Visual Literacy

The Gray Drape

Martha Rosler, 2008

I am always drawn to graphic art when I go to museums. I saw this piece out of the corner of my eye, but immediately went right back to take a closer look. The colors are pretty muted and dull, but there seems to be contrast between the gray interior area and the lighter exterior. What seems to be reminiscent of a 60s era housewife is elaborately pulling back a drape to unveil a war-torn scene. Men in fatigues and rifles make their way down a street as what appears to be a Muslim woman weeps on the ground. Flames burn in the distance, and a heavy cloud of smoke blackens the sky.

I love the contrast between the clothing that both women wear. Both are in “traditional” garments; the housewife wears a dress as was expected in the 50s and 60s, and the Muslim woman wears a skirt and hejab. The gloves of the American woman is juxtaposed to the bloodied bandages on the hands of the weeping woman. The expression on both women’s faces are also shockingly different. I even questioned whether or not the woman in the dress is aware of what is happening right outside.  Is she innocently oblivious or is she trying to alleviate any alarm that the viewer might feel after noticing the scene outside? I immediately recognized it as being a sort of anti-war cry, and while I thought the work itself was very visually appealing, I was unsure about whether the housewife’s face (probably symbolic of American culture), signified the attitude of the country as a whole in reference to the war, or to the leaders that pursued the war so vehemently.

Martha Rosler’s work focuses on everyday life, often highlighting women’s experiences. She “works in video, photo-text, installation, and performance…writes criticism” (2) and teaches at Rutgers University. She is most widely known for the creation of pioneering videos. In the late 60s, she created a series of collages protesting the Vietman war. Like The Gray Drape, she combined scenes from American culture with harrowing realities, illuminating what the war was really like for many who did not know. As a result, she depicted “an ironic, media-savvy attitude that changed the look of much art” (1). She recieved the Spectrum International Prize in Photography in 2005 and the Oskar Kokoschka Prize in 2006. Her piece protesting the war in Iraq (The Gray Drape) recieved harsh comments from critics, who felt she was regressing to her well-known, nostalgic style rather than invent something new.

1. http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/saltz/saltz10-14-08.asp

2. http://home.earthlink.net/~navva/about/index.html

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Rosler

To be honest, the shock I experienced after seeing a number of Benetton’s ad campaigns has yet to wear off. However, that is exactly what the company has strived to do, up until very recently; by associating themselves with images of “shock value”, the viewer is no longer just seeing an image. Now, he or she has an emotional reaction in response to a photo that is being used to advertise for a clothing company. I can understand the desire to break away from what we view as conventional advertising. Nearly every advertisement today is in some way promoting a certain lifestyle, or seems to include the message that without the product in question, happiness is unattainable. Rather than project this sentiment onto any of their products, Benetton’s founders believe it is more importance to raise social, cultural, and ethical questions through a new medium.

According to Luciano Benetton, their advertising hopes to undo the cycle of complacency that comes from being bombarded with “horrendous realities” in a constant stream through conventional media. By introducing these images into new contexts, they are more likely to be given warranted attention and simultaneously force the viewer to ask themselves how the Benetton ad makes them feel (55). From Luciano’s perspective, it seems like Benetton is taking a moral stance against social injustices. Maybe I’m too gullible; we should always be wary to some extent of anything we see in the media. However, a good advertisement, in my probably very naive opinion, only needs to catch the viewer’s eye and make them pause if for only a second. With Benetton’s ads, it’s more like a stop-pause-open mouthed stare for an extended period of time. While concerns raised about Benetton exploiting the suffering of others are rational and intelligent, I can’t help but wonder if even the mere use of such images helped bring about awareness from people who would have otherwise been uninformed. I mean, any publicity is good publicity, isn’t it? I’m not by any means condoning the use or misuse of the tragedies of others, but take Benetton’s ad featuring the man dying of AIDS. In the 80s and early 90s, AIDS was universally thought of as a “gay” disease, spread by the indulgent and sex-crazed. However, the photo shows the effects of the disease on the body of the sufferer but on the family as well. The one thing I truly disagree with was Benetton’s shift back to promoting their clothing in an orthodox manner after photographer Toscani retired. New ads featuring victims of domestic abuse surfaced, but several blogs have reported it as being a hoax, with one blogger even claiming that she spoke to the PR person. The believability of these claims can obviously be disputed. Benetton spent time and effort endorsing the messages that their advertisements portrayed, and refusing to continue their use of socially conscious images in advertising shows lack of conviction in their own methods.

