When sifting through lipstick ads I came across this one. It instantly drew my attention, and in general I would find this ad appealing, I’m not entirely sure why, but I would. I clicked on the image and it diverted me to a web page where they dubbed it as ‘offensive to women.’ Before, I had not taken note of the copy on this print ad, but it reads: “New! Dior Addict Lipstick to Die For… in 30 killer shades… Get Hooked. Now.” Dior unashamedly uses themes of death and addiction to sell this product. After noting this I saw this ad in a completely dissimilar light. It now looked like an action shot of a woman who had been struck across the face, perhaps in a club or bathroom of a club. I wonder how I could not notice this before. Or did I subconsciously, but because of immunization of violent and aggressive images constantly used in media, I did not even think it was a negative thing or “that bad.” Should I feel terrible for liking it to start with?
(As cited in Howson, 2004) Advertising provides “both information and misinformation (Barthel, 1989) that constructs symbolic worlds and, in turn, associates them with particular products. Advertisements shape and reflect society and the pursuit for distinction through the purchase of products.”(Wernick, 1991)
There's something interesting going on here. The older ads you featured, such as the "Crushed Rose" advert, seem to show men in the dominant position. This is what one may expect from an advert from the 'old days'. Then the ad from the 80s seems to show a far more assertive woman in the dominant role, looking far more confident that she is in control and can take care of herself. But then it gets fascinating, because the advert you show in this post reverses that trend, and shows a woman in what looks to be a submissive/abused/addicted nature. And this is the most modern looking ad. One tends to assume that society is constantly evolving over time to make women more equal and less constrained, and that the depiction of women changes in line with this. Yet this advert seems to suggest something different.
ReplyDeleteExactly. This is the question I posed before on whether or not we have evolved? Advertising and media often suggest we haven't, and well spoted on how the male and female roles reverse. In Ad 3 you do not even see the man's face right! I could examine this in great detail refrencing the work of O'Shaughnessy and Stadler who discuss media and society and the feminist movement-they refer to feminism in waves.
ReplyDelete"For example, wearing make-up may at first seem to undermine the feminist position that a woman's worth is not located in her appearance...However postfeminists may wear make-up...and thereby become part of a game that involves playing with identity and celebrating femininity."