Reconstruction Vol. 10, No. 1, 2010
Return to Contents»
Twentieth Century American Advertising and the Sacred / Kathleen Vandenberg
<1> In 1997, the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Social Communications published a brief handbook entitled Ethics in Advertising. Beginning by acknowledging that "advertising, using media as its vehicle, is a pervasive, powerful force shaping attitudes and behavior in today's world" (sec IVc), the council proceeds by addressing ethical and moral problems raised by advertising, chief among them, the encouragement of the "phenomenon of consumerism." In regards to this phenomenon, Pope John Paul II writes "It is not wrong to want to live better; what is wrong is a style of life which is presumed to be better when it is directed toward "having" rather than "being," and which wants to have more, not in order to be more but in order to spend life in enjoyment as an end itself" (sec IIIa).
<2> Such materialistic urges spring, the Council says, from man's "desire to have and to enjoy rather than to be and grow" (sec IVc), and, they argue, it is unethical for advertising to encourage such materialistic urges through the creation of false desires.
<3> The problem with these arguments is that they reflect a fundamental misunderstanding both of the rhetoric of advertising and the nature of human desire. In so misunderstanding these, the Church underestimates the power of the rhetoric created by an institution that arguably rivals its own in reach and influence.
<4> In fact, this paper proposes, it is not the case that humans are inherently more interested in consuming than in being, nor that advertising creates false desires. This paper will analyze a handful of Twentieth-century American print advertisements from the perspective of René Girard's theory of mimetic or metaphysical desire in order to illuminate how advertising rhetorically performs, in James Twitchell's words "a role historically associated with religion," whether explicitly incorporating religious imagery and employing religious language or implicitly inviting transformation, transcendence and salvation.
<5> In his work Advertising the American Dream, Roland Marchand addresses the ways in which religious imagery was increasingly incorporated into secular images, particularly advertisements, across the span of the 20th century. Two of the most common uses of religious imagery involved the incorporation of beams of lights and nimbuses or halos, although the use of figures recognizable as biblical personalities also occurs. As Marchand notes, "A beam of light became a secularized image without entirely losing its spiritual overtones" (279). Thus one sees ads like those found in figures 1 and 2. In each of these, the beam of light visually suggests that God's favor shines upon the promoted product, in the case of figure 1 a camera, in figure two, a new car. Note too the spiritual directive in the camera ad to "see the light." The use of nimbuses or halos, which in religious imagery are reserved for saints and other holy personages, on the other hand, visually suggests that the product itself possesses some sort of heavenly goodness or spiritual power. Thus, in figure 3, a bottle of Absolut is bestowed with both a nimbus and a halo, and in figure 4, a diamond ring generates a powerful beam of light, bathing its surroundings in a beatific glow. Figure 5, oddly enough an ad for Benetton, a preppy clothing company, depicts a man dying of AIDs surrounded by his mourning family, in what is clearly a tableau meant to resemble the scene of Jesus's death. What these advertisements do is secularize the sacred, borrowing on religious themes and imagery to visually suggest that one's salvation, or at the very least, one's spiritual renewal, is attainable through the purchase of material goods. The Church, as might be expected, finds such practices offensive. As they note in the handbook, "commercial advertisers sometimes include religious themes or use religious images or personages to sell products. It is possible to do this in tasteful, acceptable ways, but the practice is obnoxious and offensive when it involves exploiting religion or treating it flippantly." One might speculate that the Church would categorize the adornment of a bottle of grain alcohol with a halo and nimbus as the latter sort of practice.
