An Analysis and Discussion of Advertisement via the Lens of John Bergers Main Points - Essay Example

Section/# Female Objectification: An Analysis and Discussion of Advertisement via the Lens of John Berger’s Main Points One of the most prominent aspects that comes to mind when one analyzes the reality of female objectification in society through the lens of John Berger’s seminal piece is the fact that perspective and cultural reality are two of the defining means by which an individual or a society integrates a degree of understanding with relation to how femininity itself is viewed, understood and/or objectified. Although such a topic is broad and can ultimately require a dissertation length response to appropriately integrate and explain, this particular analysis will seek to analyze Berger’s argument through the prism of the way in which the ad, pictured in Figure 1.0, represents and strengthens Berger’s level of analysis and cultural interpretation of the mores and norms that society illustrates with regards to the means by which women are objectified. Figure 1.0 One of the interesting aspects of the ad in question is the blatant and glaring fact that the man stands in the foreground drinking in the sight that is presented to him by the highly sexualized and scantily clad women represented in the background. This dynamic is hardly subtle however, it helps to rapidly integrate an understanding that it is the man within this situation, as within almost all female objectifications, that is allowed to derive pleasure from the sight of these “products” that he is allowed to choose from (Snigda et al 11). Moreover, bringing the subject matter back to Berger’s argument, one can understand the differential that exists between the way that the man looks at these women and the ways in which another women might do the same as being definitive of the different “gazes” that men and women have with regards to examining women. Berger expends a great deal of time near the beginning of his book on discussing this differential as the fundamental starting point from which objectification can and should be understood. Rather than delving directly into the history of how men have objectified women in the past, discussing the ways in which societal and cultural pressures form a vicious cycle, or any other such determinants, this fundamental nexus of the differential in perspectives and the way that it is exhibited is perfectly illustrated within the ad in question (Aubrey 479). Finally, the strong allusion to the choice that is being made and the level to which the man is in a responsible position of power; whereas the women are merely waiting to be chosen and utilized leads this analysis to the second factor that is represented within the given advertisement. As such, one can hardly view the advertisement without being struck by the sheer power of the reference to prostitution that is evidenced. Firstly, the man pictured in the foreground is caught within the moment that the photograph is snapped, hesitating between frames on the screen; as if deciding which of these women he should select. Secondly, the entire process illustrating a transaction has the very strong element of the purchase and use of a consumable good. Moreover, the posture and representation of the women within their glass confines exudes desire in the hopes that they will somehow be fortunate enough to be selected as the prize which will be consumed. However, one of the most nuanced qualities of all which compounds the representation of prostitution within the advertisement is the text that appears directly above the heads of these women in their glass cages; says the banner: “served chilled”. This further exemplifies the fact that these women are for sale and represent a commodity that is of something of a short time span of enjoyment. The onlooker sees and understands that these women represented within the ad have something of a short shelf life, are prepared, ready, and ultimately for sale. Bringing this level of understanding in line with Berger’s assertions in his book, one can easily realize that the role of masculinity as it relates to objectification within the given context is one in which the man is acting out his role of being first attracted to the female form and its representation prior to having any interest in relating to them. As Berger himself states, “Men survey women before they relate to them” (Berger 22). Without making any particular value judgment with regards to the morality of the means by which these women have been objectified, it is fully understandable why the given situation has unfolded in the manner it has. Moreover, Berger would likely claim, had he viewed the ad in question, that this was merely a further indication that his assertions were correct with regards to the way in which men both consciously and unconsciously relate to women (Arndt 34). Similarly, with relation to the means by which the women interact with one another within the ad in question, this too deserves a further level of analysis and understanding. Berger states that women’s actions are an indicator of the means by which she would like to be observed. Moreover, Berger claims that women view themselves through the lens of how they themselves are viewed. What this means is that a higher level of attention to detail is realized than with regards to men as a function of attention to themselves with relation to the other women. Such a stance is somewhat dangerous to engage with due to the fact that it engenders a degree of belief in the fact that women want and seek to be objectified. This type of approach may be true for a number of women within the system; however, seeking to portray this as something of a general rule with regards to how women integrate an understanding of objectification is a slippery slope and only serves to further compound many of the issues, both cultural and social, with regards to how this is exhibited within the current era. This particular aspect of Berger’s analysis is perfectly exhibited within the advertisement in question (Baker-Pitts 127). Tying in with the degree to which all of the women represented are offering themselves for sale, the posture, style of clothing, hair, and makeup is all intended to give the allusion of differentiation among these choices. Not wanting to be the same, these women have chosen, or have been told by the advertising agency, that they are to represent various aspects of beauty, different forms of dress, different stances, different hair styles, and different levels of formality or casualness. This was doubtless done to not only give the male and female audience a level appreciation for this differentiation but also as a function of the fact of how modern and pervasive interpretations of womanhood and objectification of femininity are furthered within the society and culture. Lastly, and perhaps most obviously, the stance, facial expression, and posture of the women within the photo can only be described as something of a “come and get it” attitude. This level of representation of the females within the advertisement ties back in perfectly the prior discussions of how the representations exhibited with the advertisement and Berger’s own understanding of the key determinants of female objectification all tie in with one another to provide something of a symbiotic relationship. As has been stated previously, one of the single most harmful determinants of such a representation is the fact that both men and women view such exhibitions as indicative of the main stream and formulaic of the mores and norms of society. As such, representations such as this specific advertisement gain a further level of prominence and integration within the society and culture. Regardless of the advances that have been made with regards to women’s rights over the past few decades, it is clear, both from a close reading and understanding of Berger and his primary thesis as well as a consideration for modern pop culture and advertisements such as the one which has been engaged with, that the level to which the mainstream society and culture integrates with female objectification has done little to change. This is somewhat odd due to the fact that such great strides have been made with regards to seeking out equal rights, equal pay, and other gender specific rights. However, it is the belief and understanding of this author that one of the primary reasons why this cultural and societal manifestation of female objectification has changed so little is due to the fact that both male and female shareholders integrate with these representations in morally and ethically ambivalent terms. One can and should not integrate with the belief that males alone are responsible for the objectification of women. As such, females share a level of responsibility for safeguarding the means by which they present understandings and images of themselves and their self respect for the world to see. This of course is not meant to be a conservative warning as to the dangers of women sexualizing their bodies and taking a more progressive stance with regards to the way in which they exhibit themselves in public; rather, it is merely an identification that both parties, male and female, are responsible in the perpetuation of the female objectification that has become such a cultural and societal mainstay. Works Cited Aubrey, Jennifer Stevens, and Cynthia M. Frisby. "Sexual Objectification In Music Videos: A Content Analysis Comparing Gender And Genre." Mass Communication & Society 14.4 (2011): 475-501. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 19 Mar. 2013. Baker-Pitts, Catherine. "Two Bodies In The Room: An Intersubjective View Of Female Objectification." Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society 12.2 (2007): 124-141. PsycINFO. Web. 19 Mar. 2013. Berger, John. Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corp. Penguin Books, 1972. Print. Jamie Arndt, et al. "In Defense Of The Body: The Effect Of Mortality Salience On Female Body Objectification." Psychology Of Women Quarterly 29.1 (2005): 33-37. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Mar. 2013. Snigda, Sukumar, and Venkatesh S. "Impact Of Female Sexual Objectification In Advertising On Women." Advances In Management 4.12 (2011): 10-13. Business Source Premier. Web. 19 Mar. 2013. Read More