Analysis 5
Product: Fiama DI Wills Bathing Bar
Found on: India Today: Anniversary Issue, Page 2, 3 and 7 (December 2011)
Since this post compares two ads, let me start by analysing each individually and then in relation to each other.
This ad is for women. It covers a 2 page spread. The left side shows 2 flowers. Top represents incomplete while the bottom represents complete skin care. The right page shows a model with an almost bare back smiling at the reader by turning her face around. One of her left hand finger is positioned under her chin. The bottom shows the product clearly. The color scheme of the ad is green in accordance with that of the product.
Skin of a woman is compared clearly to that of a flower. If a woman pays attention to just moisturising, the flower is lifeless, almost dead. If she takes care of all 6 advertised points only then can her skin blossom. This logic has major setbacks. Skin is the interface where physical interactions occur. It is not possible to alienate the skin from the personality of the individual. When we talk about “thick skinned people”, are we not referring to their conduct? This ad uses beauty to define the image of a woman. What about those who have blemishes, stretch marks, are old and have wrinkles? Are they incomplete, lifeless? The body language of the model makes her seem shy (with a finger under her chin), timid, petite, flirtatious (she has her back to the reader and is turning her hand for a glance), fresh, young and healthy. When these are extended to the behaviour of the woman, a terrifying stereotypical image comes forward. Such ads create an ideal woman who is unattainable in terms of beauty and docile in her nature. Constant exposure creates a mindset where these become standards on which women are judged. If they fail, they suffer.
This is a one page ad. It shows a bare chested model on the right side surrounded by splashes of water. The product is advertised on the bottom left.
The model is showing off ample skin. His hands are drawn back and his chest is thrust forward. He is looking straight at the camera. Splashes of water on his skin are making it gleam. His posture is that of someone who is absolutely confident and ready to face on challenges head on. He is unafraid and in complete control of everything. The copy mentions “Rejuvinate. Re energize.” A man has responsibilities. He needs to rejuvenate himself for another day by taking a bath with the advertised product. This is again quite a stereotypical image of a man.
On seeing the two ads together, stark differences in approach appear. This is the most frightening aspect. Both the ads use conventional stereotyping of a man and a woman. The former is in control, the latter is docile. Why does a woman need all the skin care techniques and men don’t? Don’t we, as humans, have the same skin composition, features and reactions? Perhaps more important is the fact that these ads encourage a defined set of values in each gender. These values cannot interact or interchange. A man cannot be shown as taking care of his skin. That is so against machoism. A woman cannot be rough and tough when it comes to skin. She needs good radiant skin to be “complete”. These gender divisions seep into the culture and further strengthen the existing divide. Men and women are supposed to do and behave based solely on their sex. When someone defies attributes, consequences are bound to follow. So much for freedom! No wonder women are harassed. Men are powerful and women are compliant. Isn’t that how it’s always been? Just look at the ad and you will know.
no harassment 