SUCCESSFUL ADVERTISEMENT

The visual elements are very strong in this ad. Bright colors and strong type are used, ensuring that it will catch the attention of anyone who sees it. The simplicity allows for a clear understanding of what exactly is being marketed to consumers. For the 60th anniversary of the VW van, Volkswagen tried to portray a sense of timelessness. Although much has changed in our nation’s culture throughout the last 60 years, America still “depends” on this one aspect of popular culture. This ties in with the Seventh Principle of Visual Literacy.

This visual triggers a strong and immediate emotional response, especially in children from that generation. The ad illicits feelings of nostalgia for anyone whose parents drove the van. The type acknowledges that many children were even conceived in those vans, and it can even be argued that the van itself is safe as well as spacious. That strong, emotional response would occur for anyone who remembers their parents driving the van: the warm childhood memories of road trips, singing along with the radio, playing with siblings in the backseat.

While it is a good example of effective advertising, it does rely on some knowledge on the viewer’s part. The VW van is symbolic of the 60s. People painted their vans with flowers and peace signs in psychodelic colors, advocating love and harmony. However, this “peace and love” movement also translated into lots of sex, which is accounted for in the ad’s message. The VW van was an iconic part of that time period, and it seems that Volkswagen used this particular form of advertisement to ensure that this aspect of pop culture stood the test of time.

Volkswagen is famous for its crisp, simple ads. They are bold, colorful, and minimalistic, relying more on the good reputation of the brand than anything else. DDB Paris created this ad, and has created Volkswagen ads for years.

With this advertisement, Volkswagen is marketing primarily to anyone who either was born during the time the van came out, or remembers their parents owning a Volkswagen van. The ad’s success is based on both its simplicity and its message. A consumer immediately knows what is being sold with one glance at the ad, and the van becomes a way for children of that generation to feel connected to their parents. The van essentially comes full circle for anyone who chooses to buy it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UNSUCCESSFUL ADVERTISEMENT

The visual elements in the Pepsi ad are strong in that they make an impact on the viewer. However, I think that the ad presents a negative connotation for Pepsi’s product; I’m not sure exactly what the ad is trying to indicate, other than new cans that are are very small.

Principle number two, which states that visuals are carefully arranged views of reality and not reality itself, relates very well to this ad. In order to clearly get the message across that its new cans are smaller, Pepsi shows a glass of soda so small that it can easily be held by the fingertips. The cans themselves are not that small,  but the company tries to portray a reality that none of us are used to.

I can’t say that the advertisement honestly conjures any emotional response from the viewer other than maybe fascination. That fascination lasts all of a minute because the image doesn’t portray an idea that the viewer can strongly identify with. Obviously the product in mind isn’t at all controversial or sentimental, but the ad still fails to really connect with the consumer. The ad does not rely on any background knowledge from the viewer, which most likely would have further deducted from its effectiveness.

Pepsi’s commercials and advertisements typically showcase its well-known rivalry with Coca Cola. Blue is frequently used as a link to the packaging and logo. Very recently, Pepsi has updated its logo in favor of a more simplistic look. BBDO Canada, the ad agency responsible for the Pepsi Mini advertisement, put out two other ads to compliment the one above.

The target consumers for this product drink soda frequently, and are perhaps looking for a more convenient sized can; either they feel that a normal-sized can is too bulky to carry around, or they have trouble finishing the soda in an average can or bottle. While it is visually appealing, the ad makes me think that the cans are so small that you would need several to satisfy your thirst.