjamin J., and Katja H. Brunk (2019), "Nostalgia marketing and (re-) enchantment." International Journal of Research in Marketing. Hedman, J. and Gimpel, G., 2010. The adoption of hyped technologies: a qualitative study. Information Technology and Management, 11(4), pp.161-175. Heffernan, V., 2017. Magic and Loss: The Internet as Art. Simon and Schuster. Heidegger, M., 1977. The question concerning technology, and other essays. Herken, G., 1980. " A Most Deadly Illusion": The Atomic Secret and American Nuclear Weapons Policy, 1945- 1950. Pacific Historical Review, 49(1), pp.51-76. Highmore, B., 2003. Machinic Magic: IBM at The 1964-1965 New York World's Fair. New Formations, 51(51), pp.128-148. Humayun, M. and Belk, R.W., 2018. “Satoshi is Dead. Long Live Satoshi”: The Curious Case of Bitcoin’s Creator. In Consumer Culture Theory (pp. 19-35). Emerald Publishing Limited. Husemann, Katherina and Giana Eckhardt (2019), “Consumer Deceleration,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (9), 1142-63. Jenkins, H. (2006), Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture, New York: NYU Press. Jenkins, R., 2000. Disenchantment, enchantment and re-enchantment: Max Weber at the millennium. Max Weber Studies, pp.11-32. Jun, S. P. (2012). A comparative study of hype cycles among actors within the socio-technical system: With a focus on the case study of hybrid cars. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(8), 1413-1430. Kahney, L. (2005), The Cult of iPod, San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press. Kostka, Genia (2019), “China’s Social Credit System and Public Opinion: Explaining High Levels of Approval,” New Media and Society, Kozinets, R.V., (2002), “Can Consumers Escape the Market? Emancipatory Illuminations from Burning Man,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (June), 20-38. ------, 2008. Technology/ideology: How ideological fields influence consumers' technology narratives. Journal of consumer research, 34(6), pp.865-881. ------, Patterson, A. and Ashman, R., 2016. Networks of desire: How technology increases our passion to consume. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), pp.659-682. Lever, Rob (2018), ” Tech faithful gather to worship at mecca of innovation,” The Jakarta Post, https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2018/01/08/tech-faithful-gather-to-worship-at-mecca-of-innovation.html. Lyotard, J.F., 1984. The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (Vol. 10). U of Minnesota Press. Löwy, Michael and Robert Sayre (2001), Romanticism Against the Tide of Modernity, Chatheribe Porter, trans., Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 23 Macdonald, Sharon (2005), “Enchantment and its Dilemmas: The Museum as a Ritual Site,” in Mary Bouquet and Nuno Porto, ed., Science, Magic and Religion: The Ritual Processes of Museum Magic, New York: Oxford University Press, 209-228. Mahajan, V., Muller, E. and Bass, F.M., 1990. New product diffusion models in marketing: A review and directions for research. Journal of marketing, 54(1), pp.1-26. Martin, Michelle (1991), Hello Central? Gender, Technology, and Culture in the Formation of Telephone Systems, Montréal: McGill-Queens University Press. Marx, L., 2010. Technology: The emergence of a hazardous concept. Technology and Culture, 51(3), pp.561-577. McCarthy, John, Peter Wright, Jayne Wallace, and Andy Dearden (2006), Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10 (6), 369-378. McCarthy, John and Peter Wright (2003), “The Enchantments of Technology,” in Mark A. Blythe, Andrew F. Monk, Kees Overbeeke, and Peter C. Wright, ed., Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment, 81-90. McCracken, Grant (1988), Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Mick, D.G. and Fournier, S., 1998. Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer research, 25(2), pp.123-143. Molesworth, Mike and Janice Denegri-Knott, eds. (2012), Digital Virtual Consumption, London: Routledge. Mowlabocus, Sharif (2018), "‘Let’s get this thing open’: The pleasures of unboxing videos." European Journal of Cultural Studies, doi:1367549418810098. Morgan, David (2009) “Enchantment, Disenchantment, Re-Enchantment,” in James Elkins and David Morgan ed., Re-Enchantment , New York,: Routledge, 3–22. Morrison, G., 2011. Supergods: our world in the age of the superhero. Random House. Mosco, Vincent (2004), The Digital Sublime, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Muller, Jerry (2008), The Tyrany of Metrics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Muniz Jr, A.M. and Schau, H.J., 2005. Religiosity in the abandoned Apple Newton brand community. Journal of consumer research, 31(4), pp.737-747. Nye, David E. (1994), American Technological Sublime, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ______(2007), Technology Matters: Questions to Live With, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. O’Connell, Mark (2013), “The Cult of Unboxing: How I became Slightly Addicted to these Strange, Homemade Videos, with their Smugness and Exhilaration,” Fortune, July 11, http://fortune.com/2013/07/11/the-cult-of-unboxing/. Pearce, Celia and Artemesia (2009), Communities of Play: Emergent Cultures in Multiplayer Games and Virtual Worlds, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pels, P., 2003. Spirits of Modernity. Magic and Modernity, pp.241-271. Peters, John Durham (1998), Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Peters, Ted (2011), “Transhumanism and the Posthuman Future: Will Technological Progress Get Us There?” in H± Transhumanism and Its Critics, ed. Gregory Hansell and William Grassie, Philadelphia, PA: Metanexus, 147–75.

