Federici Advertisement Analysis

Okay, I know what you are all thinking when you first see this Federici gelato advertisement... How could you eat ice cream without a shirt?  To take on such a cold task requires audacity, which clearly, this desperately hungry man does not lack.  However, he does not differ from all the other Federici customers, as they are all courageous.  After all, the ad clearly says "submit to temptation," daring us to  eat that spoonful of gelato.  The entire ad is rather dark and serious.  In fact, the brightest colors in the whole picture are the pale skin of the two characters and the colors on the ice cream box itself.  This is a useful tool in order to focus the viewers attention on certain aspects of advertisements.  Our eyes naturally see the skin first and the ice cream box because they grab our attention the most.

As you can see, there is another character in this advertisement.  A beautiful, black haired women is besides this man, wearing sunglasses indoors (yet another bold act.)  Both of them are in very good physical shape.  This is a classic example of the media portraying what their average customers should look like, making them seem flawless, bold, and in perfect physical shape. This is a strategy that  ultimately causes the real customer to crave their product, while really craving the look.  

In this ad, the man is eating the ice cream and the women appears to be asking for some, with her hand on his shoulder.  The man aggressively blocks her away using his elbow and gives her a fierce look in the eyes.  "NO" he says.  What?!  So the women isn't allowed to have any ice cream but the man can eat it in bed?  It was also pointed out to me that the mans spoon is purposely or non-purposely made to look like a knife.  Now, if that spoon is really a knife, then there are MANY more possibilites as to what is really going on in this ad.  Well, weather its a spoon or a knife, it is evident in this advertisement that this man has to choose between two of mens greatest temptations; Food and sex.  It appears that he has made his decision to eat the ice cream.   This advertisement is playing on the gender roles our society has formed.  In the media, the men are allowed to grub on whatever they want, while women are prohibited from snacking.  And if they are caught , it is considered to be "cheating" or a "secret." And why is the women wearing glasses in doors?  Is she not allowed to stare back into the man's eyes directly?  I believe that this ad is condescending to women and is quite controversial... However, it fits right in to contemporary media.  

Culture Analysis

Blog #5

Over the course of this project, I found it very interesting to analyze my own culture while existing in it.  I would like to say that now I am more aware, and less vulnerable to media and cartoons now, yet I can’t say that anything will change.  The fact of the matter is that us humans can’t help but give in to these advertisements and cartoons.  We will always want that perfect complexion from a face-wash commercial, or those perfectly cooked, mouthwatering, 98-cent burgers from McDonalds.   Whether we accept it or not, Cartoons have successfully shaped our outlook on the majority of social groups.  However, as a child you don’t realize what is happening, before it is too late.  The media purposely has beautiful actresses and muscular men to make us associate that look of perfection with their product. The human mind is naturally designed to attract to perfection, which is why advertisements are so successful in taking advantage of the human’s wallet.  These same advertisements tell us what we should wear, and how we should appear.  The media creates these gender roles that we must go along with, and if you rebel, you will be penalized by humiliation. 

I found that stores form their own atmospheres by attracting specific demographics.  By singling out a specific group, they are empowering them.  Naturally, this causes the group to want to shop there because their attraction to power.  Also, people are attracted to other people that are exactly like themselves. People change their behavior depending on who they are with. The dynamics can change quickly depending on the place at hand.  This is the connection between cultural spaces and physical places. 

Why do we have to give in to the social norm?  Why must we fit into the world, and play into gender roles that the media encourages us to?  So that we are not humiliated and so we look like everyone around us? “I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine." ( Henry David Thoreau, "Civil Disobedience”)

Cultural Spaces and Physical Places

Blog #4

After a lot of observation I noticed that there is a big connection between a physical place and a cultural space it creates. In general, it seems that clothing stores like Hollister and Aeropostale and game stores like Gamestop attract and cater to a teenage crowd. On the other hand, places like peoples bank, stop and shop and Macy’s attract a crowd of people in their mid-twenties and older and at home, adults rule to the rest. Due to the differences in the age groups each place attracts, each has its own atmosphere. For example, in the teenage atmosphere it creates a feeling of freedom, invincibility and power. This was proved to me the other day when I was in a teenage clothing store and I saw these middle-school-punks skateboarding IN THE STORE, as if they owned the place.  On the other hand, when in an adult controlled environment, everything completely flips.  If you saw that same middle-school-punk in Stop & Shop with his mom, he wouldn’t say a word.  People change their behavior depending on who they are with.  It just goes to show that the dynamics can change quickly depending on the place at hand and also, how big the connection is between cultural spaces and physical places.

