`To what extent are women objectified and
misrepresented in the media by fashion magazines such as 'Vogue' and 'Look'?
Within this essay, my intention is to focus on the
representation (or misrepresentation) of females through media texts of today.
I will be specifically focusing on Vogue [1] and Look [2],
both of which are aimed at women’s fashion within the UK and were published in
October of 2013. My investigation will delve into if the exaggeration of
representation in females is necessary to gratify it’s audience members, how
truthful and accurate the representation of body image is, and finally I will
analyse several articles taken from both magazines to identify any ideologies,
whether they are making stereotypical assumptions that women are purely
interested in fashion, or whether these ideologies are more contemporary.
I will take into consideration the works of reputable
theorists such as Laura Mulvey and her work on the Male Gaze, Jacques Lacan and
his Mirror Stage, John Burger and ‘Ways of looking’, Post Feminism, the theory
of Uses and Gratifications that the audience may acquire and many more.
Laura Mulvey’s theory offers an insight into how the
cinema offers pleasures for it’s audience members, one being scopophilia.
Despite this being based on film, we can relate the theory to any media text,
whether this be in the form of television, film or print. In section III
‘Women as Image, Man as Bearer of the Look’ of Visual Pleasure and Narrative
Cinema (1975) [3], Mulvey defines the Male Gaze as ‘In their
traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and
displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so
that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness. Woman displayed as
sexual object is the leit-motif of erotic spectacle: from
pin-ups to striptease, from Ziegfeld to Busby Berkeley, she holds the
look, plays to and signifies male desire’.[3a] There is a
tendency to apply the Male Gaze to other forms of media, such a print, however
this is more closely related to the cinematic gaze, rather than that found in
print.
NEED TO FINISH – REFER TO A SPECIFIC ARTICLE
As mentioned previously, I will firstly talk about the
exaggeration of representation of women, and whether this is necessary in order
to gratify its audience’s needs. Whilst researching, I came across an article
written by the Daily Mail around the topic of clothes size. It stated that a UK
Size 16 is ‘Britain's most common dress size’ [4]. Articles
like this contradict the stereotypical ideology that a slimmer size 8 is the
average size (or the desired size) that is ‘advertised’ in magazines. There is
however, a huge difference between what the average size is and what the
desired average size is. The average size has been found in the UK at a 16,
however magazines such as Vogue and Look do not advertise brands or products
using models of this size, in fact I can’t remember the last time that I saw a
model of this size in either of these magazines.
(REFERENCE TO A SPECIFIC ARTICLE FROM EITHER MAGAZINE)
This representation of women can be exaggerated in
several ways, examples including clothes size, airbrushing, the use of
celebrities or icons rather than day-to-day women,
A content analysis of the latest edition of both Vogue
and Look magazines found than an astonishing amount of advertisements contain
female models no larger than a clothes size 6. 132 in Vogue compared to a mere
37 advertisements in Look contained female models of this size [1]
[2]. I also found there to be approximately 8 size 8 models in Vogue,
in comparison to 23 in Look. Taking into consideration that Vogue contains more
than four times the amount of pages than look does, and contains more
advertisements as a whole (rather than articles etc.), Vogue is still showing
more size 6 models in proportion to it's other advertisements than Look are.
Over all, the number of models found in these editions that were found at and
larger size than an 8 were astoundingly small. 6 were found in Vogue, and 3 in
Look (both of which only showed models no larger than a British clothes size
12). This will no doubt convince the magazine's audience that this is the way
that they are meant to look, if naturally sized women are not represented at
all in these magazines, then why would women think that it is something to
strive for? They wouldn't. Vogue as a magazine contains a larger amount of
advertisements rather than articles and stories, in comparison to Look, which
has just been proved by the statistics given. Because of this, Vogue's
intentions and motives may be seen to differ compared to those of Look
Magazine, which contains articles on the latest celebrity relationships, gossip
articles and affordable fashion. These sorts of articles tend to gratify
the needs of it's audience members by giving them an insight into the latest
celebrity news and gossip. By doing this, Look (as a magazine) is in a way
advertising the celebrity as a lifestyle choice, in comparison to Vogue, which
I have found to be advertising a specific product, name or brand. Therefore,
Vogue is seen to be directly advertising a specific product, whereas Look are
advertising a certain style, and showing the audience how to achieve this style
through the brands directly advertised in Vogue (or similar products at a much
more affordable price).
