• Thu, Aug 4 2011

Why Are Many Of The Models In Top Fashion Ads These Days Children?

Thylane Lena-Rose Blondeau‘s photographs have sparked quite the debate about what’s appropriate for a young girl when appearing in advertisements. Even though the 10-year-old is by far the youngest in a slew of popular ads, she is certainly not alone. A few young girls such as 13-year-old Elle Fanning and 14-year-old Hailee Steinfield have been cast as the muses for Marc Jacobs and Miu Miu respectively. But why are children suddenly been chosen as beauty ideals?

Marc Jacobs’ Elle Fanning campaign depicts her in various states of surprise and coyness. Taking on her viewer with big, doll-like eyes, Elle is also presented as clutching her chest with a very demure, yet forlorn expression. In another shot, she poses most stoically with heart-shaped glass and a fur coat. Elle is clearly a very photogenic and striking girl, but the context in which her youth is being captured should raise some eyebrows with parents. By aligning her big eyes and child-like vulnerability with the statement of the brand, Marc Jacobs & Co are essentially idealizing, and therefore fetishizing the the beauty of children.

The same argument can be made for Miss Hailee Steinfield’s ads, which illustrate her hugging a purse to her face and smiling among a bed of glittery shoes. Although a teenager, the Miu Miu ads are focusing and highlighting her more tender exuberance and child-like engagement with the brand. The fashion industry is notoriously and shamelessly obsessed with youth, but these ads present a different trend as Elle and Hailee’s disposition and appearance as children, not as women, are being deemed fashionable — even enviable.

I wouldn’t consider either of the aforementioned ads to be sexually explicit, but I strongly question the ethics behind making children the face of ad campaigns geared toward adults. Why are we be lured into handbag and accessory purchases by the beauty of children?

(photo: justjaredjr.buzznet.com, becomegorgeous.com)

 

 

 

Share This Post:
Related Topics: Stuff • • • •
  • Patty

    Everything about it is wrong. Including the fact that they wear fur.

  • John Smith

    How about trying this: Calming the fuck down.

  • Somnilee

    To me, these adverts (especially that bottom one with the handbag) just scream: “Look at me, I’m a pretty pretty girl with a pretty pretty bag, don’t you just want to buy it for me? And then maybe some diamonds, and a fur coat? And I’ll sit here looking all coy and cutesy and innocent”.
    It’s a very infantalised portrayal of “women”, that if this is our “role model” we have nothing left in life but to flutter our eyelashes, put out and hope someone buys us something shiny.

    (No disrespect to either of the young actresses though, I’m referring to what I see in these pictures not what their actual skills are)

  • Jan Smith

    It’s creepy.

  • Ali

    What’s interesting is how people are acting like this is a new phenomenon. Brooke Shields started modeling at 11 months; at 14 she was on the cover of Vogue. And let’s not forget about the Calvin Klein ads. She had her fair share of controversy (hellooo, Pretty Baby?)
    Milla Jovovich? She was 11 years old when spotted by Richard Avedon. By 12 she was appearing in magazines like Cosmopolitan and Vogue.
    And many more, of course. Willa Holland? Signed with Ford when she was seven. Anderson Cooper modeled from ages 10 to 13 for Ford Models as well. Lindsay Lohan was a child model for Ford too, starting at age 3. She also did a lot of commercials. Katharine Heigl worked with Wilhelmina models when she was nine or so.

    What shocks me most is that people act as if this is a relatively new phenomenon. Controversy has ALWAYS surrounded child modeling and oftentimes the images taken of them (with the exception of most commercials or mainstream catalog modeling). Personally I find many of the images lovely; some are a bit disturbing, yes. But people also need to learn to calm down and realize that just because something isn’t totally conventional doesn’t mean it should be shunned. This girls’ images for Vogue were very beautiful.

    Also, you cannot blame “perversion” SOLEY ON the people taking the pictures. To do so is essentially making the pervert, who is sick enough to look at these images in such a way, not at fault. Of course the intention of the photographer, the people who work in wardrobe and makeup and such, and maybe even the parents, need to be taken in to account. But just because they are taking these pictures does not mean they want to start churning out pedophiles.

  • Yola Barry

    Whats poignant to me is that we are failing to realize what happens when we use children to market luxury goods: We perpetuate in children the need to aspire to these items in order to feel good about themselves. When the direction of the economy and the country are as dire as they have been in decades, we should not be pushing the need for excess on a future generation. This is a carefully crafted marketing ploy to suck in our youth to buy into the concept that luxury is something we should all aspire to instead of teaching them PRACTICALITY is far more valuable.

  • Kayla

    You do realize that you’re fucking insane?

  • Pingback: Former Teen Model Jaime King Felt She Needed To Look 14-Years-Old Forever | Mommyish

  • http://www.rajrang.com/apparels/ladies-apparels/sundresses-for-women.html White Chiffon Dress

    A big thanks for the efforts you have put into writing this article. Greetings from Montreal!