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:
Lecture 6 slideshows
02e474f8-216e-429e-b573-23777c42971d
1.03.01
Posts