<6> While one might agree with the Church's assessment of such practices, this paper asserts that while the Church recognizes that advertising uses religious imagery it ultimately fails to recognize the less superficial ways in which advertising acts as a religion, promising metaphysical transcendence and transformation to its believers. It does so through the encouraging mimetic desire, a type of desire theorized by French literary scholar and key figure in the relatively new field of generative anthropology, René Girard. Girard, a former professor at Johns Hopkins and Stanford University, devoted his early work to the investigation of mimetic desire and rivalry in great works of literature and this work eventually led to the development of a scapegoat theory, which he initially used to interpret myth and ritual in archaic cultures and later applied to studies of the victim mechanism in the Christian Bible. Author of, among other works, Violence and The Sacred, The Scapegoat, and Oedipus Unbound: Selected Writings on Rivalry and Desire, René Girard is primarily concerned, perhaps obviously, with the nature of desire, the presence of violence, and the creation of scapegoats in literature, the gospels, and cultures past and present. He is perhaps most well known for his theory of triangulated desire or mimetic theory, which he employs to account for and understand violence and desire in primitive societies, myths and literature. Mimetic theory is based on a communications triangle; however, it is a triangle notably different from the familiar classical model in that persuasion is both bi-directional and intrinsically connected to desire and imitation. Messages are passed not only from "model" to "imitator," but also from "imitator" to "model," as each shifts his own relationship to what is desired. It is Girard's theory of mimetic or triangular desire that both underlies and dominates all his works,
<7> It is Girard's assertion that the recognition of this mimetic desire can be found in the greatest works of literature, works by Proust, Flaubert, Stendhal, Dostoyevsky, and Shakespeare, among others. In these works, the mechanisms of this triangular desire are revealed. They work in the following way: a model (A) (Girard does not suggest that the model himself exhibits autonomous unmediated desire; on the contrary, he proposes that most models are also imitators in an endless chain of mimetic desire) desires an object or individual (C) and, in doing so, signals to others the desirability of that object or individual. The imitator (B) copies this desire, believing his own desire to be spontaneous and automatic rather than mediated. In other words, imitator B wants C because model A wants C. Of course, because both A and B end up desiring C, they may find themselves in competition as rivals.
<8> The possibility of competition depends on the form the imitation takes. B's imitation of A can take two forms, "non-acquisitive" and "acquisitive." Non-acquisitive behavior is potentially positive; it is the type of behavior that takes place, for example, when a Christian imitates the ways of Christ. Acquisitive behavior is potentially negative, in many cases giving rise to rivalry when the desired objects are scarce, because objects that are scare are, of course, more desirable, as both (or multiple) parties are reaching for the same object in hopes of acquiring it (Things 290). In both cases, during the process of this competition the object takes on a new existence; it is transformed by the desire generated for it. As Girard explains:
This process of transfiguration does not correspond to anything real, and yet it transforms the object into something that appears superabundantly real. Thus it could be described as metaphysical in character. We might well decide to to use the word 'desire' only in circumstances where the misunderstood mechanism of mimetic rivalry has imbued what was previously just an appetite or a need with this metaphysical dimension. (Things 296)In his words, in undergoing this "metaphysical transformation" the object becomes "sacred," the sacred being that which is infinitely desired and eternally out of reach.
<9> By the same token, if, for some reason, the desired object actually does become obtainable, it is no longer considered sacred. This occurs due to the nature of the whole system of triangular desire, for, as Girard says, "the structure of rivalry is not a static configuration of elements. Instead the elements of the system react upon one another." In other words, the model, imitator, object, and desire all act upon one another, so that "the prestige of the model, the resistance he puts up, the value of the object, and the strength of the desire it arouses all reinforce each other, setting up a process of positive feedback" (Things 296). In this way, as Girard asserts, "Triangular desire is the desire which transfigures its objects (Deceit 17).
<10> This desire, as just noted, does not emanate from just one source or rhetor. In the pontifical handbook, Pope John Paul II expresses concern about what he calls "the phenomena of consumerism," and, speaking to advertisers' professed practice of "creating needs, asserts that "If a direct appeal is made to [a consumer's] instincts--while ignoring in various ways the reality of the person as intelligent and free--then consumer attitudes and life-styles can be created which are objectively improper and often damaging to his physical and spiritual health." Such an assertion of course implies that the consumer is a passive victim of the advertising system, rather than a collaborator in his own courting. However, as Twitchell notes of the relationship between advertisers and consumers: "The audience is never 'over there,' just out of sight. Rather, as in all lasting institutions, it actively anticipates and creates its own interactions" (51). This sentiment is echoed by Marshall McLuhan, who observes that: "[t]he continuous pressure is to create ads more and more in the image of audience motives and desires. The product matters less as the audience participation increases" (226). In other words, the audience works, McLuhan suggests, in the consumption of the advertising. Perceiving advertising in this way is, for most, and especially for those in rhetorical studies, counter-intuitive, primarily because it refuses to assert the primacy of a given rhetor as "message-creator" and "message-sender." It rejects, in other words, the "transmission" view of rhetoric and instead conceives of advertising as a "ritual" of sorts, one in which every consumer is simultaneously audience and participant (rather than either just sender or receiver).
