Skip to main content

Si Perfume - Giorgio Armani (Post 2)

Perfume campaigns are notoriously vague, and they often portray sexualized famous people trying to convince the commoners (us) that we will be beautiful once we smell good. This campaign, "Si by Giorgio Armani," takes a different approach. Its main message is that women should take control of their lives and just say, "SÌ." By using their perfume as a symbol of power rather than sex, they are riding the wave of feminism in popular culture and telling their viewers that women will finally have the autonomy and control we deserve the moment we walk through a cloud of their smell-fluid.

Shockingly, I think this is absolute bullshit. First, the character in the commercial is very far removed from reality. The idea of freedom she embodies involves sky-diving, wearing couture in a shopping market, and stealing a man's jacket. Few sane people who would buy this perfume, i.e. their target demographic, have the money to go sky-diving, sport couture simply because they want to, or commit an act of thievery and assume that they won't go to jail. And this commercial cannot convince us that we are capable of doing all of those things. Secondly, they use red as a power color. The world in which the model lives is black and white, and she brings the light of red into it because she is wearing this perfume. This is highly manipulative. Red symbolizes power, lust, and passion in a majority of cultures, so I can see the appeal in choosing it. However, I am angry at the designers for choosing such an easy approach to marketing. I appreciate the message, but I am disappointed that this ad is evidently the product of the #MeToo movement and new-wave feminism. Women are powerful, and that should simply be a fact. But the outlandishness of this ad gives the appearance of the Armani brand only declaring women to be powerful because that's the popular narrative. This ad campaign is ineffective and it's a cheap shot. I do not approve.

Comments

  1. I agree with your comments on the recent influx of "feminist targeted marketing." It is interesting that the beauty industry including that which produces perfume products has decided to adopt a seemingly feminist ideology, but only after women's equality became a highlight on the news. Unfortunately, as you stated, this marketing technique can devalue a movement for equality into an artificial stunt used to sell product. The use of the color red to gain the viewers attention, as well as it's connotation as a power color also shows a different side to marketing, urging the consumer to be powerful rather than passive. It is strange that a brand would be willing to interpret an idea that doesn't necessarily correlate with the purpose of their brand in order to gain attention.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I completely agree with what you've written, and it also makes one consider whether this ad really does any good in the name of feminism. It depicts a "feminist" woman as a stereotypically attractive and sexualized woman who commits bold crimes without consequence. This massive misrepresentation has become the cover girl of the feminist movement, and for many individuals (especially men) who aren't knowledgeable of real-life feminist issues, she may seem like the image all feminists are supporting. In reality, feminists are advocating for the unfair treatment of women and rights for the underprivileged, but it can come off as a fight for disproportional power for women (like the model in the commercial) who act unfairly without remorse or consequence. This undoubtedly contributes to the reluctance of many men and girls to support feminism, and those who even go as far as to be "anti-feminist" and put down the whole movement.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Internet: The Factual Candy Store (Post 6)

The standard of truth held dear by news media organizations and American culture has been diminished and often disregarded because of the rise of the internet. That is not to say that we were ever entirely truthful. While our version of democracy has always required a certain degree of transparency and communication, we have never shied away from propaganda and smear campaigns and rose-colored depictions of our own society (except when it was inconvenient). However, the internet has given way to a whole new form of communication and unprecedented access to information. People are free to choose whose writing they read and whose version of truth they listen to because there is an overwhelming variety of options and no time to listen to all of them. And this is bad. It opens new markets. Because we want to hear what we already believe, we seem to have reached the consensus that there is no longer a need for local papers and truthful news,

"Loyalty beyond reason is where the profits lie." (Post 3)

Many of the ideas presented in  The Persuaders , a documentary on the advertising industry by Frontline PBS, both shocked me and rang alarmingly true. The line that struck me most was, "Loyalty beyond reason is where the profits lie." As sickening as this concept is, I think we can all accept that there's truth to it. Humans feel the need to be accepted, and when they're not receiving the validation they want from the people around them, they turn to something with which they can affiliate. This is where advertising is successful. Cults require social sacrifice and the worship of an immediately visible leader. Brands are simply more convenient. They require monetary sacrifice of a certain, specified amount, and you don't ever have to see the faces of the people whose pockets you're lining. And all the while, your affiliation with that brand gets you the social acceptance you have always longed for. When an individual becomes affiliated with a brand to t