Victim
of Beauty

I’ve
chosen the Victim of Beauty campaign
to analyze. To begin with, the photo centers around a very striking woman,
pictured right of the center. Her face is slim and pale, with slightly sunken
in cheeks that darken on the outside. Her lips form slightly downward, painted
in a striking red color, which matches her simple dress towards the bottom of
the frame. Overall, she seems to be rather skinny and pathetic looking, but her
beauty is very evident and profound when placed upon the black background.
The real attention
getter, however, is her swollen and nasty looking right eye, which is black. It
looks as though she’s been abused or beaten, tinted darker purples and pinks. I
believe this to be the main focus of the entire image. Her left eye is done in
makeup and very gorgeous, though it appears to be sad and looking off into the
distance, not directly at the viewer. Perhaps also to set her mood, her hair is
nearly as black as the background, tying her gloominess her to the darkness
which surrounds her, yet consistently keeping her as the main focus.
The image is done
elegantly, and isn’t too busy, so the statement is clear and true to the
viewer, however they may interpret it. In white all caps letters is the
statement “Victim of Beauty” pictured to the left of the center, balancing the
ad off very nicely. I first go to the woman, directly to her black eye, and
then immediately I notice the words to her left, connecting the two things
together. It is a very bold yet simple statement, which keeps the viewer
interested and maybe even adds shock value so people will seek it, whether they
like it or not. Ads like this are meant to be powerful and show something that
isn’t average, and the feedback usually consists of strong dislike or awe.
In fact, there is
entire campaign showing images of beautiful women with nasty and bloody cuts to
their face, however this image seems to be the most well-known for the
campaign. These models have been dressed in high end clothing and accessories
like Valentino, Galdini, and H&M, so one would think they are trying to
advertise clothing along with make a statement. Some believe this campaign to
be a declaration against the modeling agency and how models are treated and
perhaps even abused. This could even be a form of protest. Others think it is
mainly an attention getting ad meant to sell clothing and bring attentiveness
to the modeling industry.
Reading further about why the editors made
this particular ad choice, I can agree that it was meant to start a
discussion, if not a debate. The campaign has become renowned because of this,
so in a sense, it is accomplished and successful. Actually, I’d even say it was
a brilliant idea to but light on such a touchy subject around the world, and
stick it in the faces of the masses. The editors wanted there to be mixed
responses, and encouraged people to make their own artistic assumptions;
though, they held firmly it was not a campaign to support violence
against women. This campaign was to be open and interpreted, controversial and
daring, and absolutely breathtaking.
For the counterargument, this is definitely
an outrageous and ridiculous ad. It is insensitive to those who have suffered
from abuse and to those who are trying to prevent and raise awareness of how
terrible abuse is and can be. Putting myself in the shoes of an abused person,
I would say looking at his woman could nearly bring a person to tears and tear
down their confidence. By beautifying the ugly and horrendous side of spousal
or any kind of abuse, especially targeting women, seems sexist and wrong.
People could interpret this to mean that even though women are beautiful, they
are still the weaker sex, and men have the controlling power over them. No
matter your standing with intelligence and whit, it seems that women will
always have the lower hand.
The arguments combined make a strong
standing for both parties, though I am not here to pick a side. Victim of
Beauty had some hard hits from critiques and concerned citizens who
absolutely protested the ad. Secretly, though, I think this is what they were
striving for, so that the ad could become viral like a bad disease, or a very
excellent one. So that beauty could be shown to have an ugly and neglected
side. So that it could stand out from the rest of high end magazines and
shoots, to become a sensation all its own.
It’s hard to not be
prejudiced as an artist and say that I like this bold ad, because it raised
hell and started a long chain of talking and repulsion. I think art should be
meant to always do this, appeal and appall. I do think this will sell and be
known for generations to come, because beauty and violence together can be brilliantly
terrible when blended.
No comments:
Post a Comment