I think the “personal brand” concept has more worth than you’re giving it. Your definition of brand to a “line of pretty much identical products” is too narrow, and a “personal brand” is a natural concept and something for people to think about in this attention-scarce world.

1. When people talk about “brand loyalty” they usually mean loyalty to a company rather than a product. For example, my childhood neighbors wood buy only Oldsmobile cars. They didn’t by the same model of car, but trusted the “Oldsmobile” brand. Others might do the same for all things “Volvo”, “Sony”, “Apple”, or “Revlon”.

Brands can also be multilevel and hierarchical. “Oldsmobile” the company was a subsidiary of “General Motors”, which is a brand in itself. Many people have brand loyalty to “iPod” for music devices but no particular loyalty to the parent company “Apple” when buying a laptop. And still others have loyalty to “Apple” that subsumes “iPod”.

2. I disagree that brands are necessarily tied to the personalities behind them. Steve Jobs and Henry Ford are indeed strong personalities behind their companies that people might know of, but that is the exception rather than the rule. My neighbors had never heard of Oldsmobile founder Ransom E. Olds, who had been dead for 40 years. Most companies and products (and all senses of the word “brand”) do not have a personality behind them that people “are reminded of.” In fact, brands often pay a lot of money to co-opt a memorable personality for their brand: William Shatner is the face of Priceline, Cindy Crawford was the “face of Revlon”. Many brands are formed more around concepts and values than personalities: “Volvo” is safety, “Nintendo” is fun, “Apple” is stylish, “Allstate” is good care, etc…

3. On the other hand, people can and do become brands on their own. These brands do not necessarily relate the actual personality of the people behind them. “Alice Cooper” is a brand of heavy metal music and wild antics, while Alice Cooper the person is by all accounts a regular nice guy and a good golfer. It is common parlance in Hollywood for actors or musicians to carefully cultivate their “image” or “brand.” It is no coincidence that these are the professions most at the mercy of the attenion economy!

This is not to say that this splitting of person-brand is to be recommended. You are right that many famous personalities did not (and did not need to) pay attention to the concept of personal branding. But this doesn’t mean that personal branding is impossible or that others could benefit from paying attention to it, especially today when attention is so scarce.

You point out that great creators, “by being who they are…do not need to pay any attention to the concept of branding.” It seems to me that many of the “greats” of the past worked a lot on branding. Some concsiously, some by just by their temperment. Culdn’t one argue that in today’s attention-scarce world, it is more important than ever to think about what you stand for and how others think about you? If someone is only going to pay attention to you (or your post, your art, your video, etc) for a short time, doesn’t it make sense to craft what you will be remembered for and what you will “stand for” during the brief time they align their thoughts with yours? This is what is meant by developing a “personal brand”.

Glad to see you posting again, I look forward to reading more!