A Nurse with a Gun

Saturday, December 06, 2008

Random Paranoia

Click to enlarge
I was perusing a couple of articles in the WSJ when I noticed this incongruous J.Crew advertisement. Does the models head look out of proportion to anyone else? Did they hire Marina Oswald as their photographer? Surely not. More likely, the head was photoshopped onto the body. The size of the hands are much too small for the face, and in fact, the body seems to be of an androgynous sort.

Why is it that J.Crew is trying to convince me that a man who appears to enjoy watching the Army Navy game (and rooting for Navy), shooting a fine 1911 (most likely a Colt), and perhaps dropping a bit of rum in his eggnog would be wearing this kind of outfit? I'm not certain at all if this is the right head on this body. Has anyone seen this same body in a J.Crew advertisement with a different head attached? And what kind of subliminal message is being sent by having WR YOU LI in italics? Inquiring minds want to know.......



Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's not the model's real head? Next you'll be saying that Oswald was a participating patsy! Gosh!

7:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a graphic artist, here's my stab: it could be photoshopped, there's an unbelievable amount of that in high-end catalogs. Possibly the guy had a bit of a pin head that they wanted to fix and over-corrected. Or, they boosted the head size to make something look a little "off" as an attention grabber. Or, it could just be the guy's real head and tiny body... many professional models are tiny because that body type looks better proportioned. Think Robert Redford vs. John Wayne... who would better show off a fine suit?

Nothing subliminal in the ital headline letters... just a stylization/trying to be different.

10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a real dude. I saw more pics of him on the JCrew website.

11:07 PM  
Blogger AlanDP said...

J Crew is infamous for having really stupid pictures of their models, and/or stupid-looking models. Ten years ago or so, I remember regularly reading a website that was dedicated to this phenomenon. The site's not around anymore.

5:17 AM  
Blogger lee n. field said...

Androgynous chic.

7:43 AM  
Anonymous Perpster said...

Yes, random AND paranoid. Have you been getting enough sleep Xavier? ;-)

7:29 AM  
Blogger Xavier said...

Have you been getting enough sleep Xavier? ;-)

Actually, no. I plan to rectify that tonight..........

5:09 PM  
Blogger Matt G said...

Uh, Xav? The simpler answer is this: they use slightly monstrous-scale weirdos dressed like sissies in most catalogs these days.

I recall when J. Crew actually had some decent looking items that I'd like to wear. But this current trend is to dress anemic looking "men" in very, very close-fitting suits and sweaters and peg-legged pants, to make them look like grown versions of school boys.

It makes my spine craw just a little bit. I never root for one team over the other during the Army/Navy team (congratulations, Navy!), but as for the rest, I think that yours and my idea of manly tastes would probably not differ much.

5:29 PM  
Blogger Will said...

I'm not going to comment on the head-to-body proportion but rather his outfit.

Horrid. The modern take on the classic '60s look is bastardized. The ironic quality of fashion nowadays has gone too far. Everyone wants to look casual by wearing more formal wear with jeans and the like. Why not let real men dress like men and real women dress like women?

11:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link