Lolita Kelly's Post

Since our presentation i have continued to look into theme's surrounding controversy. My first experience of Lolita was by Vladimir Nabokov through over cover story module as this has been produced as a Penguin Modern Classic, quote from www.penguinclassics.co.uk,

                  'Humbert Humbert - scholar, aesthete and romantic - has fallen completely and utterly in love with Lolita Haze, his       landlady's gum-snapping, silky skinned twelve-year-old daughter. Reluctantly agreeing to marry Mrs Haze just to be close to Lolita, Humbert suffers greatly in the pursuit of romance; but when Lo herself starts looking for attention elsewhere, he will carry her off on a desperate cross-country misadventure, all in the name of Love. Hilarious, flamboyant, heart-breaking and full of ingenious word play, Lolita is an immaculate, unforgettable masterpiece of obsession, delusion and lust.'

                                          

Lolita has also been described as a 'prepubescent or adolescent girl who is attractive and sexually responsive, she lusts after older men and is lusted by them in return.    

Lolita is also a Japanese fashion trend that tries to capture the innocence of youth and nostalgia for the 19th century several types of lolita, Gothic lolita, sweet lolita and classic lolita.

Lucy says...

I really like all of the images Zoey has posted, particularly the ones of the children for Cadeaux. They represent how some children look in modern day society, like adults. There was a programme on Channel 4 which criticised high street stores for the making of provocative clothes for children, making them more adult. It was on the Sex Education Show.

Here is the episode: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-sex-education-show/4od#3181456

Zoey Says...

I really like these ones by Tom Ford but are they controversial enough? They were taken for French Vogue January 2011. Its controversial because it takes the concept of children's dress up to an adult level. Putting the children in provocative poses and facial expressions. Its almost exploiting children, paraded around/hyper-sexualized/or unwilling participants for the amusement or financial benefit of adults.

Zoey Says:

Also I came across an image that I found ages ago in some sort of publication and thought 'WOW! how did they get away with that' :

Jessica and Lisa Origliasso of the Veronicas recently appeared in an ad campaign for PETA in support of the organisation's anti-fur stance, with the pair saying they were motivated to do the shoot after watching videos of a Chinese fur farm. Jessica told press recently that the use of fur in the fashion industry is ignorant, unnecessary and unacceptable.

 "We don't want to be an ignorant generation, we want to inform people. We can be the generation that makes a difference."

I haven't found much information about it but if you like it I will do some more digging. I think its a perfect controversial image because it contains all the fashion elements of a fashion advert expect it is expressing the environmental harm of the industry regarding furs and the innocent animals that were killed so people can own such items. 

Again thoughts please :)

Zoey Says...

Right, 
as the previous images really didn't work in the context that we required for the exhibition I've had another look around. As mentioned earlier, we all wanted to include some of David LaChapelle's work. I've found this ad campaign:

 It is aimed to encourage every eligible 18-year-old in America to register and vote in the presidential primaries and 2008 presidential election (1/4 of american are not register on voting lists). Stars are here attached, muzzled, gagged etc...
These images are really shocking and strongly express that by not voting and keeping silent will make yourself suffer by not having your say. They are typically controversial as you would expect from David LaChapelle. However they do not contain his usual sexual elements.


I really think it belongs in our exhibition, what do you guys think? Which one do you prefer? 

Mike - Steven Klein : Anatomy of a Murder

In the SS/11 issue of Arena HOMME+ Steven Klein has an exposé titled 'Anatomy of a Murder'. The expose is a new view on the male body. It is only in the Special Edition of the magazine which has been banned from news stands, it is only available from selected retailers. I thought it would be good to include this because you rarely see full frontal male nudity in fashion magazines. The images have a very sexual and intimate feeling to them. 

Amongst the images is a self portrait of klein, with Susan Sontag's - Death kit. There is a link between the shoot and the book.

Zoey Says...

I've popped on to show what I've found and you've all covered it in the zillion posts you've posted today, haha! I've been looking at some old controversial images and I think its really weird how they aren't controversial at all in todays society! 

Robert Doisneau - "Kiss by the Hotel de Ville" 1950

"hen the photo was first published in Life magazine in 1950, Doisneau made it clear that the photo was posed, but that the subjects were real lovers he had met on the street.  In the 60s, Doisneau was faced with accusations that the lovers were actually actors.  At this time, Françoise Bornet, the female subject of the Hôtel de Ville photo, came forward and told the press that she was not an actress and, indeed, this was a photo of her and her real- life lover at the time, Jacques Carteaud" - Apparently it was such an issue because such passion did not exist on the streets & the passion that did happen was not of real lovers. 