A Deeper Look at Aladdin

Blog #3

During the vacation, I had the opportunity to watch the Disney movie Aladdin, and analyze some of its subliminal messages. The first and major point of racism that I caught was to do with representation of the Arab people.  I thought that Disneys representation of Aladdin and Princess Jasmine was very different than the other characters and background actors, they are quite noticeably Americanised. Aladdin and Jasmine both have paler skin, American accents and facial features. The citizens of Agrabah, however, all have big noses, darker skin than the lead characters and speak with thick accents. I also noticed how Aladdin’s skin tone changes throughout the movie.  He starts off as a poor arab man, with dark skin, and by the end of the movie he is rich and whiter.  Coincidence?  I think not.  Not only were the main characters Americanised, but the minor one-bit roles appeared to be villainous, greedy and deceitful merchants.

I also discovered a hidden message in the dialogue.  In the scene where Aladdin and Jasmine are to take a magic carpet ride, Aladdin calls on Jasmine to come with him, and continues to speak under his breath “teenagers take off your clothes. ” However this piece of dialogue is strangely muffled, slightly distorted and seems to be joined by another voice in the background.  This is a prime example of a verbal hidden message.

Disney is creating a stereotype of the Arap people with negative connotations based on their representations.  They are trying to send messages to the innocent minds of our country’s children, and exploit their vulnerability.  At a young age, cartoons easily influence the mind, and they are utterly controlling.  Disney could make an entire generation believe any stereotype.  Throughout the entire movie, they reinforce heterosexuality and grab the attention of the viewers by including a love story.  Aladdin builds these gender roles by having a male protagonist who has to “win over the girl.”  However, the Princess does not accept Aladdin until he has money!  So Disney reinforces the idea that money comes before love, and you cannot have love until you are successful.  So maybe the reason behind Americans strong desire for money originated from Disney.  

Gender Roles: Fashion

Blog #2

A big part of the American culture is fashion.  Unfortunately, we all care about our appearance and how others view us, more than anything else.  Over Christmas vacation, I examined the fashion of both men and women to find an interesting comparison. 

   While walking around the mall, I noticed some of the values held highly in our society. There were countless dress shops, each displaying a multitude of options. The array of bright colors and sparkling sequins was nauseating. And of course these stores did not only offer dresses, there were whole walls dedicated to displaying necklaces, bracelets, etc. Any accessory a girl could ever ask for was available.

However, if one were searching for proper male attire for a formal dance, (like I was) they would find quite a stark display in comparison. Within the same mall, there are probably two, at most, stores selling suits and tuxedos. These stores are noticeably smaller, and offer much less. After all, there isn’t much to offer in the first place, simply pick a color for the overcoat and tie… maybe even a handkerchief if you’re feeling audacious.

This is because of our gender roles.  In our society, females are EXPECTED to express their femininity by their choice of clothing.  They are “allowed” to wear such a wider range of colors and patterns.  Modern clothing is in no way unisex; there are many colors and patterns that men couldn’t wear without getting attacked by their peers.  There is a lot of pressure on men to display their masculinity in their clothing.  This issue even extends beyond clothing; the pressures on genders can be seen through behaviors, language used, relationships, things you buy, and hobbies.  And the worst part of it all is, if you rebel against the status quo, you will become an outcast, and possibly looked down upon.  This experience led me to believe that there is some sort of unspoken social taboo against defying your gender role.