<11> The Church however, does not accept this perception of the relationship between advertisers and consumers, and while they note that there is nothing intrinsically good or intrinsically evil about advertising, that it is a tool that can be used well or badly, they also assert that it sometimes "touts harmful or utterly useless goods to the public," "makes false assertions about goods for sale" "exploits less than admirable human tendencies, and creates "unremitting pressure to buy articles of luxury." In asserting the role of advertisers as fabricators and manipulators, the Church joins a long line of critics. In fact, nothing, Daniel Boorstin argues, has been "more widely misunderstood" than advertising. As the images of advertising proliferated and rumors of manipulation, subliminal and otherwise, swirled in their midst, consumers became, in effect, conspiracy theorists. As Boorstin describes it, Americans reached a point where they essentially looked for a scapegoat, and
Daring not to admit we may be our own deceivers, we anxiously seek someone to accuse of deceiving us. "Madison Avenue," "Public Relations," "Organization Men," and similar epithets have given us our whipping boys. We refuse to believe that advertising men are at most our collaborators, helping us make illusions for ourselves [emphasis mine]. (205)This hypothetical deception necessarily depends on a conception of oneself as a passive audience, acted on by aggressive, self-serving, manipulative rhetoricians who fool one with their clever images, and, in so doing, coax money from one, only to deliver to him or her meaningless objects that bring no permanent pleasure. However, as Twitchell argues,
We were not suddenly transformed from customers to consumers by wily manufacturers eager to unload a surplus of crappy products. We have created a surfeit of things because we enjoy the process of getting and spending. The consumption ethic may have started in the early 1900s, but the desire is ancient. Kings and princes once thought they could solve problems by amassing things; we now join them. (11)
<12> In the Rhetoric of Motives, Kenneth Burke describes the desire driving consumption as a "frenzied human cult of advantage," which he defines as "the quest of many things that cannot bring real advantage yet are obtainable" (274). He acknowledges the need for a "meta-rhetorical" explanation that would clarify why such a thing exists. He believes that, while "institutional factors would account for its intensity" only a meta-rhetorical explanation could account for the origins and perpetuation of this seemingly mad desire (274). As Burke notes,
We would only say that . . . implicit in the perpetuating of persuasion (in persuasion made universal, pure, hence paradigmatic or formal) there is the need of "interference." For a persuasion that succeeds, dies. To go on eternally (as a form does) it could not be directed merely towards attainable advantages. And insofar as the advantages are obtainable, that particular object of persuasion could be maintained as such only by interference [emphasis original]. (275)Girard's theory of triangulated desire provides the meta-rhetorical explanation both for the origins of this desire and its intensity because it explains the nature of the "interference" with which Burke is concerned. According to Girard's theory, individuals will never be satisfied with possession of the objects they believe they desire, because possession will ultimately fail to transform them into the Other. This seeking to become the Other combined with the impossibility of such ontological transformation provides the interference necessary to ensures the perpetuation of their misdirected desires. Advertising maintains this interference and thus, to use Burke's words, feeds the "frenzied human cult of advantage," by supplying a constant flow of images of the Other embodied in hierarchical relationships, which invite and prevent imitation and identification and thus sustain persuasion by mediating it. They therefore supply what Burke refers to as "a cult of new needs" and thus the persuasive appeal is permanently maintained, despite any individual's acquisition of an object.
<13> What Burke describes when he discusses the nature of hierarchies and their attendant mystery, in effect, is the double bind as theorized by Girard. The simultaneous, mutually dependent yet contradictory movements inviting imitation and maintaining differences described by Burke are embodied in the dynamics of mimetic desire. The perpetuation of these movements, and thus the perpetuation of persuasion, is necessarily dependent on the transformation of the desired object. This object must continually appear to be both obtainable and unobtainable; it must, in other words, take on the appearance of the sacred. This transformation is equally dependent on the desires of consumers and the powers of advertising. Consumers sustain the persuasion because all humans, Girard asserts, are driven by a metaphysical desire to be the Other, and advertising seems to supply the objects by which this transfiguration may be effected.
<14> In responding to advertisements, humans are intensely (and perhaps ironically) spiritual. In a culture that has become, in many ways, increasingly secular, they have, turned towards the act of purchasing in order to find redemption or salvation. Twitchell is one of the few media scholars to have noted this aspect of advertising, (without, however, any reference to rhetorical principles) as when he points out that
Mid-twentieth-century American culture is often criticized for being too materialistic. But we are not too materialistic. We are not materialistic enough. If we craved objects and knew what they meant, there would be no need to add meaning through advertising . . . What is clear is that most things in and of themselves do not mean enough. In fact, what we crave may not be objects at all but their meaning. For whatever else advertising does, one thing is certain: by adding value to material, by adding meaning to objects, by branding things, advertising performs a role historically associated with religion. The Great Chain of Being, which for centuries located value above the horizon in the World Beyond, has been reforged to settle value on the objects of the here and now. (AdCult 12)Advertising performs its most important religious role, as Twitchell says, by "adding value to material, by adding meaning to objects," and it does this, this paper argues, through the construction of a mimetic triangle. Advertising presents models for consumers' desires; each object towards which these models direct their attention and interest is transformed by their gaze. The more objects people obtain, the more it became necessary to sacralize the objects; the sacred, as Andrew McKenna explains, "always being what must both attract and repel desires" (para 6).
