I understand John Berger's concept of the 'male gaze' in a double sense. Firstly I interpret this concept as the accepting and aware gaze of a painted or photographed women. As Ways of Seeing points out, and as much of advertising today testifies, women are portrayed in images staring straight at the absent spectator-owner/ spectator-buyer. This gaze supposedly signifies the woman's acceptance of the male who is taking in her image. In oil paintings, I believe that the woman's acceptance of the male gaze represented the 'reality' that she was presently possessed by the significant spectator-owner. For modern advertising (photography), the meaning of the male gaze is different in the sense that the woman's look is more of an invitation or suggestion to the spectator-buyer. Her gaze is one of the promise of the future. If the consumer buys the product, he might really be able to possess the women, rather than just in advertisements.

The second way that I understand the concept of the male gaze, is through the suggestion that women have a dual view of themselves. On one hand, a woman recognizes herself as surveyed by the male gaze (a means of achieving power through attracting men with their beauty). On the other hand, she herself is the surveyor, figuring out how she will appear to the men that exist in her life. Thus, as Berger states, a woman is not posed as she is, but as the spectator sees her.

The ad I chose for analysis is a Sheer Elegance Panty hose campaign. The ad contains a photo of an elegantly dressed woman poised seductively on the edge of a couch (or should I say divan). Her nylon clad legs are displayed from the thigh down and are located in the center of the photo. The room is decorated with an oil painting (crazy historical stab at validity) and a fine looking oriental rug. The caption reads "What makes you feel most female? Silk." The woman's eyes are directed to the right of the page. While she is not looking directly out into the awaiting eyes of the spectator-buyer, there is an undeniable sense that she is looking at an unseen man off to the right. This makes sense to me in light of the fact that this is an advertisement directed towards women. The spectator-buyer in this case is probably a woman, but the unseen male to the right of the page who has the privilege of the model's smile, is validating her beauty. The model is essentially exhibited on the couch, thus she is aware of being surveyed.

One of this ad's intentions is to imply to the female spectator-buyer that the model has captured the male gaze, represented by her very open fixation to the right hand side of the page. This absent male gaze is significant of the accepted beauty of the model (I suppose as well as the model's acceptance of being objectified as beautiful). The spectator-buyer recognizes this beauty and wants to gain it for herself. This is representative of the male oriented surveyor aspect of the way a woman sees.

She sees beauty as a man might see it (and be attracted to it), and can use that information to make herself beautiful and desirable as well. Thus, the possible outcome or effect this ad might have is to make the spectator buyer desire Sheer Elegance Panty hose so that she might capture the male gaze, and be able to view herself as desirable (the cultivation of glamour). If this response wasn't getting so long I might spend some time grappling with the significance of the play on femininity, elegance, and the ironic (in terms of Berger) presence of an oil painting in the background of the ad. I'll save it for another.

Elena Christopher

Ad Analysis #2