Topic Question: You are asked to provide a presentation to a group of children between the ages of 8-10 years old. Your topic is about fire safety and how to prevent fire accidents in the home. The context of this presentation is in Primary school.

If I were to teach children about fire safety, I would show them a real fire!

I would take out a lighter and light it. Some people would show them a cartoon or animated fire with mean faces usually because in order not to scare them or they think that the children would remember easily if it were a cute animated fire but I do not think so. In my opinion, it is better to show them the real thing so they know how the fire really look like. Real fire do not have mean faces and iconic in reall life right? What I am saying is that, be realistic. I am sure that they already have this image in their schema for fire. Children are very curious at their age and I assume that they acknowledge fire even before they enroll in a school, perhaps from the stove where their mother cook their breakfast or the bonfires their father made during their camping trip or in their PSP, PS3 or any visual games that they play. Some might say that I could just show them a picture of a real fire but I prefer showing them live because children are more attentive and fascinated to interactive things.

After showing them the first schema, I would go on with my explanation of what a fire is and what it is capable of. Then I will show them the next schema:-

I know this might look slightly gory for primary students but I think it is the best way. Besides, they are primary children and they are old enough to see such image. If I were a parent myself, I would show them this because at least they know that this is a serious matter that they need to be aware of. Moreover, this image would heighten that negative effect of playing with fire at home.

The top level of the schema is that the fire is always hot and burning and the lower level of the schema would be the fact that it can cause serious problems which might be dangerous for them if they do not handle it with care. Both of the schemas are congruent because both of them are things that we see in our everyday life.

02e474f8-216e-429e-b573-23777c42971d

1.03.01

When you look through the ads, I am sure that you can identify the differences. I, myself, realized that what had been presented by Dr Chris in the lecture about Coco Chanel and the Dolce&Gabbana ad had struck me to point this out. The Chanel brand was actually a name from a legendary woman named Coco Chanel who made history by making women fashion clothing while Dolce&Gabbana's designers are actually men which explain their masculine and rather sexist ads. If you examine closely, they make a perfect comparison!

In visual communication, it is the time where you analyse ads critically and I did. I have looked over ads from Chanel and Dolce&Gabbana and there are differences. The Chanel ads show more women than men while the Dolce&Gabbana ads show more men than women. If we knew about the history of Chanel, it is clear why they put more women than men in their ads. The ads mostly reflects on women because that is what Chanel is all about. It is about femininity.

The Dolce&Gabbana ads however are very masculine and male-dominated since they show more men and less women. If you look through their ads, most of them have more than one men in an ad. This is very significant because the designers are male. I am not saying that because the designers are men, the ads show more masculinity stereotypically. Some male designers do design more fashion for women than men such as Emilio Valentino and the late Gianni Versace. Yet this is just an assumption. It is possible that they represent more masculinity than femininity in their ads because the designers are men. I could be wrong but there are possibility because if you observe closely through their ads, especially the ones that have both men and women together, the men are mostly being focused on compare to women. They are always posed upright, bold, fit and muscular, mostly emphasizing their physique while adorn them with their expensive fabric. The women however, are always in a very awkward positions such as these:-

However, there is always a story to tell in each of the ads but I am not going to elaborate on that, it is up to you to interpret it. Again I am not saying that all of the ads show women in such manner, but most of them do. All these could be a significant to the fact that the designers are male and that they prefer to appeal more to their sex than the opposite sex.

Another question you might want to consider when you analyse Dolce&Gabbana ads, is that 'Do you realize that you tend to look more onto their models and story of the ads than the products they are trying to promote?' because I did. I realized that I forgot about the products they are trying to promote because I am focusing more on what the ads are trying to say. However, this is because we are taught to do for being a professional visual communication students but if we are just those people who just wants to buy fashionable clothes, they might interpret what the ads are trying to say but that is just it and then they shift their thoughts, will they really look 'sexy' in that outfit? or will they attract as much opposite sex as what the ad is showing?'

It seems that the representation of the ad is much more emphasized than the products. We could put this into thought that they actually promoting their brand name. Nowadays, fashionable people usually buy things because of their brands regardless if it is a bag, shoes or accessories. It shows distinction if you buy certain brands. Sometimes you hear people saying 'This is not just a bag, it's Prada" quoted from a movie called 'White Chicks' and another one quoted from a movie called 'The Leap Year", a man ask a woman "This bag looks expensive, why would your fiance bought you a bag? Isn't that weird?' and the woman says 'It's... Louis Vuitton..' meaning it is not just an ordinary bag but it is an expensive designer bag and it means that the name itself IS the product! The items somehow is just a medium in order for them to promote their brand names instead. However, this only happens if the brand has developed reputation and popularity because people already acknowledged their brand names.

