E-Paper
Does skin sell?
"Nowadays you need a bare bottom even if you're just trying to launch a handbag," says fashion designer Giorgio Armani. Although marketers in India have so far been wary of full-frontal nudity as seen in fragrance ads in the West, they too are getting wise to an ancient truth: What shocks, also sells.
"Nowadays you need a bare bottom even if you're just trying to launch a handbag," says fashion designer Giorgio Armani. Although marketers in India have so far been wary of full-frontal nudity as seen in fragrance ads in the West, they too are getting wise to an ancient truth: What shocks, also sells.
There seems to be just one thought behind ad after ad - no publicity is bad publicity. While some may actually love the eyecandy on offer, others would remember the campaign for being outrageous. In either case it's a win-win situation for the advertiser. It is the company, the brand and the product that ultimately grabs attention.
Prahlad Kakkar of Genesis Advertising has a message for those embarassed by increasingly graphic ads like Kamasutra condoms and the 7-up TV spot featuring a voluptuous bikini model.
According to him: "Nudity was always acceptable when you see the larger picture. For example in villages it is the way of life. It is certainly not a taboo for scores of villagers for whom it is a natural state of existence, especially in the tribal belt. It is a city-centric middle class syndrome to consider nudity a taboo subject.
"Be it films, advertisting, heritage, art or culture, nudity has been the norm per se. A nude paiting is aesthetic to some because there is a demand and choice exercised for it. For heaven's sake we are living in a free country. Why control our minds by way of what politicians may think is right or wrong.
"I still remember how much noise was made about the Madhu Sapre-Milind Soman ad for Tuff shoes. A lady from the Shiv Sena would go on and on about how the Milind and Madhu were doing damage to Indian culture, how the ad was vulgar in its appeal, etc. My argument to her then was simple - there is a difference between vulgarity and art. The Tuff shoe looked aesthetic because it had Milind and Madhu in it. Both of them have beautifully sculpted bodies and they are bound to look attractive no matter how you present them. But if I were to do the same ad with this lady from Shiv Sena then it would cease to be a work of art and turn vulgar. We don't have it in us to carry of such advertisements given our body structure and frame.
"Please remember that if nudity looks appealing, then it has a lot to do with how it is presented. Only a beautiful piece of work, subject, artist or painting on nudity would be called art and not just anything that shows the unclothed body.
