The author says:
Book about how to remove cellulite
Nathan says:
I’m always hesitant about giving advice across cultural lines. (I’m especially hesitant when it’s Polish culture — if you’ve seen how odd their posters for American movies seem to American eyes, you know that there are some very different standards at work.)
However, judging by the American standards which I know best:
- Google Translate tells me that the title is “Effective Methods of Getting Rid of Cellulite” in English. Given the photograph being used, I would think that someone along the lines of “Secrets of Getting Rid…” would work better.
- This subgenre of self-help books relies heavily on specific promises — a subtitle that says “21 Days to Firmer Flesh and Younger Skin” or somesuch would be appropriate.
- Why is there no byline?
Other comments?
Well, I guess it works for what it is supposed to be! Especially if the model is an example of the method’s effectiveness.
And, yes, an author credit would be a good thing.
(PS I love Polish film posters!)
I’m sorry. What were you saying?
Every part of this photo is designed to look sexy to men: the lingerie, the bulging cleavage, the pouty lips and “naughty” pose.
You need a photo that demonstrates a woman feeling good about herself: smiling, not focused on the viewer, outdoors (to demonstrate that she feels good about being seen in public), wearing something that bares the legs but is an outfit a woman would voluntarily choose to wear. Probably a light desaturated/pastel palette.
There should be a billion stock photos that fit the requirements; here is an example.
Exactly what I wanted to say. Everything in this appeals to men, not women. If I saw this cover, I’d dismiss it as erotica without even reading the title, and move on. This doesn’t say, get rid of cellulite and have legs as nice as mine, this says I want to mount you.
Ladies, gotta confess, I disagree. I’m a woman, an original-generation feminist, and I think that this is just as effective for women as for men. For example, what woman saw the infamous VS ad, with Giselle, in that black lace bit, and didn’t want to look just like that?
I do agree that it’s a bit more sexual (boobs!) than it needs to be. It does make me wonder if a man wrote it/designed the cover for it.
But, overall, showing a sexy babe is also wish-fulfillment for the women who want to look like that. I might use a different picture, to FOCUS on great legs, rather than great boobs.
Yeah, it would appeal to me, but I’d still assume it was (steamy?) romance or erotica, and I was thinking so before anyone said anything. Could be because I don’t buy this sort of book, though. Maybe a before and after with the after being less “come hither” and more “looking sexy, but not looking for sex” would be more appropriate?
“Looking sexy, but not looking for sex”, exactly. That sums it up best.
Something like this, for example, is still very sexy, but the body language says more of “Look how sexy my legs are” rather than “I just wanna sleep with you”.
Uh, also with due respect, that gal’s body language looks more like it’s saying “Saddle up and get to it, boys!” I definitely wouldn’t use that one on this cover.
On that subject, note the responses to this little video study of objectification in advertising. Buzzfeed obviously was pushing an agenda here, but a lot of the viewers (including yours truly) didn’t agree with it. A lot of the responses were along the lines of “Oh, I don’t think I’d mind seeing more like this,” and “That ‘nerdy’ gal looked way better than the ‘nerdy’ guy, and shouldn’t that guy on the beach be wearing a speedo instead of swim trunks?” Also, a lot of the people saying these things were straight guys themselves.
Bottom line: objectification sells, and sometimes it even sells pretty well to the ones being objectified in the advertisements.
Since you ask, *I* would not want to look like Giselle in that or any other black lace bit.
But let me put it another way that you might find more compelling: Genre. As evinced by all the male commenters, that photo says “softcore porn for men”. If you look at other women’s beauty books, you don’t see any porn models.
Um, with due respect, RuPaul’s guide at that link looks awfully smutty in a… you know… fabulous sort of way.
Celebrity fashion guides written by celebrities do indeed often feature photos of celebrities on the cover, yes.
If that’s a photo of the author, I will freely retract my previous comments.
Yeah, no. I don’t wanna look like that either. I have nothing against sexy people on the cover, on the contrary. Sexy sells. But as I’ve already said in a comment below (that’s not showing up for some reason, I’m hoping Nathan will get it out of spam folder eventually), it’s not the skin shown, it’s the message. It’s one thing to have a sexy woman with long legs who looks pleased with her figure, quite another to have a woman who’s blatantly trying to seduce me. Since I’m straight, and I assume most of the intended audience will be, I’m not particularly attracted to a women trying to seduce me. Sexy body, by all means, seductive, no thanks.
Also, I think it’s rather telling that men here don’t see any problem with it, while most of the women do.
Sorry — the more links a comment has, the more suspicious the spam filter gets.
Well, now that you mention it, it does specifically appeal to me as a male. While attractive people in advertising are typically used to appeal to the opposite sex, however, diet and exercise books typically use them to appeal to the same sex as well by subtly saying “You will look like this if you use our product.” Case in point: this book on fitness for men prominently features a beefcake guy on the cover; it’s probably promising its readers more than it can actually deliver, but it’s definitely promising men that they’ll look like beefcake if they follow the book’s instructions.
This book’s cover is likewise promising gals they’ll look like this pinup gal if they follow the book’s instructions. I’ll concede it’s probably also promising more than the book can really hope to deliver, since eliminating cellulite is not automatically going to give women this gal’s slender figure, buxom bosom, and pouty Angelina-Jolie-style lips. As with the book about men’s fitness I linked, however, I think this cover’s designer has at least some leeway by American standards for engaging in such artistic license.