Possamai, Adam (2006), “Superheroes and the Development of Latent Abilities: A Hyper-Real Re-enchantment?” in Lynne Hume and Kathleen McPhillips, ed., Popular Spiritualities: The Politics of Contemporary Enchantment , Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 53–62.

Prensky, M., 2008. The role of technology. Educational Technology, 48(6). Reid, Robert (1986), Land of Lost Content: The Luddite Revolt of 1812, London: Cardinal/Oxford University Press. Ritzer, George (1999), Enchanting a Disenchanted World, Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Robinson, T.R. (2019) Time and Culture in Consumer Behaviour: Framing the Future Through Technology, Routledge, forthcoming. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Glencoe: Free Press. 24 Rosa, H., 2003. Social acceleration: ethical and political consequences of a desynchronized high–speed society. Constellations, 10(1), pp.3-33. Rose, D., 2014. Enchanted objects: Design, human desire, and the Internet of things. Simon and Schuster. Rosner, D.K. and Turner, F., 2015. Theaters of alternative industry: hobbyist repair collectives and the legacy of the 1960s American counterculture. In Design thinking research(pp. 59-69). Springer, Cham. Rotolo, D., Hicks, D., & Martin, B. R. (2015). What is an emerging technology?. Research Policy, 44(10), 1827- 1843. Rydell, Robert W. (1984), All the World’s a Fair, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rydell, Robert W. (1993), World of Fairs: The Century of Progress Exhibitions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Saler, Michael (2006), “Modernity and Enchantment: A Historiographic Review,” American Historical Review, 111 (3), 693-716. ------2012. As if: Modern enchantment and the literary prehistory of virtual reality. Oxford University Press. Schroll, R., 2013. “I Have Been Dreaming about This”: A Netnographic Study of Consumers’ collective Pre- Purchase Consumption Activities. Challenging the Bounds of Marketing Thought, pp. 411-7. Sconce, Jeffrey (2000), Haunted Media: Electronic Presence from Telegraphy to Television, Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Segal, H.P., 1994. Technology, pessimism, and postmodernism: introduction. In Technology, Pessimism, and Postmodernism (pp. 1-10). Springer, Dordrecht. Sengers, Phoebe, Kirsten Boehner, Michael Mateas, and Geri Gay (2008), “The Disenchantment Effect,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 12 (5), 347-358. Smith, M.R. and Marx, L. eds., 1994. Does technology drive history?: The dilemma of technological determinism. MIT Press. Stahl, William A. (1995), “Venerating the Black Box: Magic in Media Discourse on Technology,” Science, Technology & Human Values, 20 (Spring), 234-258. Stevens, Lorna and Pauline Maclaran (2005), “Exploring the ‘Shopping Imaginary’: The Dreamworlds of Women’s Magazines,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4 (4), 282-92. Stivers, R. (2001), Technology as Magic: The Triumph of the Irrational, New York: Continuum. Streeter, T. (2011), The Net Effect: Romanticism, Capitalism, and the Internet, New York: New York University Press. Thompson, C.J., 2004. Marketplace mythology and discourses of power. Journal of consumer research, 31(1), pp.162-180. ------. and Gocken Coskuner-Balli (2007) “Enchanting Ethical Consumerism: The case of Community Supported Agriculture,” Journal of Consumer Culture, 7 (3), 275–303. Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A. and Howell, J.M., 1991. Personal computing: toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS quarterly, pp.125-143. Turkle, Sherry (1995), Life on Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, New York: Touchstone. ______(2011), Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, New York: Basic Books. Turner, F., 2010. From counterculture to cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the rise of digital utopianism. University of Chicago Press. Turner, V.W., 1982. From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. Paj Publications. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11, 342-265. ------and Davis, F.D., 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), pp.186-204. Venkatesh, V. and Morris, M.G., 2000. Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS quarterly, pp.115-139. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, F.D. and Davis, G.B., 2003. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27, pp. 425-478. 25 Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y. and Xu, X., 2012. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 36(1), pp.157-178. Von Hippel, E., 1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management science, 32(7), pp.791-805. Walliss, J. (2006). ”Spiritualism and the (Re)-Enchantment of Modernity,” in James A. Beckford and John Walliss, ed., Theorising Religion: Classical and Contemporary Debates, Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 32-43. Weber, Max (1964), The Sociology of Religion, Ephraim Fischoff, trans., Boston: Beacon Press. Williams, Rosalind (1982), Dream Worlds: Mass Consumption in Late Nineteenth-Century France, Berkeley, CA: University of California. Wood, Natalie and Michael Solomon, eds. (2009), Virtual Social Identity and Consumer Behavior, Armonk, NY: Society for Consumer Psychology. Zuboff, Shoshana (2019), The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for the future at the new frontier of power. New York: Profile Books. Zwick, Detlev and Dholakia, Nikilesh (2006), “The Epistemic Consumption Object and Postsocial Consumption: Expanding Consumer-Object Theory in Consumer Research”, Culture, Markets, and Consumption, 9(1), 17-43.