So much excitment!

So we had a one to one  tutorial last week and it really did help build my confidence on the subject I'm doing. Sam said that I had research enough on the subject for me to be able to start writing.... so I have! It's not easy to start an essay like this but I have managed to write my opening statement but I still haven't gotten enough information or organised what I have to be able to start the rest of it so I have just been compiling my notes and trying to organise them into paragraphs.
The paragraphs themselves are going to have topics and I have been busy organising the topics that I want to have.
So, watch this space for developments! I have to get back to writing now!

Its been a long day!

I think I have finally decided what the title of my essay for CHI is going to be! It's been a long day researching and I have found a couple interesting points I want to elaborate on. I made sure to focus only on that today and put all my other subjects aside so that I could really get into this.
So I've been reading 'Feminist Television Criticism', 'Media, Gender and Identity' and 'Gender and the Media' today to try and get a hold of what it is I want to talk about.
I went for a walk this morning to clear my head before settling down to this research and the whole time I walked I was thinking about how I was going to go about this topic, because I am easily intimidated by large amounts of text and information. I figure I want my question to be something along the lines of "How is Feminism represented in the media?" and then I want to refer back to ways it was shown in the past and also refer to examples from the present. That way it won't be too much to digest for me but also the people who will have to read this.
I want to look at some journals too but for now I'm going to continue my research from these books and highlight some things I want to read up on more.

Until the next time!

Sessions 7 and 8 catch up!

OKay guysI know this is a lot to get through but I got really into this piece of work and was so happy that I finally caught up on it! I am loving these lessons now and am finding it a lot easier to do the work now that I enjoy it :D I even have an idea about what my final essay is going to discuss! Anyway, I have some more writing to do for the other parts of the course but I think I might post a little stuff on here through the next week if I get a spare moment!

1.       The site(s) of the production of an object or image eg.

·         How was it made? Using a film camera.

·         Using what methods, materials, tools, what kind of technology?

·         The advert was made using HD video cameras I can imagine, post production software, Photoshop

·         How can you describe its composition?

·         Is it identifiable as a particular genre? It’s not easy to discern what genre this advert is.

·         Who made it, where and when? Maybelline commissioned the advert to be made but it’s not clear where it was made although I would assume in a studio mostly and it would have been made a few months in advance of Christmas as it’s a festive advert.

·         Why did they make it? Who was it made for? It was made to entice potential customers to buy up matte perfection for their faces for the party season. They have created false need; telling the customer that it is the right thing to have matte skin that is flawless. It’s made for people who think they have spotty skin or uneven skin tone (although this foundation, I know from experience, actually increases clogged pores, spotty skin and naturally uneven skin tone).

·         What else was being made at the same time? Perfect match foundation by Rimmel which promises much the same thing but in a non-clogging liquid form.

·         What was the social, cultural and technological context of its production?

2. The site of the image:

What visual effects are produced by the materials and techniques used? The skin of the models is completely matte and ‘flawless’. Most likely they are wearing a LOT of stage quality make-up and have been airbrushed in post-production. The background used and the outfits they wear in this make it seem high class, business like but natural and toned down. It conveys the idea that powerful, independent beautiful women all have matte skin so they use Maybelline. The bright stage lighting used makes everything bright and youthful looking.

What are its formal qualities, for example:

• The composition or design of the image;

Everything is very minimal, there are few models, a simple backdrop and barely  any effects.

• Its spatial organisation;

A lot of close ups to show how flawless the skin is even up close.

• Its content or function;

The function of the simple back drop, wardrobe and natural looking make-up is to show how ‘normal’ skin should look and how the women in this advert are naturally beautiful without over embellishment. The function is to promote this make-up as being unrecognisable as make-up to everyone around you and that it can make you look like you are naturally ‘beautiful’ and ‘flawless’.

• The use of colour, tone, texture;

All the colours in the advert are very minimal but they have women of all skin tones and colours. Everything is very bright, youthful, matte and smooth.

• The style of the image

How does the image relate to its social context? I don’t think that the advert really is about the product. Just like perfume or car adverts never talk about the benefits of the product anymore. They are all trying to sell you a way of life rather than the product itself. The women in the advert are supposed to make the audience buy the product because people want to be like those women; strong, independent and beautiful. Basically, the women who will be using it most likely won’t be partying all night or working in a high powered position so socially, it’s not very relevant or even relatable to the customer.

3. The site of the audience:

How has it been displayed and where? The advert was on TV but it is also available on YouTube and shown on the homepage of the Maybelline site. Also the advert would have been in sidebars of websites and would have been made into a paper format for editorial such as Vogue and Elle.

How has it been circulated eg. Are there multiple copies or just one? This would have been mass published as this is a very well known brand.

What viewpoint or values does it offer to its audience or consumers?  As mentioned before,  this advert offers the value that perfect skin is skin that is covered up, that is one colour all over, one that is not shiny or pink or spotty. It conveys ideas of what perfection is and what true beauty is. It says you shouldn’t have skin that looks any other way, especially in the party season. It creates this false need to have it for the party season because you don’t want to have shiny skin at Christmas.

How does it relate to other visual texts? A lot of adverts for beauty products, clothing brands etc. all create this need to have what’s in rather than what you want or need. It’s entirely postmodern; having stuff for stuffs sake not because you need it.