That said, I’ll also concede this book’s subject is a little more specific than that one’s, and so the imagery ought to be a bit more focused on its specific subject too. The designer doesn’t need a new picture for that, however, because the solution is simple: just zoom in on this gal’s long, slender, and obviously very cellulite-free legs. Promising the female readers they’ll have legs like that if they follow this instructions may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it should be well within the reasonable limits of truth in advertising.
Citing men’s fitness publications may be a poor example, since they have their roots in gay porn.
@katz: nyaaaaaaaaaaaaah, that’s a teeny bit of a stretch. It’s a bit like saying that National Geographic had its roots in adolescent and tween porn, since young men used to sneak it out of the house to look at aboriginal women naked or at least bare-breasted. And yes, while I’m aware that there was a boom in men’s physique magazines, due to gay subscribers/buyers, that was a happy happenstance for the original publishers of men’s physique–which became fitness-magazines. We could as easily argue that women’s beauty rags have their roots in gay women. {shrug}.
I still say that while I personally agree that I don’t think it’s an awesome image for a how-to cellulite reduction book, it doesn’t faze me. We’re all sold stuff through sex. Every day, some days it feels like every minute of the day. We don’t see beauty in a vacuum. We don’t see hardbodies on the beach, without there being some sexual aspect to it. Same with weight-loss commercials, adverts, etc. The implication is “this chick/dude is hot, as evinced by how many men/women are flocking to her/him, and if YOU buy this product, so too shall you be!” We all know this.
However, as the late Justice Potter Stewart said, effectively, it’s hard to define porn. You “know it when ou see it.” (Less well-known is the fact that in the Jacobellis case, he did not see porn, in the movie under discussion.) You see that in this image; I don’t. Sure, it’s a bit come-hither…but I just don’t see it as you do.
I’m sure that by now, the submitter got a lot more than he expected! If it were me, going back to the actual topic of cover design, I think that the first image that Ctie, I think, linked–the backward, over the shoulder shot–would sell the idea of “no more cellulite” better than this particular image, regardless of its offensiveness, or lack thereof.
Did you read the article? Physique magazines were gay porn. That was their first, last, and only purpose. They weren’t labeled as such because of obscenity laws. Here’s another article if you don’t believe me, but I mean, that’s just what they were.
Yes, I read the article, and yes, I’m familiar with the history. There were physique mags before they became big, due to gay men. THAT was my point. Do I dispute that the “genre,” for lack of a better word, grew exponentially, when gay men discovered them? No.
But IMHO, arguing that the genesis of all men’s physique mags is gay titillation (no one can say that the mags in the 40-50’s were “porn” by any stretch) is, to me, both a stretch and revisionism.
HOWEVER, back to the topic at hand: I’m sure the Polish anti-cellulite book/cover/author has a ton of new ideas now.
The cover example you linked is vastly different than, for example, this photo. The attitude of the cover model says, hey, let’s go grab a beer and maybe talk about fitness, while the stock example is saying, I wanna do things to you that would make a porn star blush.
It’s not the meat on display that’s the problem, we all like to see beautiful people of both sex. It’s the suggestiveness. This and this photo have some nice, sexy legs on them that say, hey, look at my legs, aren’t they sexy? Which is a lot better message for a book on cellulite than, come here, I wanna tear your clothes off.
Well, speaking as a man here, the guy in the stock photo definitely has an “I’m checking you out too” look on his face, but it looks to me like anything else you’re attributing to his body language is entirely from your own imagination. We’re kind of digressing from the subject at hand anyway: I cited that male fitness book in order to point out that just as we straight men can appreciate other men’s sexual aesthetics, so too can ordinary women appreciate another woman’s sexually desirable traits without actually desiring her that way themselves. In fact, that particular book has a distaff counterpart that advertises itself using a female model in much the same way; the only reason I wouldn’t use a model exactly like that one on this cover is because that book is about the whole body’s health and fitness in general, while this one is specifically about cellulite, which primarily affects women’s butt cheeks and the backs of their thighs.
The first photo of a gal’s legs you linked might serve this cover’s purposes, though you’d have to zoom in a bit to emphasize that the upper half of those legs is what’s relevant. As for that second picture, I would never, never, never put that on this cover: the only thing keeping those legs’ purely invitational erotica pose from being outright X-rated is the hard R-rated skimpy underwear on them. For this book’s cover, any picture of a gal flat on her back with a knee raised to signal receptivity is completely out of the question.
While the model on this cover does look a little “come-hither” in her pose, the way she’s holding her finger says more “Let’s keep this just between you and me, OK?” than “Shut up and get busy!” the way the stock photo of the gal with the leg irons in your post above and the stock photo of the leggy gal flat on her back in your post here do. Whether the book can deliver on its implied “secret” to being cellulite-free, the ideal message for the cover model’s body language to be sending is “I’m proud of having these great gams, and yours can look just as good if you buy this book.”
I don’t know much about Polish aesthetics either, but yes, I would probably buy this book if I were in the market for diet and exercise books. Unless there’s some kind of taboo against putting your name on a book in Poland, then yes, this should also have a byline on it. Other than that, I can’t think of any other improvements to recommend; from what I’ve seen of Polish advertising, pretty ladies sell products every bit as effectively there as they do here.
At first glance, I thought this was along the lines of erotica.