There are two articles in the Guardian this week that tell a similar story without even realising it.
The first article is about older women and how they have stepped to the forefront of fashion magazines. Apparently, the older look sells after all. People will flock to buy magazines and products that feature or are endorsed by the likes of Madonna, Elle McPherson, Christy Turlington, Halle Berry and Kate Moss to name but a few.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jul/13/rise-of-older-models
In direct contrast, or so it seems, there is another article, written the day after, about the appallingly crass reality television programme where judges are creating “Britain’s Next Top Model”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/14/michael-hann-britains-next-top-model
Here, they have a range of younger women who are desperately seeking stardom through the flaunting of their very beautiful little bodies and learning all the sordid tricks of the trade.
The article concentrates on the group of girls who were told to pose as a threesome with some strange bloke to sell panties. As it turns out, although they were scantily clad in their negligee, it was the male product that they were trying to sell and not the garments that the girls were wearing.
See the results for yourselves and see what you think.
http://www.fred-and-ginger.co.uk/news-events/britains-next-top-model/
So what is the similarity between these two articles apart from the bleeding obvious that they are both to do with the fashion industry?
Essentially, although they probably don’t actually realise it, they are both appreciating the fact that sex is something for the older women. That is not to say that younger women cannot participate. I mean everyone has to start and learn somewhere but subconsciously, maybe they are both saying that sexuality is a more comfortable concept for the older woman; that older women are more in tune and at ease with their sexuality and therefore it is more natural and more vivid to use their sexuality in adverts than the falsehood of an imposed sexuality that we see when younger models are used.
Let us look at the two articles separately.
The first article explains how there seems to be a growing interest in the use of older models. The writer explains that as a thirty something woman, she felt ignored and invisible as she walked down the street. Prior to becoming a trigenarian, she felt noticed, whereas now she had entered into a new decade she had lost her oomph. Yet, all of a sudden, she was discovering the fact that there could be a second coming; older women are beginning to be seen as attractive once more.
The article moved on to explain how many older women were selling products that younger models could not do in such an authentic manner.
Older sisters are doing it with encouragement from a range of brothers.
As some commentaries on the article suggest, the cynical response to this is that it is purely down to economics. For example, one commentator stated that this is merely a financial issue and that they wouldn’t be using these older women unless it sold their product. Such a comment totally misses the point as to why it is that older women are “selling the product”. They are selling the product and being used by these magazines because their maturity sells things. And why? Because they are confident and comfortable with themselves and with their sexuality, and this confidence and assuredness comes across in their stance, their posture, their very essence, thus giving you the confidence and assuredness in whatever they are selling.
It’s quite simple really.
There are some fantastic quotes in the article from people who seem to know what they are talking about. Two Dutch photographers, Inez Van Lamsweerde and Vinoodh Matadin, say that they prefer to use older women because they have the experience that can be reflected in the shot.
No manner of acting can give reality to something that real experience can.
This reminds me of that glorious conversation between Dustin Hoffman and Laurence Olivier during the filming of “The Marathon Man”. Hoffman had been up all night, getting into his character using Strasberg’s method acting. His character was devastated by the loss of his brother and had allegedly been searching days on end to find the truth of his siblings disappearance. Old Oliver saw him and said “Good God man, whatever is the matter with you?” to which Hoffman replied that he was fine but that he had been up all night preparing for his role. The master actor rebuffed this nonsense with a quick response “Wouldn’t it be easier to just act, darling?”
But acting is not always possible. Real experience is often required. For example, just as masturbating with a decent dildo is fine, it pales into insignificance compared with the reality of two people making love with copious orgasms all round.
Real experience is far better, and I am now beginning to wonder if Meg Ryan had ever had a real orgasm before her “When Harry Met Sally” spectacle.
The Dutchmen state
"models like Kate [Moss] and Daria [Werbowy] are mature, they've grown up, they're women who have had a life and experience. For about five or six years now we haven't shot anyone under 18 for that reason, but also for the fact that, we feel the modelling business should not promote girls working under this age. They're not out of school – their bodies haven't developed yet and they don't have a sense of self. Sometimes they haven't had sex yet. It's hard to project all these things on someone who hasn't had that experience."
I’d go further than that. It is not hard to project these things on someone who hasn’t experienced it. It is almost impossible to do so.