As mentioned by McQuarrie and Philips (2008), Go Figure! New Directions in Advertising Rhetoric:-

a) Rhetoric in advertising more concerned with style than
content.
b) Advertising rhetoric more interested in how to say
something as much as what to say.
c) Advertising style is not new. Since antiquity, there are
different rhetorical styles: rhyme, anaphora, antithesis or
synthesis (p.5).
d) Advertising style consists of the medium, genre,
strategies of production and creative imageries to show
an argument.

So it has proven that advertisement do concern more with style than content and more interested in how to say than what to say. Moreover, it also mention that advertising style consists of the medium, genre, strategies of production and 'creative' images. The ads above have shown that the setting, the models and the concept are more focused on than the product.

However, if we look at the Chanel ads, they are slight different and our perception and observations of the ads are also different than how we do to the Dolce&Gabbana ads.

The Chanel ads are more feminine because it is apparent from its history background. Its original designer, Coco Chanel has freed women from inferiority and now women can walk the step as men. If you observe closely through the ads, they are actually more women being portrayed than men. Compare to the Dolce&Gabbana ads, the women are never being presented in an awkward manner like what we see in the Dolce&Gabbana ads. The women are always posed upright, independent, beautiful, free-spirited and elegant at the same time. It fits the whole concept of Chanel. The ads clearly shows that women nowadays can do things that they want to do and they could have jobs and life that they never once had. One of the ads shows Nicole Kidman in a black and white suit all shriveled up but she still laugh and feeling somewhat energetic emphasizing the fact that she has been successful in her life as an actress and she did it all by her hard work.

To conclude, the signifier of the ads are what the ads are showing such as how the products are being presented and the signified is how we interpret the representation of the ads about the products. Basically the signified depends on the readers because it is up to us how we think about the ads and my signified thoughts of the ads is that they represent the existence of the brands meaning my knowledge of their history, designers and their reputation conclude my interpretations.

References:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/dolce-amp-gabbana-forced-to-pull-sexist-and-violent-advertisement-437639.html

http://www.feminine-leadership.com/blog/archives/148

http://www.mantlethought.org/content/reading-feminism-coco-avant-chanel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chanel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolce_and_Gabbana

Lecture 6 slideshows

02e474f8-216e-429e-b573-23777c42971d

1.03.01

This is a video I found in Youtube and I think this is very useful for those of you who wanted to recall back what semiotic is. It is very simple and easy to understand. Enjoy!

Semiotics is the study of sign which is useful when you want to analyse the meaning of texts. Semiotics is derived from the work of Ferdinand de Saussure. It is a useful approach for you who wants to analyse visual texts. One way to use this semiotic approach is using advertisements. Advertisements had been using various ways in order to promote products or services. 

I have chosen Chanel and Dolce&Gabbana ads because they are one of the most popular ads seen worldwide and also exciting to be analysed.

These are ads from Chanel:

These are ads from Dolce&Gabbana:

After all of you seen these ads altogether, you probably wondering why I posts them in but I am sure you know why though. These ads came from two different designer brands and also being designated by a very different type of people. If you look closely you can differentiate between the two ads for example, the Chanel ads are more female orientated whereas Dolce&Gabbana ads are more male orientated so what does this conclude? 

Before we go deep into analysing these ads, we must know the background of these two brands. Chanel brand was created by the legendary couturier, Gabrielle Chanel who later adopted the name Coco Chanel when she became successful in her fashion career. She was the one who creates simple clothing for women during her days where women were forced to wear heavy materials for clothing and were strictly forbidden to wear small amount of fabric. 

The women in those days had to wear large amount of fabric put together so they look rather curvaceous and beautiful but in fact, the women were feeling nothing less comfortable and this angered Coco Chanel. She started to become rebellious to the fact women should wear these nonsense so she decided to change that. She slowly made small dresses for herself, making the dress more loose-fitting, easy to wear and basically comfortable. 

She had gone against the convention of society and became a legend to the fashion industry. She had become an icon and a role model for women of all times. 

Dolce&Gabbana, on the other hand, are two Italian designers, Domenico Dolce and Steffano Gabbana who also have risen their fashion empire and became one of the successful brand in the world of fashion. 

Domenico Dolce and Steffano Gabbana

Dolce&Gabbana sells various kinds of luxury items such as watches, sunglasses and purses. They are more of making items that are more of to long-term trends than seasonal trends. Their designs are very modern yet very casual. 

These two big brands are known worldwide to be one of the most influential and popular fashion brands in the world.   Thus they have made millions of fashion ads and  have created various kinds of ad designs and models to be presented in their ads. Their ads are very distinctive in order to represent themselves to the world. 

