Words are hard.

Ack! I writing too much today. I'd just thought I'd share the final result of my advertisement analysis. It is clear towards the end that I am rushing and there are some terms you may not be familiar with, but overall I am quite proud of the results. Here is a link to the ad. Its not the actual ad but the picture the takes you to the collection is the same, along with the copy. The layout is different, but that is made clear in my description. Please enjoy.

Fashion at a Fraction

What could a Target ad possibly be doing in Vanity Fair, a magazine known for its high-end fashion advertisements? Its offering you just that: high-end fashion…at a fraction of the cost. This Target ad has tapped into hopes, fears, and desires of contemporary America. In the face of an economic down turn, the likes of which the country hasn’t faced in several decades, American consumers are reevaluating their budgets and being forced to abandon the luxury of keeping up with those ever-fashionable Kardashians and those like them. But Target tells us, through their well-placed advertisement that we don’t have to abandon our bling or our budget.

The March 2009 issue of Vanity Fair features President Barak Obama as their cover model, stating that his ERA BEGINS! It seems fitting then that amidst page after page of designer clothing advertisements we find one lone Target ad proclaiming that you can get the “glam without pricey drama”. In this singular ad Target “targets” one of the greatest issues facing American citizens today, one which President Obama himself is addressing while in office: the economy. In this advertisement we see a young, classically coiffed and made up blonde, white female leaning happily and dreamily with her cheek cupped by her right hand. On her wrist, fingers, neck and ears are colorful and sparkling jewelry that perfectly compliment her skin tone, eye color, and makeup. She seems unadorned by anything else, including clothing. There seems to possibly be a hint of white material at the bottom of the page, but it is insignificant in comparison to her gleaming skin and jewelry. Just beneath her chin, next to a Target symbol, we read “Target delivers glam without pricey drama, Erickson Beamon starting at $14.99”. In the bottom left corner we are given further information about this sale: it is running from “February 15 — June 26 and we can preview this collection at Target.com/ericksonbeamon”. We can also “Expect More. Pay Less”. And there in lies the key to the success of Target thus far. They promise to give us more and not charge us for this luxury. This is exactly what consumers want to hear especially in economic times like these. Those young “strivers” in the VALS2 network would be highly appealed to by such a prospect. These people who wish to appear to have the money and success but don’t might very well find the prospect of purchasing jewelry made by a designer featured in magazines like Vogue and Elle an amazing opportunity. But this ad isn’t only playing on the consumer’s financial fears, its also addressing the fear of not fitting in.

Henry A. Murray’s taxonomy of needs lists many of the different desires being appealed to in this advertisement, but just under that need for sex (i.e. the nearly naked model), is that need for affiliation. This advertisement is telling you that you too can have that glamorous life that you see within the pages of this very magazine without filing for bankruptcy afterwards. You can have that life, for $14.99 plus tax. Perhaps the most obvious testament to this promise is the three words at the very bottom of the left corner. Design for All. It is the populist proclamation that everyone has the right and now the opportunity to wear designer. By appealing to this desire to belong to this group of people who can afford designer jewelry in an economic crisis, Target is also appealing to the consumer’s need for prominence, for attention, and to achieve. They want to belong to this elite sect, but since they don’t, they want to look like they do. It’s a populist advertisement for becoming elite.

The analysis of gender in the ad is tricky to directly define. It certainly follows the “Men’s Woman” pattern of young, white, blonde, attractive, scantily clad, and unattached to any form of significant other. However, surpassing all of that is the fact that it presents one of the biggest concerns of a “Women’s Woman”: “the desire to attain and maintain her physical attractiveness” (209). This woman in the ad is beautiful. Not only is she simply beautiful, she is glamorous. What higher level of attractiveness is there than that? This advertisement tells the female reader: Don’t you want to be glamorous like her? And now they can for under $20. With gender mostly identified, race becomes a whole other matter. The woman is white. Does this tell us that only white people can be glamorous? It is unclear based on the aesthetics of the ad itself. Most of the other advertisements in the magazine focus on vibrant colors and spring collections. If this is Target’s “Spring Collection”, as the dates seem to imply, then the model they chose compliment the colors perfectly. As stated before, the colors of the jewelry (gold, pink, white, and blue) perfectly match the physical appearance of the model: white with blonde hair, pink lips, and blue eyes.

Through careful analysis it is clear now that the seemingly out of place Target ad in March’s Vanity Fair is actually a clever response to both the needs and desires of contemporary consumers. They targeted the nationwide economic panic and its retail and social implications with a well-organized appeal to the penny-pinching consumer. It wouldn’t be surprising if similar ads begin to surface, making even more promises that you can have it all at the fraction of the cost.
 

------->I just wanted to add, for my fellow GG fans. This is also an Erickson Beamon piece. 

XOXO