The other day in class we looked at different advertisements and broke them down to what message they were trying to communicate and how they conveyed that message. I was cited for finding a majorly considered humorous ad unamusing and a majorly considered unamusing ad humorous. I wasn't going to dwell on the discord between my peers and I until I read a response to Daniel's Gender Roles post. Why is the scene in the Jungle Book, "terribly hilarious" when it is "brainwashing" women to be and aspire to be what the world tells us we should be?
I've been baffled since that class why something so seemingly trivial and insignificant with serious implications was found to be humorous compared to something serious and taboo with minor implications. Why is if funny that the portrayal of a sexy, lingerie clad girl is capable of being controlled like an Xbox character? Yes, the image is funny. But what does this say about women? And what is it reinforcing in men? The answers are all negative.
How come no one saw the cleverness in taking something that was so blatently taboo, something that would stir strong emotion in all who saw it, and use it to sell a silly product? The end thought/outcome is positive: buy this small canister of bug spray and it will solve a very serious matter plaguing society.
Both ads were ridiculous and absurd; one called for objectifying women and a positive view on a toy that is so often detrimental to relationships and distracting from life, and the other reinforced an already negative view on a negative subject. So why do more people find humorous the suggestions with serious consequences and not the suggestions will foolish consequences?
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I wonder if maybe the first ad's long term consequences are not so apparent to the audience, as the blatant second ad. Perhaps that is the work of good advertising, because didn't they get the mass majority of individuals to feel the way that they wanted them to feel? I guess they did manipulate us then didn't they?
ReplyDelete