Insulting People - Just Do It

Cardboard Winter Collection

The New Ark Mission and Aashray Adhikar Abhyan are two organizations which help homeless people in India. With their advertising campaigns they are trying to collect more means to further continue and expand their charitable work.

The first organization, The New Ark Mission, launched a campaign in order to collect old clothes for the poverty stricken people living in the streets. They chose to get their message across by mocking classical fashion advertising campaigns. The prints feature little girls dressed in clothes made out of cardboard, newspapers or potato sacks, with the words “Winter Collection” written over them. These images hit the nail on the head, and with proper placement such as in fashion magazines or billboards near shopping centers, their persuasive ability is intensified by the contrast the environment offers them. Applying to a person’s emotions, especially the feeling of guilt they make the reader/viewer think twice before fantasizing about new fashion. As if the imagery itself wasn’t enough, the bottom of the ads features the following text in fine print: “To 33.4% of people in Karnataka, garbage is fashion. Please donate your old clothes.”  It is my opinion that by not asking money but clothes, the organization presents itself as genuine in helping people in need.

The other organization, Aashray Adhikar Abhyan, appeals to the viewer’s emotions in a completely different way. Their ads show homeless people, all curled up in the form of a question mark. The text on the images reads: “37% of Indians live in poverty which puts a question mark on their future”. By using realistic scenes, these ads have the power to trigger both shock and sympathy, thus making them effective. However, when contrasted with the campaign of The New Ark Mission, these ads do lack in creativity, seeing that the information they are serving to the viewers is nothing they haven’t seen many times before.

Seeing that poverty and homelessness are a great problem in India, one must consider who the target audience for these campaigns is. If shown in India, these campaigns may not have the same effect as if they were shown in Western countries. If they are shown in the West, one must applaud the creators of these ads for finding the appropriate means to show the contrast between different lifestyles and thus evoke the feeling of wanting to help. An especially good way of doing this is using notions from Western culture, such as fashion, in order to make the subject of the ads closer to their audience.

The two campaigns are prime examples of how different approaches can be used in advertising in order to convey the same message. With charitable goals such as helping homeless people, the main requirement is to appeal to emotions, and if this is achieved, the campaign will, undoubtedly, resonate with a wide audience, if nothing else, by raising awareness.

Did you come from Japan?

As someone who is not at all interested in politics, and even less so in political cartoons, I had a very difficult task ahead of me regarding the choosing of my subject. Having had somewhat followed the recent disaster in Japan, I decided to analyze a cartoon which would be related to its consequences.

“Doubt”, a cartoon by Luojie from China, published online at www.politicalcartoons.com, addresses bans by different countries on food imports from Japan. It shows the Disney character Snow White being given an apple by her evil stepmother who is disguised as an old woman. The twist is obvious, while the old witch has skin that is green – a sign of something that is unnatural, Snow White is holding in her hand an issue of a newspaper which has “Japan nuclear radiation” written on its front page. Furthermore, she is holding a magnifying glass and asking the old witch where she is from.

The cartoonist’s idea was executed so as to resonate with a very wide and general audience. The animated characters are well known to all of us, and upon inspecting his other works, I have found that Loujie most often relies on well known concepts or sayings in his cartoons.

This cartoon can be seen in two ways. One of them, the more obvious one, is the author’s ironic take on the paranoia that has overwhelmed the Western world where extensive inspections of imported products from Japan are made. This is most obvious from the way in which the author chooses to alter the well known Disney imagery – adding the newspaper, the magnifying glass and last but not least, painting the old witch’s skin green.

However, one must also take into account the reason why this exact animated movie was chosen by the author. Its mocking and ironic tone does make a point, but one must also consider the fact that the apple in the fairy tale was indeed poisoned. This poses a question to which the readers must find the answer on their own: Is the whole deal blown out of proportion or do we need to consider every aspect of the story, even those which are not reported to us by our governments?

As already mentioned, by choosing a well known scene, Luojie manages to reach out to a wide audience, appealing to that which they are on familiar terms with in order to awaken their interest in the topic which may seem completely alien to them. For one must always keep in mind that what we eat is what we are. And if reports of radiation levels change on a daily basis, as they do at the moment without any explanation, it is our obligation to ourselves to seriously consider all the circumstances surrounding that which we consume.

An Apology for Misrepresenting the Peace-Loving Religion - or Else.

In “I Was a Tool of Satan”, an article by Doug Marlette, the author raises two questions – censorship and the consequences of the lack of it. When his cartoon with the caption “What Would Mohammed Drive” was published on an online page of The Tallahassee it triggered a series of complaints, some going as far to threaten the author’s life. In his response “With All Due Respect, an Apology Is Not Needed”, Marlette pointed out that his attack was not aimed at the religion of Islam, rather the fanatics of the Muslim religion.

The central point of the article is undoubtedly the author’s opinion on the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Not only does he describe today’s society as ruled by an “anti-intellectual mobocracy”, but he even goes on to describe today’s censorship masked by “marketing surveys and focus-group findings”. He describes his sort, that of political cartoonists as on the verge of extinction, caused by a mock-sensitivity which allows misinterpretation to become a cause for threats.