<15> Advertisers sacralize objects by constructing a mimetic appeal. They do so by inserting a mediator/model between the consumers and the object for sale, creating a triangular relationship between the model, product, and consumer. In so doing, advertisers focus the audience's attention less on the physical attributes of the product for sale and more on the relationships between both the mediator/model and the product and the mediator/model and the consumers. They construct, in other words, the mimetic triangle theorized by Girard in order to motivate consumption; this triangle depends on rhetoric communicated through the mediation of the Other. We can see this mimetic appeal at work in figure 4, the De Beers diamond ad. Here, a model is posed in a confident and assertive fashion, her direct gaze aimed towards the viewers who are, due to the low camera angle, forced to look up to her, both literally and figuratively, in order to meet her gaze. The medium shot used to capture the attractive blonde reveals a posh setting, a high fashion dress, and a slim physique--all of which act as visual cues to this woman's superiority in matters both financial and physical. This superiority is further asserted by the use of axial balance, an even distribution of elements across the four quadrants of the image, which suggest formality, elegance and sophistication. On her right hand, the actual product, a diamond ring, is obscured by a powerful glow of light, a glow intensified by the chiaroscuro lighting, which creates shadows providing contrast for this apparently magical item. She, it is clear, is in possession of a sacred power that her audience is not. She has become something powerful--the ring so merged with her finger that it is impossible to see where her body ends and the ring begins. The audience is invited to join her, to in fact become her by the text underneath which reads: "Your left hand says "We." Your right hand says "Me." Your left hand rocks the cradle. Your right hand rules the world. Women of the World, Raise Your Right Hand." The conflation of "You," "We," and "Me" blurs any distinction between the consumer and the model, suggesting that, in fact, the consumer has already transcended her lonely, alienated state, is already wearing the ring and has become a "Women of the World." She has, in other words, successfully become the Other through the sacred power of the diamond ring, a ring so powerful it is invisible in its visibility. Little mention is made of the diamond itself--its cut, clarity, color, or carat weight--because the product itself is not important; its transformative powers are.
<16> What the theories of both Burke and Girard suggest is that human desire is not materialistic, that though people appear to continually desire new things, this appearance is deceptive. Desire for objects does not, therefore, precede desire to be otherwise (a desire that can never be sated and is thus responsible for the perpetuation of rhetoric); desire for objects is merely the way in which individuals can simultaneously sustain and conceal their other-directed desire, their desire to transcend metaphysical hierarchies. In advertising products through the construction of mimetic triangles, then, advertisers invite consumers to believe they can be something Other, to believe they can transcend, ironically, the physical and the mundane, and in this way, they play to use Twitchell's words "a role historically associated with religion."
Works Cited
Boorstin, Daniel J. The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America. New York: Atheneum, 1987.
Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1950.
Girard, René. Deceit, Desire, and the Novel: Self and Other in Literary Structure. Trans. Yvonne Freccero. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UP, 1965.
---. Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World: Research Undertaken in Collaboration with Jean -Michel Oughourlian and Guy Lefort. Trans. Stephen Bann (Books II & III) and Michael Metteer (Book I). London: Athlone, 1987.
Marchand, Roland. Advertising the American Dream: Making Way For Modernity, 1920- 1940. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985.
McKenna, Andrew J. "Cool GA." Chronicles of Love and Resentment. March 22, 1997. 20 March 2009.
McLuhan, Marshall, and Lewis H. Lapham. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994.
Pontifical Council for Social Communications. "Ethics in Advertising." Eternal World Television Network. 20 March 2009.
Twitchell, James B. Adcult USA: The Triumph of Advertising in American Culture. New York: Columbia UP, 1996.
Images
Figure 1: Absolut Perfection
Figure 2: DUCO
Figure 3: Diamond Ring
Figure 4: Benetton ad
Figure 5: See the light photography
Return to Top»