Who is the audience? Is there more than one (eg. Lapper herself, critics and art historians –

What have they written about it, tourists, and art lovers)? Mostly, the audience is meant to be women who are terrified of getting old or not looking as beautiful as they should do (which could be anything from 18 – 85!) Teenagers I think are especially affected by these adverts I think because they strive to be perfect and liked by their peers. To be popular at any cost.

What meanings do audiences construct and how? I can only talk personally but I think that the audience would watch this ad then turn to themselves in the mirror and start to point out their flaws and they create this need, which they didn’t have prior to the ad, for the product because it can fix all these problems they have (even though it was the ad itself that caused these problems in the first place).

Are these the meanings intended or preferred by the person who made it? How do we know? We don’t know, we can only assume. I assume that the thought running through the head of the advertiser who create the advert was that they wanted sexy, powerful looking women to make their product look important and make people want it. Bar that I wouldn’t have thought they would think that deeply on it.

Is its meaning challenged/contested by different social groups? I would have thought that the guy or gal who designed the advert would fight for the meanings that they started off with and people who were avidly against the advert because it conveyed images of ideals of ‘perfection’ would probably appose that. With anything that is in the public domain, there will always be someone to oppose it.

Oh dear!

So I haven't posted in a while but that is going to stop RIGHT NOW! The last session was sooo interesting. I have started to really enjoy the sessions and was truely gutted about missing two of the sessions over the last two weeks.
In the last session we talked about modernism and post modernism and in true Hati fashion I decided to relate that to fashion. In particular, Lolita fashion. Now I was having an interesting conversation about this in the car with my mum on our way to Bath for some retail therapy.
She was asking me about why I dress Lolita and I was trying to think about it and all I could come up with was that it was pretty. Then she was saying how she thought it was sort of post-modernist feminism. And to be honest I think I agree.
Basically this simple question my mum asked me helped me understand this. Modernism was basically a movement  by designers to use only what was necessary to create something. For instance, in the war, it was illegal to use excess fabric or embellishments. This however was overrun eventually by post-modernism which valued art for the sake of art; things that didn't have a functional purpose or restriction.

Now I have a task to do :D So see you in the next post!!!

Judas

So I took a look, semiotically, at the music video for Lady Gaga's 'Judas'. I think that there is a lot in this video that is symbolic because it refers back to the story of Judas, one of Jesus' Disciples who betrayed him. I don't think I know anyone around me who doesn't know that story. I don't the story as well as I would have when I was younger but I do vaguely remember it.

In the video, all the bikers have the names of the disciples on their leather jackets and you wouldn't know that unless you knew the bible. Jesus also has a crown of thorns on his head Judas is always by his side. In the film, Gaga is wearing a blue hooded outfit and also in the video she washes Jesus's feet. These things are indexical because it refers back to Mary Magdalene who washed Jesus' feet and also wore blue, much like Jesus' mother Mary who is often depicted in a blue gown. You wouldn't know this if it wasn't your culture to know.

Stupid Girls

I love this video but not because I support being something you're not. Now I thought that looking at this video semiotically would be easy but actually, it's kinda hard!!

I guess for the most part this video has a lot of indexical imagery. I don't think many people in like Papa New Guinea know what a Beverly Hills or 90210 girl is so WE get the reference to purging, tanning and tiny dogs etc because we are exposed to it so much in the UK and America.

I think thats why you get fashion like Gyaru because I don't think the Japanese really understand the reference like we do.

The devil and angel on the little girls shoulder I think could be symbolic but also indexical because I think it might be a very western reference to your bad and good conscience. So you would only understand it if you understood the reference.

Also you know that when she is standing in front of the American flag that she is a politician (the president of the united states). This would only be understood by people who have been exposed to pictures of the american presidents. 

Like I said at the beginning, this is hard, but I think, for the most part, this video is indexical because this wouldn't mean anything if you weren't privy to the knowledge needed.

Japanese Subculture and Fashion

As you're probably aware, I'm not new to Japanese subculture, streetstyle and fashion. However, it was interesting to hear a little of the backstory to why the Japanese like to adopt similar fashions to Europeans, with their own twist.
I was always a little bit curious about why they wanted to ignore their fashion traditions but then I realised that the occupation by the Americans in the second world war could have something to do with it. The excert soon confirmed it.
In our lesson we did discuss the ways in which fashion has changed our culture and this would be a perfect example of how a whole nation can be changed just because of the cultures of another or even just the dress.
For instance, women in Japan have always, tradtionally, been quite reserved because it wasn't acceptable to be flamboyant if you wanted to be respected. However, when American ('western') fashions were adopted, women became louder, more talkative and even rude. When I was in Japan about 3 years ago, I met a lovely Japanese man in a Yakitori joint in Tokyo and we were talking about how people used to say Gaijin girls (foreigner girls) were always so loud and unreserved compared to Japanese girls but now, all the girls in Harajuku and Shibuya are crazy loud and outgoing.

Anyway, needless to say there are a lot of different subcultures and fashion styles in Japan but for me to go through all the ones I know would take a LONG time.... so I will try as I can to spread them out over a couple blog posts. :D