Through the Looking Glass pt. 1

I would like to begin by stating that even as a future advertiser, it was surprising to read about all that images and words can mean to different people. I enjoy studying and dissecting advertisements to try and figure out what exactly an ad is suppose to mean. What emotion is it supposed to evoke? How is the ad supposed to be interpreted? Seeing that much of the interpretation is done instantaneously, it really takes a creative mind to start with nothing and build meaning from images and words.



Taking this recent cover of GQ, I began to look at this image for deeper meaning. Besides the fact that GQ is a men's magazine and a cover featuring Jennifer Aniston (regardless of if she is clothed or not) would help sell more issues, why create this particular image? I have come up with these possible interpretations:

1) The tie (Brooks Brothers btw) is included because GQ is a men's fashion magazine. Simple enough.
2) Now for the colors of the tie. In Western culture, red has traditionally been associated with courage and love. Fitting, considering many have felt that Aniston has displayed much courage throughout the Pitt-Jolie situation. Blue has been associated with serenity and infinity. Again fitting since Aniston now claims to be at peace with everything in her life.
3) Now why is she nude. Here a nude Jen is the signifier and freedom is the signified.

Well now that that is all cleared up I don't have to be ashamed about looking at borderline porn, since it is clearly not.

I choose the title for this blog post after I had read the first two chapters of the book, and it was done for this reason: whether we are referring to one's interpretation of an image or aesthetics or taste, what we see or what we choose to see is a product of our surroundings, environment, upbringing, etc. Think Burke's terministic screens. This should not come as a surprise considering the ideas and theories that we have been introduced to in rhetorical theory, professional comm, etc. But once again, considering our interpretations are done simultaneously as we view an image, we are not aware what is influencing our interpretations, and we accept these unquestionably.

I will conclude with an "adbusting" image from an advertisement in Berlin. "Subvertising" is the act of altering an advertisement to make a statement. What message could the subvertisers be trying to convey?