By exaggerating and therefore misrepresenting the
number of size six to eight women in the UK, these statistics place an emphasis
on the ideologies that have been created by the media.
A study published on the 15th of August of 2013 showed
an audit of all UK-based magazines and their circulation within the first half
of this year [5]. This showed Look to be fifty nine magazines away from
the highest circulating magazine of the first half-year, compared to Vogues'
standing at sixty two. This may prove (in conjunction with the number of size
6-8 models in the October edition of both magazines) that magazines containing
larger-sized women may be found more appealing to audience members. And not any
audience members, the target audience for both magazines is of the female
gender, proving that the exaggeration of
representation (in respect to clothes size, anyway) is not necessary. The
reason for Look being higher in circulation than Vogue may come down to several
other contributive factors however, including a lower price of £1.80 [2] in comparison to Vogue’s £3.99 [1] and local, more affordable and
easily accessible brands being advertised. As mentioned previously, the
target audience for both magazines has been found to be females, and this can
be supported by journalism columns from opinion-based sources such a Journalism
students studying at the University of Winchester, and factual-based sources
such as The Guardian. The producer of the column written about Vogue magazine
stated that; ‘Vogue’s target audience
is females in their late twenties to thirties.’ and that ‘Since joining Vogue in the late 1980’s, Editor Anna Wintour has worked
to protect the magazine's status and reputation among fashion publications.
Wintour changed the focus of the magazine in order to do so. She focused on
more accessible ideas of "fashion" to suit a wider audience. This
allowed Wintour to keep a high circulation while discovering new trends that a
broader audience could afford. Wintour also departed from her predecessors'
tendency to portray a woman’s face alone on the front cover. This, according to
the Times', gave "greater importance to both her clothing and her body.’ Both of these comments allow us to understand that as
a female editor, Anna Wintour’s initial aim was ne ver to objectify the female
models used in her magazine, but to allow people to look at the model as a
whole (body included) rather than just a face, whether this lead to the
objectification of women or not, is however another story. [6]
Bibliography
[1]
Vogue Magazine, October Edition (A monthly magazine)
[2]
Look Magazine, October Edition (Published 7th
October: A weekly magazine)
[3]
[4]
[5]
Published 15th August 013
[6]
THEORISTS:
Laura Mulvey
Jacques Lacan
Hyper reality
Uses and Gratification
Post Feminism
John Burger: Ways of Seeing
Aim 1: Does female representation have to be
exaggerated in order to gratify the needs of it’s audience.
Aim 2: How truthful is the representation of body
image?
Aim 3: Article analysis, looking into ideologies.
Size 16 is ‘normal’ and now our average, in
comparison to 195 where the average was 7 inches slimmer and a stone lighter.
http://eprints.ru.ac.za/2303/1/NDZAMELA-MJourn-TR02-129.pdf
University dissertation research
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/magazine-abcs-full-circulation-round-first-half-2013
Published 15th August 013
Magazine Circulation stats: First half of
2013
Here is a full breakdown for UK magazine
sales in the first half of 2013 as measured by ABC.
|
Name of magazine
|
% paid for
|
avg sale
|
change y/y
|
|
Look
|
90%
|
200265
|
-19.9%
|
No.59
|
Vogue
|
94%
|
193007
|
-5.9%
|
No. 62
Out of a possible
5 criticisms of women’s portrayal in magazines
Beauty Redefined Blog
AIM 2
Is the representation of women’s body
image truthful?
-
Clothes size:
using unrealistic models, or photo shopping realistic models to make them look
unrealistic, or copying their head onto another, slimmer body.
-
Face:
airbrushing (make-up, hair extensions)
-
Clothing
(sense of style, shoes, objectification: short skirts/dresses etc.)
AIM 3
Article Analysis: ideologies (of what?)
-
Real women?
-
Affordable/Not
affordable clothing?
No comments:
Post a Comment