It’s like seeing actresses “giving birth” when they have clearly never done so in real life. They scream and push and get chronologies all mixed up. They sweat buckets of moisture and finally relax as the baby’s head appears miraculously after half a minute. What they never portray is the relentless boredom, the insufferable pain, the tears of frustration and fear and the total horror of the event in its non-Hollywood reality.
The article continues to quote other fashionistas. Francisco Costa from Calvin Klein states
"The woman who puts my clothes on needs a certain level of sophistication. We wanted to acknowledge the women who have always worn our clothes: women who have their own identities, have full lives, have kids."
He is stating the bleeding obvious that the industry has clearly ignored for too long.
So within this article we have a celebration of maturity. We have an acceptance that older women have an unwavering confidence that is clearly captured on film and that this certainty sells products. The older woman has a sexual confidence about her. Take a look at the Dolce and Gabbana photograph of Madonna and a younger man and you have no doubt, despite the ubiquitous cross around her neck, that this woman can fuck. How appropriate that they also have a young man who is probably at the prime of his sexuality too.
Turning to the other article, the theme is also about age but points fingers to people who are making younger people do something that they are not ready for.
The article talks about a bizarre programme called “Britain’s Next Top Model”. I haven’t seen the programme and have no intention to do so. It sounds like a horrendous idea and a horrendous show with a mixture of would-be’s and has-beens all trying to give the fashion industry the gravitas that it evidently does not deserve. They are a sleazy bunch all-told.
In some ways, I think they are far sleazier than their pornographic counterparts. At least porn magnates admit to what they are trying to do. These people are potentially even more manipulative than the Heffner’s and co of this world. Why? Because they try and get young women to be sexual via the back door, so to speak. They are not up front about it. That is not pleasant.
The article continues to explain how the candidates for this unbelievably stupid title were asked to do a photo shoot, as stated earlier, for a famous lingerie company. The girls did not feel comfortable. They found the pseudo lesbian poses and the kisses that they had to do unbearable. It was obvious, according to the writer, that they did not want to be doing these things.
He continued.
What we saw on Top Model – the pressuring of young women into providing masturbatory fantasies for men – was more than modelling. Of course, modelling has always been about selling sexiness, especially lingerie shoots. But this wasn't selling sexiness, it was selling sex. Forget the sizzle, these girls were the steak, nothing but pieces of meat. And it was final proof that the celebrity trend of recent years – the faux lesbian kiss – has passed from being a desperate bit of attention seeking into a forced rite of passage for young women who might wish to make their living from their looks.
Now there is a certain amount of political correctness going on from this middle-class, middle-aged Guardian writer. He is hardly going to come out as being a fan of porn is he? And the whole article suggests a certain primness about the whole notion of sexuality. His attitude towards porn is evidently from a 1980s feminist standpoint.
But I suggest that he is onto something here without even realising it. He is so determined to be all high and mighty about same sex kissing that he misses an essential point about the whole notion of photographers working with these younger models.
He continues in the piece to criticise all the celebrities who have “kissed a girl” for the sake of sensationalism and creating a media storm. To an extent, I would agree. Feeling another woman’s tits or giving her a good tonguing purely for the sake of selling your latest film or record is a bit sick. However, if these woman are doing it because they are celebrating the vastness and multiplicity of their sexuality, then good on them! They do not warrant such criticism.
His criticism is also loaded with a hint of contempt for bisexuality too. He does not even consider the possibility that Scarlett Johansson or Penelope Cruz might have enjoyed their snog with one another. He does not contemplate the fact that Sandra Bullock was turned on by kissing another woman. He cannot accept, it seems, that these women found the whole experience very horny.
I have to say, I wish I had been in the room when Scarlett and Penelope were getting it on. There might have been quite a few trips to the loo for me!
But here is the real crux of the issue. If Fred and Ginger, the lingerie company, had been a little more thoughtful, they would have realised that they were using the wrong models. If they really wanted to sell their panties, they should probably have been looking at the older women who have that great comfort with their sexuality. They would not have to act or embellish the poses. They’ve been there. They can demonstrate what they have experienced. These poor, innocent and downright naive young women cannot do this.
So in essence, without even mentioning it, both articles are telling me that the time is ripe for older women to not only get out there and flaunt their ever maturing delightful bodies, but also get out there and celebrate the sexuality of their being. It is a sellable product in itself if only people had the foresight to realise.
No comments:
Post a Comment