But the BIG question for today is 'What is the difference between the Chanel ads and the Dolce&Gabbana ads?' The answer will be in the next post. 

References:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/dolce-amp-gabbana-forced-to-pull-sexist-and-violent-advertisement-437639.html

http://www.feminine-leadership.com/blog/archives/148

http://www.mantlethought.org/content/reading-feminism-coco-avant-chanel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chanel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolce_and_Gabbana

Images are all from google images

 

This is a video I have uploaded from Youtube and I think that anyone especially women who love fashion should watch this. It is about a legendary woman named Coco Chanel. We knew her in Dr Chris's class in our week 3. This is actually just a movie trailer, a biography of the legendary Coco Chanel, of how she started to rebel and make women clothes much more simpler and go against the convention of the society. To me, she is an inspiration, a perfect example for women who wish to be independent in any way. Enjoy! 

When you look at these pictures, the first thing that appears in our mind is 'the perfect' or 'the ideal' family. We see these type of ads everywhere from our milk cartons, TV commercials and also our family portraits. However, we know that these are not always what it looks like right? We know that a real family are not always as happy and all smiles like what we see in these ads or family portraits.But that is what ideology really means, which is to make everything 'look' positive. Well, who would not want to be positive? Everybody does! But in reality, it is not always as positive as what our TV commercials show or how we pose for a family portrait. 

I realized that these type of ads could actually offend certain people. I once had a friend and she always have problems with her family. She usually goes to me and tell me everything about her problems, how she was always being beaten by her father and mother, and that her parents always fight with each other and in the end, they got divorced. She knew that she does not have the perfect family like some people do and this actually makes her angry. I remembered that one morning when we were in the library, we were just reading some random books while waiting for our parents to pick us up, she suddenly threw a book over the desk and sulk. I was surprised and asked her why but she did not answer. So I pick up the book from across the table and found out it was a magazine where the cover shows a beautiful looking people, young and old, hugging and smiling together. The title of the cover was 'Your Family'. I immediately knew why and when I turned to her to comfort her, she was already crying. 

After she looked at the cover of that family magazine, it made her angry thinking how the cover is generalizing it to everyone because it is not true. So every time she sees a picture of a happy family, she would sulk, groan, scowl or just roll her eyes. After the divorce of her parents, she became rebellious and hot-headed. I tried to help her by giving her advice but it did not work. Until now, I do not know where she is but I hope she has changed into someone better.

Therefore, ideology sometimes can alter perception. It depends on our own interpretation and perception of things and sometimes our life affects on how we view things. Positive ads are not always as positive as they think they are and it is possible that these ads could change someone's personality. My friend thought that it is not fair for these type of ads to be widespread because it is not true but we know that it is because of her problematic background. Other people might find those type of ads appealing and nostalgic sometimes. It might remind them of their own family photos which they took during Hari Raya or Christmas.

To conclude, when we ever see any type of ads, we must always put in mind that they are not always what they seem to be. Most of the time they are lying to us, to be honest. They just want us to buy their products or services and maybe indirectly ask us to payback the money they pay for the ads.

Nostalgia basically means the pleasant things that has happened in our past.  They are our memories that are sentimental, beautiful and that we cherish them whenever we think about it. It is what makes us happy and keep us moving on. A person should have at least one or two nostalgic experience or life would be in misery and I  am sure of it.

Whenever I hear this word 'nostalgia' my mind immediately picture a Malay karaoke CD my dad used to have when I was eleven and the album name is Nostalgia. It was a compilation of the greatest Malay singers in the old days and most of the singers are my dad's favorite such as Broery Marantika, P.Ramlee, Sheila Majid and some others. So when Sir Chris asked us 'What is nostalgia?' it made me smile because it reminds me of the CD and also the surprising fact that my dad can sing! I found out that my dad could sing the next day after I saw the CD on his desk. For your information, my dad is a very serious man and it is a rarity to see him in such...personality...I would say.

Other nostalgic things that you keep other than the memories you play in your mind would be photographs, videos, music and perhaps objects. I, for one, would say that I am fortunate to be given my own space in my wardrobe and I have these two huge drawers where I kept all the things of my past such as my diaries, trophies, photo albums, birthday cards and gift wrappers, perfume bottles and some shopping bags and receipts that are memorable and somewhat like souvenirs I intend to keep for memories. I would keep all these safely inside my wardrobe and is strictly forbidden for anyone to touch anything in it. So whenever I feel bored or nothing to do I would just sit there and rummage everything out and I would smile and giggle just by looking at the wonderful treasures I have kept all these years!