Just me. Thinking thoughts, living life, figuring it out as I go along.
And, no, I don't really know what I'm talking about.
Friday 5 October 2007
Powerful
Dove, Evolution
I first saw this video a while ago... We all need to look at beauty and how we see it, and we need to help the next generation see what beauty is; not what the media says.
Victoria - I love that Dove is doing stuff like this. The bigger industry just doesn't seem to care what it's doing to our women and girls. We need more companies like Dove! Great job putting it here.
Jonathan, I think a lot of the younger generation have no idea that what they see in the media isn't real. I wonder how many of the not-so-younger generation don't know either. I remember the fuss around the poster and I remember not noticing.
Jenn, I would love to see more people involved in advertising doing good rather than just perpetuating the hurtful images.
I love that you're got this here! I saw this video for the first time a couple of weeks ago & have the address saved on my desktop with the intention of doing a post about it myself. This is one of the things that pisses me off most about our society.
This video should be mandatory viewing for every girl during elementary school, before they have a chance to get those distorted images pounded into their brains!
Displaying a picture of a beautiful girl is exactly like telling a story. There is an art to how far you can stretch the truth.
1. Radio: In the 1910-1940s, people were told stories through the radio. In fact, some believed these stories such as "The War of the Worlds" so much, that they took to the street, thinking Martians were invading. But soon people adapted and were not easily fooled.
2. Movies and TV: Boy, did people ever trusted the messages coming out of the television! They trusted it so much that American culture was formed from it. ie, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s TV. But then people start to realized that "Leave it to Beaver" isn't exactly what actually happens in real life. Now, you're going to need some more gizmo to "fool" the people.
3. Computer Graphics: And indeed, gizmos did arrive. It started rolling in from the 1980s onward. For a while, telling a story with computer graphics can easily captivate an audience. But around 2000, people began to become immune to the fancy graphics.
4. Reality Show: Blair Witch and RealityTV shows started telling people that everything on screen is "real" (..and we all know how "real" some of these shows are such as The Jerry Springer Show). But for the time being, it's working. I believe people will become immune to it within 10-15 years.
I see photography following the exact pattern:
1. Hand drawn pin-up girls from the 1910-1940s embellish the truth about beauty. Some believed it; others don't.
2. Photographs of girls replaced the pin-up girls. Most people believed the beauty that they see because, after all, "photos don't lie". But they soon become immune to the message as well.
3. Digital photography. To make a photograph look larger than life, artists would manipulate these images digitally and wow people with them.
4. "Reality" photography. I predict that fashion magazines will follow that Dove Evolution message and say "From now on, we're only doing Reality photography." (And we all know how "real" that can get.)
Therefore, no, I don't believe it should be mandatory viewing for all. Once everyone becomes immune, they will jump to #4. There will always be a distortion of reality with any type of media.
Ok, I hear what you're saying, but I'm not sure waiting 10 or 15 years will help the next generation of girls. Also, you're asking a lot of the general public.
If making something like this available means one little girl no longer thinks she's fat/ugly/etc. then it's worth it.
ynbf, I've been thinking about this more and I think the point that's trying to be made is that our young girls especially are being exposed to these images of what women look like and we need to show them that what they see on tv or in music videos or on tv (etc etc) are not realistic portrayals of what women look like. They are women who have (in most cases) extraordinarily slender builds (or extraordinarily over "womanly") and then are made up and photographed and airbrushed and computer manipulated and they have handlers etc etc.
I think you have some fair points about things but I think our girls really need to see that the media's portrayal of women is unrealisic and unfair and unattainable.
And, I'm suggesting that young boys see things like this as well so that they can start seeing female beauty as NOT what's in the movies. Beautiful shouldn't be models and movie stars, it should be real, natural different, varied women.
13 comments:
Wow.
I knew that I loved Dove for a reason.
I know.
: )
I remember seeing this when it first came out a couple of years ago.
I often wonder how many young girls realise that magazine covers and posters are always enhanced ?
