As I was going about some chores, I flipped on the Super Bowl mostly out of obligation. As the game intensified and began to appeal to my underdog boosterism, I took a time out to pay attention.
Like a great deal of people who claim to "watch it for the commercials," I took great interest in the ads, mostly from an academic perspective. These promotions are always trying to push the envelope, using the big stage of the Super Bowl to attempt to make a splash. Sometimes the result is a big, impressive production. Sometimes, the concept is so bizarre that the agency hopes we'll remember it.
Sometimes, like the ads I've lamented about in the past regarding the commodification of "macho, " they are just plain insulting. The Helzburg Ad I saw upped the ante.
It starts with a dimly lit scene and romantic music. A guy sits at a desk, meticulously preparing a greeting card for his love. Eventually, he presents her the card and tells her that he couldn't find a card to communicate how he really felt, so he made one for her, by hand.
Then, like the needle being pulled from the record, the romantic music stops and gives way to music more akin to a carnival than a romantic scene. A sarcastic voice says "because you're not that guy" and then goes on to say how easy it is to show someone you care: buy a diamond.
I verbally berated the television.
Instead of communicating thoroughly and thoughtfully how you feel, one should simply spend some money on a diamond and lob that her direction instead? The ad is actively derisive to the man many women claim to want, offering a simplified consumer solution to the complicated task of expressing your emotions. Have we really sunk to the point that our outward symbols are more important than our real feelings and the words we use to express them?
Is it any wonder that relationships fail so readily when the most critical part of them, open communication and emotional healthfulness, is ridiculed during the Super Bowl? Are relationships just a symbol for different patterns of massive consumption?
Don't be a pansy, dude, just get a diamond and get back to watching the game! High five!
If this is how relationships are measured in our era, are they really worth anything more than the contribution they have to the economy?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I remember the first in this series of commercials. There is a guy painting his girlfriend's toenails and suggests that they might need another coat (as if painting them to begin with isn't bad enough). Then they say "Because you're not THAT guy."
I wouldn't read too deeply into that ad. I actually laughed when I saw the first one and I'm a woman! I am lucky, however, to have a husband who doesn't believe throwing diamonds is the way to my heart, but then again, he's not THAT guy either.
Remember this is the jewelry industry speaking in this commercial, the same people who will tell you that 3 months salary is a starting guide as to how much to spend on a ring...yeah right!
so i take it you're not going to use your refund from G.Bush this year to stimulate the jewel biz?! me neither. helzberg is a philanthropic presence in KC, though, so maybe those 3-month salary gems fuel more than the blood diamond industry.
i'd take the handmade card over a diamond any day. though, i was reared by a mother who eschewed gems as any legitimate symbol of affection, commitment or, gasp, love. she has no engagement ring and my parents have simple gold bands. i fall in their camp. and we're not all "that guy" or "that girl". my guess is that more of us fall into the camp of in-between, conflicted, inconsistent living.
glad you blogged again!
PS you should've come watched the bowl with us!! :)
I just came across your blog via Facebook's KC Bloggers group. Excellent post. And, yes, this what it all has come to. I even have girlfriends who have "enhanced" (ie spent their own money) their wedding rings because the giant diamond solitaire in their engagement ring "needed friends."
Even with all the media attention over the past few years about how tainted gems are, we're still slave to the starry bling, equating a diamond to prosperity, affection, and security.
This is a good piece, Staub. You make a few very good points! I agree with them.
Post a Comment