Part 4 · Uncategorized

Advertisement for a Cuddly Toy

The French philosopher Jacques Derrida said that in order to understand an image, it should first be deconstructed. He also suggested that the viewer should not accept the image without question, but to explore and analyse the content. He encouraged the freedom to question.

I chose this advertisement because I found it confusing and wanted to try to understand what the advertisers were hoping to achieve.  I deconstructed the image as suggested by Derrida.

20200706_143402
Advertisement published in the Daily Mail Weekend Magazine 4 July 2020

These are my thoughts on the advertisement:

  • I found the image to be confusing, the line between animals and humans appears to have been erased.
  • The image shows a female, age unclear, cuddling a toy baby monkey dressed up to resemble a baby girl, complete with pink outfit and a pink bow in its hair.
  • As the image has been taken from a weekend colour supplement, not a child’s comic, and the wording of the advert is aimed at the reader, I assume this is a “grown-up’s” toy. Of course it could be purchased for a child, but given the actual cost, and the implication that it could be an investment, that would be unlikely.
  • Would this advert have had the same effect if the toy had been a human baby? By using a monkey to create the cuddly toy, is it then deemed acceptable to be owned by an adult?
  • Described as “Our First Ever hugging monkey” and “So Truly Real”. It cannot be real because it is representing what is essentially a wild animal posing as a human baby.
  • Made of “Soft RealTouch vinyl” and the arm of the monkey is shown with a light covering of hair. A real monkey does not have skin made from vinyl and yet this is portrayed as being soft and realistic.
  • “Poseable to hug you” implies that the monkey has put its arm around the adult in a warm and caring way, not that the arm has been arranged, thus giving the impression that this is a perfect substitute for a real baby.
  • A further image shows the monkey sitting independently, in a baby pose, again implying that the toy is a baby substitute.
  • The description implies love, comfort, warmth, security, suggesting that “If her big brown eyes don’t melt your heart, feeling her arms around you certainly will.”
  • Then at the end, having drawn the reader into this feel good advert, the advertisers use pressure to encourage a purchase:
    • Available for a limited time
    • Payment plan of 4 installments
    • Pay nothing now.

I am told that monkeys can make loving pets, but they are monkeys, not babies. To cross the line and create a toy monkey which looks and behaves like a human baby for purely commercial reasons is confusing. I wonder whether this advert is aimed at women who for various reasons do not have a baby to cuddle and the monkey is a “respectable” substitute.

Part 4 · Uncategorized

Exercise: Elliot Erwitt – Dogs

Erwitt
Elliot Erwitt, New York 1974

Erwitt, a Magnum photographer,  was known for his photographs of dogs and when I researched his work I noticed that most of his “dog” photographs were taken at the eye level of the dog and not necessarily at the eye level of any people in the photographs.

In this photograph I think he set out to make the small dog the main subject, with the feet of the person and other much larger dog secondary.  He may have included the whole of the person and larger dog originally, but by cropping them out in this way, it makes for an amusing image.

Looking at the coat and boots I assume the person is female, affluent and a dog lover and it appears she is walking her dogs in a park.  Erwitt was influenced by Henri Cartier-Bresson and the “Decisive Moment”, but this photograph does appear staged.  The woman and both dogs are stationary at the moment the photograph was taken.  Perhaps he approached her and asked if he could take a photograph, and she was happy to oblige, stopping for a few seconds in front of the camera as he knelt down to the level of the smaller dog.

Erwitt focussed on the feet of the subjects as the background behind the subjects is out of focus and over exposed, which I think would have been intentional to ensure the viewer looked at the subjects rather than the background.