Anybody remember the poster for "King Arthur" that featured Kiera Nightly with - ahem - bigger boobs ?
Victoria - I love that Dove is doing stuff like this. The bigger industry just doesn't seem to care what it's doing to our women and girls. We need more companies like Dove!
Great job putting it here.
That is an amazing commerical. Thanks for sharing. I think I will post a link to my blog so hundreds (okay like 10) more people can see this.
Jonathan, I think a lot of the younger generation have no idea that what they see in the media isn't real. I wonder how many of the not-so-younger generation don't know either. I remember the fuss around the poster and I remember not noticing.
Jenn, I would love to see more people involved in advertising doing good rather than just perpetuating the hurtful images.
TSG, it's a good one, that's for sure!
I love that you're got this here! I saw this video for the first time a couple of weeks ago & have the address saved on my desktop with the intention of doing a post about it myself. This is one of the things that pisses me off most about our society.
This video should be mandatory viewing for every girl during elementary school, before they have a chance to get those distorted images pounded into their brains!
I agree Delton, but think it should be mandatory viewing for boys too, girls especially though.
Good point! Mandatory viewing for all.
: )
Displaying a picture of a beautiful
girl is exactly like telling a story.
There is an art to how far you can
stretch the truth.
1. Radio: In the 1910-1940s, people
were told stories through the radio.
In fact, some believed these stories
such as "The War of the Worlds" so
much, that they took to the street,
thinking Martians were invading. But
soon people adapted and were not easily
fooled.
2. Movies and TV: Boy, did people ever
trusted the messages coming out of the
television! They trusted it so much
that American culture was formed from
it. ie, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s TV. But
then people start to realized that
"Leave it to Beaver" isn't exactly what
actually happens in real life. Now,
you're going to need some more gizmo to
"fool" the people.
3. Computer Graphics: And indeed,
gizmos did arrive. It started rolling
in from the 1980s onward. For a while,
telling a story with computer graphics
can easily captivate an audience. But
around 2000, people began to become
immune to the fancy graphics.
4. Reality Show: Blair Witch and
RealityTV shows started telling people
that everything on screen is "real"
(..and we all know how "real" some of
these shows are such as The Jerry
Springer Show). But for the time being,
it's working. I believe people will
become immune to it within 10-15 years.
I see photography following the exact
pattern:
1. Hand drawn pin-up girls from the
1910-1940s embellish the truth about
beauty. Some believed it; others don't.
2. Photographs of girls replaced the
pin-up girls. Most people believed the
beauty that they see because, after
all, "photos don't lie". But they soon
become immune to the message as well.
3. Digital photography. To make a
photograph look larger than life,
artists would manipulate these images
digitally and wow people with them.
4. "Reality" photography. I predict
that fashion magazines will follow that
Dove Evolution message and say "From
now on, we're only doing Reality
photography." (And we all know how
"real" that can get.)
Therefore, no, I don't believe it
should be mandatory viewing for all.
Once everyone becomes immune, they will
jump to #4. There will always be a
distortion of reality with any type of
media.
Ok, I hear what you're saying, but I'm not sure waiting 10 or 15 years will help the next generation of girls. Also, you're asking a lot of the general public.
If making something like this available means one little girl no longer thinks she's fat/ugly/etc. then it's worth it.
IMHO
ynbf, I've been thinking about this more and I think the point that's trying to be made is that our young girls especially are being exposed to these images of what women look like and we need to show them that what they see on tv or in music videos or on tv (etc etc) are not realistic portrayals of what women look like. They are women who have (in most cases) extraordinarily slender builds (or extraordinarily over "womanly") and then are made up and photographed and airbrushed and computer manipulated and they have handlers etc etc.
I think you have some fair points about things but I think our girls really need to see that the media's portrayal of women is unrealisic and unfair and unattainable.
And, I'm suggesting that young boys see things like this as well so that they can start seeing female beauty as NOT what's in the movies. Beautiful shouldn't be models and movie stars, it should be real, natural different, varied women.
OK, rant over. : )
Post a Comment