Not the correct type of controversy for our exhibition, I don't think. I just thought it was interesting! 

I also found an ad campaign for Antonio Fedrici icecream in 2009. Using sex and religion to promote their goods. 

Highly controversial because it treads a fine line between sex and religion. Religion is typical of repressing sexuality. Such scenes, especially of such high figures (nuns & a popes) would NEVER happen and therefore almost promotes this to be desirable. 

Super Mods Enter Rehab by Steven Meisel, Vogue Italia July 2007

Another one I found whist searching through fashion images. These ones are controversial because there has been many a model who have fallen ill and had to go to rehab due to drugs and alcohol.

Again some controversial ads to include into our exhibition. I really like the the image of the newborn baby but was actually one of the most censured visuals in the history of Benetton ads. At this point the language of Benetton communication changed radically. The February 1992 campaign showed photos of high drama situations as above a man assassinated by the mafia.

While my last image Duncan Quinn an ad for bespoke suit designer, shows a smug looking man holding a necktie around a woman's body who is wearing only underwear  & bleeding from her head. How this image of possibly a dead woman lying half naked on the bonnet of a car with her killer standing at her side give a positive imaging of the company & designer i find appalling.

Kelly's post

I think all of these images are strong and from my knowledge have been banned in certain countries due to suggestion of violence, rape & drug taking. Think they could all be up for discussion to see if they can make it into our exhibition!

Kelly's post

Lucy: More controversial photographs.

Tanner Krolle: Bags to Covet

 ???

Designer bag company, Tanner Krolle, used this sexual image to advertise their hand bags. The advertisement caused a stir when it was featured in a UK edition of Vogue and consequently, The Advertising Standards Agency received many complaints from readers who described the image as being too sexually provocative and offensive. I certainly agree with this, and feel that if the image did not have 'Tanner Krolle' incorporated within it, you wouldn't know it was supposed to be advertising bags.

Benetton

Carrying on from what Mike said about Benetton advertisements, I felt this one could be interpreted as being rather controversial. It could be argued that it represents equality, however, many people may also see this as being unnatural. Had the photograph of been two people of different race joined together hand in hand, it would be acceptable. However, breastfeeding is an intimate experience which connects a mother with their child and it is obvious from this photograph that the child does not belong to the woman.

Kenneth Cole

(The controversal nature of this image is more obvious from it's background information)

At first, this image looked quite innocent to me. However, reading into why it caused such a stir shocked me. When initially looking at the photograph, I didn't really concentrate too much on what was written on it. I soon realised from reading this and the information about it that Kenneth Cole was using AIDS to sell his products. The way in which they have incorporated the statement comes across as very innocent and somewhat downplays the impact and severity of the disease and almost insults those who have to live with AIDS.

Mike: Controversial Fashion Advertisements

Sex and fashion have long been intertwined. Sex and advertising – even longer. There have been many images created by advertising companies and fashion houses to sell products to us by shocking us. These controversial images sometimes work and more than often spark a debate or two on the way.

A few brands that are not strangers to using controversial advertising:

Sisely:

Sisley - 2001

Sisley has delivered consistently provocative ads for the better part of a decade. Whether it’s white residue in their model’s nose or mouth (see above), you can count on this Benetton Group company to push the envelope

Dolce and Gabbana:

Dolce and Gabanna - Jan 2007

Banned in Italy, This Dolce and Gabbana advertisement has been criticized for its 'glorification of gang rape'. whilst you can never be sure of the brands intent they have been well known for their shocking advertisements, the company’s penchant is for controversy.

Tom Ford:

The company's 2007 advertisements for Men's aftershave raised a few eyebrows. I personally think they're very clever adverts and play on the whole sexuality of the brand. i can see however why some people would find them offensive.

There is so much you can read into this advert when you look past the blatant sexuality of it whether it offends you or not. For example the red lips and nails. possibly signifying desire or passion. The womans skin is shinny or wet, this evokes feelings of passion again and heat. The womens mouth is open, which is a very sexual/submissive thing to show in an advertisement when linked with context of the image. When you begin to look into the signs of the image you can see a lot more about it. Pretty much all of Tom Ford's adverts have an overtly sexual nature to them, here a few more examples:

2008

2009

2011