Young celebrity, Carmen Electra, holding a tiger and wearing neon colored eye makeup, stares back seductively at readers
of Us Weekly Magazine, (June 18, 2007, page 9). “Wild Thing,” a new cosmetic brand, is in bold black letters, and images of six brightly-hued eye shadows are at the bottom of the page. This ad is apparently an artifact for women, not only because it is marketing cosmetics, which are worn by women, but also because it appears in a tabloid magazine whose readership is predominantly female. Also, the ad “can be perceived as a unified whole, (Brummett, RIPC, p. 21), since it is a simple one-page ad, and the group identifications manifested are plenty, (i.e., women can or might want to identify with Electra’s “wild side” for a variety of reasons). There are many feasible interpretations of this
advertisement based on meaning (
indexical, symbolic, and iconic), as well as several different, but not necessarily opposing theories (Marxism and Feminism) that are distinct in theory.
Carmen Electra is often associated with being wild (in the sense of today’s unwritten definition of wild, which often refers to an unruly, intensely carefree woman). She modeled for Playboy, married a using drug addict, and she is open in the media regarding her sexuality. This gives indexical meaning to the text, especially when coupled with a small tiger, which is also associational, since tigers are literally wild animals. The name alone, “Wild Thing,” has indexical meaning because it could make one think of being daring or even more exciting. Iconic meaning is also present in this text as there are two distinct images (Electra and the tiger) which signify wildness. Symbolically, the word “wild” could stand for carefree or even perhaps, living on the edge, especially since this word has evolved over the years and it is often used to describe late night party-type behavior. In addition, the 1980’s produced a song by Tone Loc titled “Wild Thing,” which became another word for sexual intercourse.
A Marxist might say the structure of the text is one with the “sex sells” implication. In other words, if a woman wants to break out of her mundane routine, she can figuratively become Carmen Electra if she wears the new “Wild Thing” eye makeup. Marxists might also agree with the implied implication of power a woman can have since the ad portrays Electra holding a tiger, which could be considered dangerous by most. Furthermore, Marxists might agree the ad seems to suggest that middle class women might find this product as an attractive option, giving women the ability to feel more liberated, wild, and free. Lastly, Marxists might also agree the media often implies the current state of our society as one in which women are exhausted and have very little time to let loose and be wild. This product could then pick up value as a sign because the value of it can be traded or compared to freedom from one’s day-to-day overwhelming responsibilities.
The Feminist analysis of this advertisement is not too far from the Marxist view, but the perspectives are quite different. For many feminists, the oppression of women is rooted in the nature of men. So, it could be said this product is attempting to encourage women to become something they are not (wild) for the sake of getting a man’s attention. The double standard most Feminists agree exists implies that men do not need a new cosmetic brand to act wild and carefree since society accepts this type of behavior from men, hence, men do not need a reason or encouragement to act wildly, they just do it. Most important, however, is that although an ad such as this is encouraging women to break free in a sense, from a Feminist perspective, it could imply disempowerment of women, which one might believe is a negative attribute of this text.
Overall, this artifact can mean, imply, and suggest many different things to different genders, groups, and classes. The ad appearsto be appropriately placed within a publication that targets middle class women, who, according to a Marxist perspective, might need a materialistic, superficial escape from their overwhelming lives. Feminists would agree the advertisement is marketed to women as well. However, many Feminists might concur that such means of achieving a wild, carefree state of mind are unnecessary based solely on the idea that men do not require the same actions to achieve the same results. It is important to note that neither point of view is right or wrong. They are simply based on varying observations, perceptions, and interpretations, especially when taking into consideration the multiple meanings (indexical, iconic, and symbolic) which are many throughout this text.