The two main arguments made were 1: The diner location, as a part of an Americana setting, is an historically offensive place to suddenly have a smiling, happy, Black American be welcome. And 2: The provocative split-leg positioning of the girl, juxtaposed with the Tommy logo & bottle placement was so suggestive that it even suggested the price she paid to be in the restaurant was of a non consensual sexual nature.
The first place my mind went with this ad, likely because I'm a chubby female, was condescension. It was as if the ad were saying, "I'm such a free-spirited, hottie! And I'm declaring my independence to sit in a diner and not order a damn thing, that's how I've got the thighs for these incredibly short shorts! Also, I smell GREAT!"
Then that made me think of how the diner setting was a historically insulting place to see a black person "declaring their independence" to "sit in the same place where white people were likely being served- and she's not even being hosed down or anything!" And then I remembered - "Wasn't Tommy Hilfiger the guy who was accused of being racist? Well, I guess that explains it."
I don't really suppose any of the ad execs who made this had any of these intentions in mind when they made it. It's just the reasonable place a lot of critical minds might go to as a result. Analyzing stuff like this can certainly lead to over analyzing, and I agree that the rape notion is a bit out there.
...
The shadow exercise was cool. I really liked feeling comfortable going to whichever side I felt I belonged on. Back in high school or something, I might have been swayed by the majority, but I couldn't care less. Some of the claims were hard to know where to go, only because some of them were sort of ambiguous. For example- I think watching TV has more than enough positive qualities to stand on the side for TV, but I don't think there's anything good about vegging out in front of the boob tube for hours on end every day... especially children.
That's all I got for now. Sorry for the abrupt conclusion!
-Kayte
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Yes, I really don't think the ad execs had any intention of offending people, but I do think they were completely ignorant about some important issues in history. They should have known that an ad like that could bring about some controversy...
well i guess now that you bring up ignorance it could be a possibility but i do think that your over simplifying things and your thinking very narrow minded.
Post a Comment