“Victim of Beauty”

Throughout time there have been a plethora of advertisements that have stimulated controversy and debate across many audiences. The main purpose in creating such content is to ultimately attract immediate attention and discussion about a particular brand across a mass audience. This type of persuasion and coercion is defined as advertising that, “deliberately, rather than inadvertently, startles and offends its audience by violating norms for social values and personal ideas” (The Effects of Shock Advertising) (1). Controversial advertising, also known as “shock advertising”, in most cases, portrays an unpleasant image or graphic that is intended to reinforce both explicit and implicit meanings. In turn, this may instigate controversial debates and a negative brand image in response to society’s norms and expectations.

In 2012, a Bulgarian fashion magazine, “12 Magazine”, published an editorial that included a series of close up head shots of beautiful models wearing makeup that highlighted bruises and wounds on their face and body. In response, the images created an uproar within the media, as many critics argued this was an attempt to “glamourise domestic violence” (NY Daily News) (2). In regards to this controversial fashion shoot, both the signifiers/ denotations and the signifieds/ connotations associated with the image provoke a multitude of individual representations and interpretations.

Image: Reading the Pictures (3) 

When analysing a complex image, it is important to understand the denotations that are associated upon first glance (what is actually on display) (Turnbull, 2017) (4). The image displays a close- up shot of a woman who appears to be suffering from injuries or wounds on the left side of her face. The use of an explosive red garment emphasises the woman’s innocent porcelain skin and blank facial expressions, in order to draw immediate attention to the dark colouring and bruising on her face. In turn, the incorporation of text, “VICTIM OF BEAUTY”, is strategically capitalised and paralleled against the woman to initiate a contrast against the black, empty background.

Additionally, through the use of explicit visual techniques, one may infer the connotations or meaning behind an image (Turnbull, 2017) (4). This controversial image published by “12 Magazine” in 2012, infers the brutal relationship between beauty and violence. The images from this shoot are confronting, disturbing and upsetting, which encourages individuals to voice their interpretations to others, thus generating further attention to “12 Magazine”. The use of a young innocent woman, emphasises the vulnerability one may experience in a situation where they have no control over what is occurring. This image may allude to the notion that the perpetrator is the “beauty” and the young woman is the “victim”,  to which she has succumbed to the pressure’s of maintaining a materialistic appearance as a result of the external fashion environment.

Following this publication, a series of critics commented their thoughts on the shoot to display how there can be many interpretations of the same image (NY Daily News) (2), (Fashionista) (5).                                                                                                           

• “Violence against women exists way too frequently in real life for us to want to look at it in a fashion magazine,” – Blogger Cheryl Wischhover
• “Why do you automatically jump to domestic violence? Why assume women can’t get injured on their own? I think it’s a really interesting shoot” – Lindsey Schuyler
• “This is not a shoot glamorizing, or encouraging, or supporting violence against women…Some see a brutal wound, others see a skillful work of an artist, or an exquisite face of a beautiful girl”- 12 Magazine

Advertisements, regardless of their controversial nature, produce different perspectives based on one’s own ideologies.

Brittany

---

---

(1) Manral, K. (2011). The effects of shock advertising. [online] Theadvertisingclub.net. Available at: http://www.theadvertisingclub.net/index.php/features/editorial/3290-the-effects-of-shock-advertising [Accessed 19 Mar. 2017].

(2) Murray, R. (2012). Magazine explains controversial fashion shoot, says photos aren’t intended to glamorize violence. [online] Nydailynews.com. Available at: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/fashion/magazine-explains-controversial-fashion-shoot-photos-aren-intended-glamorize-violence-article-1.1098313 [Accessed 19 Mar. 2017].

(3) Anderson, K. (2012). “Victim of Beauty”: Glamour of Violence (Once Again). [image] Available at: http://www.readingthepictures.org/files/2012/06/Victim-of-Beauty-01.jpg [Accessed 19 Mar. 2017].

(4) (Turnbull, 2017)

(5) Wischhover, C. (2012). Editors at 12 Magazine Defend Their ‘Beauty’ Editorial Featuring Brutally Injured Women. [online] Fashionista. Available at: http://fashionista.com/2012/06/editors-at-12-magazine-defend-their-beauty-editorial-featuring-brutally-injured-women [Accessed 19 Mar. 2017].