there's denial, and there's denial
Posted on 2009.01.05 at 23:14
Back in August, there was apparently a flap in the blogosphere about how Eva Mendes was in a Calvin Klein fragrance ad, in which she rolled around in bed like, well, like someone in a Calvin Klein ad. In the process of Eva's writhing about, one nipple showed for a moment. Not surprisingly, the ad was banned by American TV networks.
Gawker has these quotes from creative director Fabien Baron, which I think are pretty much the definition of "disingenuous":Yeah, remember back before Bush was elected, when TV ads always had nudity? I think it was actually a legal requirement in the 90s for every TV ad to have at least one female nipple.
I agree with Baron in many ways. I think American media and society are too repressed about sex and nudity and whatnot. I disagree, though, in that I think that if you act surprised to find out that you can't put nipples in an American TV, that you just make yourself look either a) completely ignorant or b) completely disingenuous.
I think Gawker correctly diagnosed the situation:
I was apparently too busy taking photos of naked women to hear about this at the time, because I didn't know about any of it until today, when I was reading the Eva Mendes interview in the January issue of Allure. (Yes, I need a job.) In the article, she says:
"I don't think it was just the nipple. This was a time in my life when I was extremely emotional. I was going through some very difficult things, personally…So there's this vulnerability and intimacy that come across. And I think people can be disturbed by that."
Gawker has these quotes from creative director Fabien Baron, which I think are pretty much the definition of "disingenuous":
“You must be kidding me. This country really needs a new president — this country is so messed up,” said Baron. “It’s such a joke and it’s quite upsetting, frankly, how hypocritical this country has become. It’s OK for children to see people killed by guns? Spreading a little love right now would be a good idea.“She is being a little sexy, but they are not provocative,” added Baron. “They are really well done. The spot is really beautiful — I really can’t believe this is happening.…I don’t know what else to say.”
I agree with Baron in many ways. I think American media and society are too repressed about sex and nudity and whatnot. I disagree, though, in that I think that if you act surprised to find out that you can't put nipples in an American TV, that you just make yourself look either a) completely ignorant or b) completely disingenuous.
I think Gawker correctly diagnosed the situation:
So the company will run an edited version, the racier cut will be an online smash, the new perfume gets a ton of free media, and Eva Mendes can raise her asking price for her next film ever so slightly.
I was apparently too busy taking photos of naked women to hear about this at the time, because I didn't know about any of it until today, when I was reading the Eva Mendes interview in the January issue of Allure. (Yes, I need a job.) In the article, she says:
"I don't think it was just the nipple. This was a time in my life when I was extremely emotional. I was going through some very difficult things, personally…So there's this vulnerability and intimacy that come across. And I think people can be disturbed by that."
Now I like Eva Mendes, but while Baron is disingenuous, Mendes is just plain delusional. Yes Eva, we are so in touch with your emotional state that we can't handle it. If you'd been "in a better place" when you showed your nipple, America would have allowed it on TV.