East vs. West

Blog #1

Sometimes, the best way to analyze your own culture is from an outside perspective.  Over thanksgiving break I traveled past the CT borders and found my self in Phoenix Arizona.  Ahh, the West… the perfect place to be while a blizzard approaches your hometown back east.  I stayed with my relatives in a gorgeous clay-style home. (Typical Arizonian) The entire house was one floor, which is common in Arizona.  This comparison allowed me to see the difference in architecture between the East and West.  Us Connecticutans are used to two, maybe three floors in our houses.

 My uncle and his family are very big into outdoor activities. Each child in the family play a sport every season of the year, and participate in recreational outdoor activities on a daily basis.  They go rock climbing, hike mountains, and even drive their dune buggies through the desert.  After observing this, I noticed how different it was back home.  Compared to Norwalk, they are much more physically active in the West (or at least in Arizona.) 

Another noticeable difference in Arizona was the mood of the people.  Everyone that I talked to there, stranger or not, seemed very cheerful and positive.  Now, I did some research and concluded that there is a scientific reason for this mood difference.  Because they basically skip winter, they are exposed to sunlight all year round, which delivers essential vitamins to humans that affect their moods.  That being said, I strongly recommend you don’t take a vacation to the Connecticut area during winter because I can assure you, no one will be in a good mood. 

I didn’t realize these major differences until I returned back home.  Instantly, I realized how the attitudes of the Easterns are different.  The west is all about going with the flow; just let your hair get messed up in the wind from your convertible, why not? Dude, my uncle even goes to work in shorts and a t-shirt!  Well, in the East, we are much more strict.  We need to be on time to everything, with a straight tie, and a proper hair cut.  Why?  It’s just our culture.  

So Different, but So Alike

Joseph Goebbels and Emperor Hirohito both gave war speeches in a time where one was very much needed for their nations.  Hirohito graciously announced the surrender of his nation, while Goebbels only wanted to motivate his country to fight harder after a gruesome defeat at Stalingrad.  Although both men had different intentions for their speeches, they used similar rhetorical techniques and appeals in order to affect their audiences. 

Emperor Hirohito’s tone in his speech was not exactly what you would expect from a leader who had to tell his nation that they must surrender before their country is obliterated.  On the contrary, Emperor Hirohito speaks with such a proud, nationalistic tone that the citizens of Japan probably didn’t even think of it as surrender, but rather saving the rest of the world through their own sacrifice. Hirohito soothes the blow of defeat by instilling a strong sense of pride for the nation, saying “Despite the best that has been done by everyone—the gallant fighting of our military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of our servants of the State and the devoted service of our 100,000,000 people…” Rather than straightforwardly stating that they lost, Hirohito twists the situation saying that the war didn’t go exactly to “their interest.” The Emperor further manipulates the information, going as far as saying that “Should we continue to fight, it would not only result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.”  This makes Hirohito sound almost heroic for saving human civilization, like he should be praised for his nobility.  Hirohito did a marvelous job at making the situation seem like a positive gain for him and his nation.  Bravo Hirohito, bravo. 

 Goebbels uses a similar method in his own speech. Though his speech is much longer, and cover’s several different points, there are some notable things it has in common with Hirohito’s. “This is a threat to the Reich and to the European continent that casts all previous dangers into the shadows. If we fail, we will have failed our historic mission. Everything we have built and done in the past pales in the face of this gigantic task that the German army directly and German people less directly face.” Goebbels warrants this claim throughout, listing the ways that the German people must help, how they MUST make sacrifices to support the troops. However there is a significant difference between the two speeches; Goebbels is obviously much more enthusiastic, I mean, he IS trying to bring his people up from defeat after all, compared to Hirohito who is just trying to bring his people down from…already being down… Goebbels also implies consequences for any that don’t support the Fuhrer’s reign, saying that those who don’t “must lose their heads.” While Hirohito tries to comfort the people of his nation, Goebbels focuses on not only nationalism, but also heavily on fear. His whole speech is filled with implications and dark undertones threatening any who does not contribute to the war effort.

               So in essence, both speeches had opposite goals in mind, but ultimately ended up using similar rhetoric, and similar appeals. So whether you’re a Japanese Emperor facing unconditional surrender, or a German leader serving under Hitler, it’s always within your best interests to make your country feel responsible for the world itself.