The question the reader is left with is that which should, perhaps, not even be posed. Isn’t art supposed to comment on reality? If any author must contain his comments about his society in fear of his life, then perhaps this same society is undermining one of the most important human rights: that of free opinionation.

Nothing in Particular, Really

In his article “Under God”, Samuel Huntington explores the controversy that arose when the line “under God” was taken out from the Pledge of Allegiance. Keeping a rather objective stand, he makes a point of stating the arguments both for and against the omission of the particular line.

The issue arose when atheists, a minority in the United States of America expressed their dissatisfaction of being “outsiders, not full members of the political community” (Huntington, 2). To be made to refer to a god can be seen not only unconstitutional, but also in conflict with the ideals the nation was built on – a promise of religious equality amongst all. However, Huntington also addresses the importance of religion in American society, stating an opinion that by omitting “under God” from the Pledge, atheists are imposing their beliefs, or lack of, on the rest of their community.

Gary Markstein, on the other hand, gives the reader a very subjective view on the matter. By replacing the debated line with “one nation under nothing in particular” he makes a point that without religion, there is no true ideal that creates a connection between the people of America. This can also be seen as harsh criticism of the society, seeing that Markstein seems to believe that, except for religion, nothing is really a striving force for the nation.

While the two authors address the same subject, in their works we can see a difference of opinion, one which undoubtedly mirrors that of the very nation of the United States of America.

Don't Be Stupid. Protect Yourself.

In order to sell certain merchandise to potential customers, an advertiser must at first awaken in them the impression of needing the product. This is often achieved by subliminal messaging, or simply put, deceitful persuasion. Advertising companies often use techniques such as invoking in the target customer a sense of familiarity. Coca-Cola Hellenic chose to achieve this by recreating a family atmosphere of bickering at the dinner table. Henkel aims at invoking in their consumers a sense of guilt by bombarding them with images of nearly fluorescently white laundry.

On the other hand, there are those bold advertisers who chose to expose their targets straight to the point. This is mostly the case with organizations which have certain goals, such as PETA, WWF, WHO and others. A series of ads I found interesting exactly for not beating around the bush is a campaign by CondomShop.ch, an online prophylactic dealer.

In their advertisements they chose to depict unprotected intercourse by using clear metaphors. Those practicing unsafe sex were shown facing extreme situations such as extinguishing a fire or fighting in a battle without any protective gear. These situations can be seen as dumbing-down the consequences of carelessness in intercourse, for they make a point that sexually transmitted diseases can be just as dangerous as a burn or a bullet to the chest. Furthermore, they chose their slogan to be “Don’t be stupid, Protect yourself” which is to evoke in the viewer a sense of being responsible by using protection.

One must not forget that these are advertisements and aim at selling certain products, however, I find it far more acceptable than the emotional blackmail of detergent-makers. With the focus on a goal which is beneficial – fighting HIV and AIDS – CondomShop.ch actually managed to raise awareness in addition to creating a successful campaign (which so often rely on selling hot air to unsuspecting customers).

Dress codes in dance class are

1) necessary in early stages of ballet training.

2) a formality in exam classes.

3) not enforced in most dance companies.

4) a way of teaching students discipline in their attitude towards dance.

5) helpful in removing distractions for ballet teachers in class.

Examplification:

1) In order to be able to see the dancer's positioning, the teacher must be able to see not only their body, but also the way their muscles work. This is why beginners of classical ballet are often advised against wearing tights which, even though they are very thin, can be a barrier in observing the dancer's technique.

2) By having a dress code in exam classes, students are encouraged to step up to the occasion not only in performance but also in acknowledging it as a formal event.

3) Dance companies do not enforce dress codes mostly because of the preference of each dancer for certain types of warm-up clothing. Furthermore, the lack of a dress code gives dancers the opportunity to develop their individuality and grow in different directions.

4) By following the rules of dress codes, dance students are taught to take their dance genre seriously and as a discipline as well as an art form.

5) Teachers can be easily distracted by baggy clothing, seeing that these disable them from seeing mistakes in a student's technique. When the whole class looks the same, a teacher can focus on pinpointing mistakes more easily, thus giving him or her the ability to correct more students.

Comparison:

Dress code: dancers are equal, teachers are able to correct them, there is a sense of discipline in the studio.

No dress code: dancers are individualized, teachers may find difficulties in correcting technique.

Casualty:

Dress codes in dance classes, especially classical ballet classes, are something on which everybody has different views on. Most prestigious schools and studios require their students/dancers to dress a certain way, while there are those which do not have special requirements beyond the usual leotard, tights and ballet slippers. However, in professional companies, these dress codes are rarely enforced, which may be seen as wrong in the way that the ballet masters are restricted in their ability to improve a dancer's technique by corrections.

Effects:

Dress codes in ballet schools will certainly lead to dancers attempting to stand out in class in more subtle ways such as wearing jewelry (if allowed), head-wear, and makeup.