As surprising and completely offensive this ad was to me, not only is it real, but it's also current, and aimed towards women, in some sort of ironic, throwback "let's market to women through essentialist stereotypes" kind of way. While the text is extremely off-putting, the pin-up, Edward D'Ancona aesthetic is something I find really beautiful when done tastefully, so it is eye-catching, before being so overtly crude as to completely dispel my interest. The woman appears happy, but judging from the accompanying text, her happiness seems to be predicated on the common lie that women must objectify themselves in order to gain approval from society, or fulfillment on a personal level. The ad is selling vodka, in an age where the martini is extremely en vogue for the single lady (think Sex and the City), while assuming that throwing back to Helen Gurley Brown-esque attitudes about female sexuality is a relevant way of catching the attention of the young social climber. Note also that the young social climber represented is thin and white, as is the case with all media catering to this genre of persons. Apparently, only white women drink martinis. "Van Gogh" implies a level of cultural appreciation and glamour that people tend to look for in their beverages of choice, yet the implicit message of the text in the ad is decidedly more lowbrow, catching attention with cheap humor and a calculatedly loose lifestyle. I must, of course, clarify that I am in no way puritanical about women owning their sexuality in whatever manner they see fit, but I do experience considerable internal opposition to the empty-headedness that this caption encourages. It makes me wonder why these female stereotypes are being reinforced by the focus groups as being accurate, and why despite its blatant manner of pontificating on the same worn out stereotypes, the ad campaign is still being hailed as "edgy," not only by the advertising company, but also by the New York Times. Of course, women becoming complicit sexual objects is nothing new, as they are now more risk averse because of contraception and can actively pursue their autonomous sexuality (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey 151), and perhaps it's not even my place to say that this is an inappropriate manner of expressing that sexuality, but in reducing young, white, female professionals seeking an after work outlet to their most unflattering common denominator (a parodic sorority girl, essentially), this ad implies that women only value themselves when they play into their own "objectification, commodification... and dismemberment" (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey 208), a set of legs and a mind that will never consider the implications long enough to see that they're not really "in" on the joke. Wouldn't want to risk getting our panties in a bunch, right?
Works Cited
Kirk, Gwyn, and Okazawa-Rey, Margo. Women’s Lives: Multicultural Perspectives. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010.
Elliott, Stuart. "Vodka Brand Goes Edgy as It Reaches Out to Women." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. The New York Times, 9 Aug. 2010. Web. 29 Sept. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/business/media/09adnewsletter1.html_r=1&pagewanted=2>.
Oh, and p.s. as an added bonus, here's my favorite ad from this campaign:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSo I don’t know why I posted that without editing it. I guess I thought I was better than other people and didn’t need to edit my own work but clearly I should never do that again because it looked like I was annihilated so here is what I meant to say:
ReplyDeleteAbove all I would upmost like to point out that the prose style in which you write is extremely seductive (no pun intended) and that I really enjoy reading the concepts you have to offer in class and via blog. I enjoy hearing what you have to say for the upmost reason that you are not a sheep in a hypothetical sense. You don’t follow what everyone has to say and that your perspectives are unique, witty, and tasteful.
However, considering the assignment is to critique someone’s analysis and not praise their work I would like to share with you a short interaction I had with my roommate regarding the advertisement that got me thinking. So I shall begin with a description of my roommate – straight, long blonde hair, green eyes, fair skin, slim, white teeth, heterosexual, 18 years of age. I’ve been friends with her since 5th grade. Her senior superlative in high school was “Best Personality”. She was a cheerleader. Now since you have a little idea of who my best friend is, picture the following scene: I am sitting on my bed reading your blog. I am scoffing at the advertisement and its absurdity and I decide to read it aloud to her to see if she finds it just as disparaging as I do. Sarcastically I say, “Women who don’t wear underwear never get their panties in a bunch!” She laughs. I stare at the “SEX AND THE CITY” poster behind her and ask myself why I would think that SHE out of all people, the prettiest, most popular girl in high school, would ever be offended or feel violated by such a degrading advertisement. I feel despondent and cynical. I get out my headphones and listen to music because I feel as though explaining why our generation is doomed thanks to advertisements like this are completely useless and she, along with everyone else will never understand me.
Herein lays my problem and well as problems for many girls like me – instead of being assertive about how I feel I chose the “path of least resistance.” This ties in with your comments about girls being “risk averse” and “…not really ‘in’ on the joke.” You see – you, me, and everyone else is the epitome of everything that the girl drinking the martini in the advertisement represents because we choose to accept it, we choose to believe we are laughing with everyone - not being laughed at, and we choose to “not get our panties in a bunch.”
This idea of "not getting panties in a bunch" is part of a larger problem outlined in theory as the rise of raunch culture. IN essence, part of the path of least resistance and often hailed as the path to freedom is the idea that liberated women are sexually free, sexually liberated, and sophisticated enough not get their panties in a wad. Interesting how the ad works to silence women and to et them to laugh at the uptight, reinforcing the notion that they should be fun-loving and never angry. This goes with what Seely argues as the Marilyn Monroe beauty ideal.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post discussion.