Images

When discussing the role of advertising in today's culture, which I am forced to reluctantly participate in, my first instinct is always to begin with "Barbara Kruger..." I understand now that my attempt to align my argument with Kruger's critiques is simultaneously an acknowledgement of the majority. I evoke the name 'Kruger' as a defense mechanism to protect me from the multitude of trash positioned opposite her work.

"I shop therefore I am" by Barbara Kruger

In his book, Provocateur: Images of Women and Minorities in Advertising, Anthony Cortese writes that, "advertisers targeting women consumers subscribe to very limited notions of what constitutes femininity... and, consequently, 'feminine' buying patterns" (52). Women need to fit into neat, little boxes so that the industry can maximize its profit. The idea of a woman with a strong sense of her own individual identity conflicts with advertisers' quick and easy appeal to the lowest common denominator. Cortese describes the concept of "the perfect provocateur". He considers her "an ideal image that arouses a feeling or reaction... [who] is not human; rather she is a form or hollow shell representing a  female figure" (54). A few years ago, Kotex released a series of advertisements meant to critique the notion that women are simply props available for use when a product needs a saleswoman.

It is a smart advertisement. I remembered it, so supposedly they succeeded in holding my attention but then the glaring contradiction arises - Kotex is still advertising a product and they are still assuming that this female identity will appeal to the woman consumer. They are condemning an act that they are quite clearly guilty of as well.

So why are women still limited to the role of the object even in a society where we are acutely aware of the marginalization? Naomi Wolf explains this phenomenon in her book, The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used Against Women. She argues that, "Women are mere 'beauties' in men's culture so that culture can be kept male. When women in [our] culture show character, they are not desirable, as opposed to the desirable, artless ingenue" (59). The feminine identity has been defined by society, a patriarchy, as an other. Historically there are very few response to the Other. The most obvious is violence which the advertising industry uses more frequently than anyone should be comfortable with.

What are consumers supposed to gain from this image? Dear Valentino, a pretty red dress is infinitely less appealing when its wearer is being brutalized, and presumably by the police no less. Nothing about this image should say, go out and by that dress. It is also a premise that the company probably knew because I had to really strain my eyes to read the fine print. So, why is this image in circulation?

A second and equally popular response to the categorized Other is detached observation. When we encounters something different, a powerful accompanying urge to stare often overwhelms us. We look, and we compare, and we classify. Race, class and gender are all socially defined to ensure there will always be an us and a them - an eternal struggle. I didn't know what blackface was until I came to Hunter. It's just not something that crossed my consciousness before I was forced to watch an ancient video of a minstrel show so imagine my surprise when I saw that the fashion/advertising industry uses the concept to sell.

Gloria Steinem, whom I had also never heard about until fairly recently, writes about her days with Ms. Magazine in an essay entitled "Sex, Lies and Advertising". She details the constant struggle that she faced attempting to attract advertisers to the magazine. Amongst the many discouraging reports she describes, the then Estée Lauder refused to advertise in Ms. because according to him, the beauty products that are sold by the company are specifically for "the kept-woman mentality"(119). Obviously the readers of Ms. were hardened feminists who had tossed all their makeup into the roast along with their bras. Because of those societal labels, the anonymous readers of the magazine could never fit his ideal and thus they did not even deserve the opportunity to read his probably offensive sales pitch.

"Your body is a battleground" by Barbara Kruger

I used to buy Vogue, Harper's, Elle, Diva and Playboy. I distinctly remember walking into the pharmacy with my mum and begging her to pick up the latest copy of one or the other. I also remember being beyond annoyed when I inevitably hit the first advertisement. The percentage of substance versus texture in any of those listed above is simply astounding. Mum would roll her eyes, and I would explain that it's just what magazines do. This is normal. This is expected.

What is this advertisement selling? Is it selling the ability to contort one's body into a position that must get uncomfortable really quickly? According to Jean Kilbourne, in her article, "Beauty and the Beast of Advertising", advertisements like this one "sell values, images and concepts of success and worth, love and sexuality, popularity and normalcy" (121). Advertisers use their narrow views of the ideal woman to attract women who do not, will not, and should not fit that model. This mythical "ideal woman" is either a housewife, a sex symbol or a superhuman combination of the two. As with every established role in society, anyone who does not subscribe to the neatly defined categories presented to him or her or them, is immediately pushed to the outskirts of the culture being bred.

"Your comfort is my silence" by Barbara Kruger

How would a world look if people loudly rejected the ideals of the advertising industry? Edward Bernays, a pioneer in the field of public relations and propaganda, once said, "It is sometimes possible to change the attitudes of millions but impossible to change the attitude of one man" (quoted in Tye 102). In a crowd, we suffer the fate of the blind but one person's will is sure. I don't know how to change the advertising industry but I also don't think that is the first step to a full scale philosophical shift. I think that the consumers are the first wave. If I learnt anything from sitting outside an economics class once last semester, it is that a large profit driven industry follows the money so if the money has a change of heart, slowly the advertisers will follow. 

Works Cited:

Cortese, Anthony. Provocateur: Images of Women and Minorities in Advertising. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. Print.

Wolf, Naomi. The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used against Women. New York: W. Morrow, 1991. Print.

Tye, Larry. The Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays & the Birth of Public Relations. New York: Crown, 1998. Print.

Steinem, Gloria. "Sex, Lies and Advertising"

Kilbourne, Jean. "Beauty and the Beast of Advertising"