Duncan Quinn describes themselves as a ‘bespoke atelier and lifestyle destination for discerning gentlemen.’ They are a high end brand which started up in 2003 most known for making custom fit suits for males. It is interesting that they describe themselves for the ‘destination for discerning gentlemen’. My automatic opinion of this advert of theirs is that the male shown in the advert is the opposite of a gentlemen and therefore so is their brand.

Also, those that are not already aware of the brand may think that Duncan Quinn sells lingerie given the focus on the female’s underwear. My initial thoughts are is why is it so necessary for a so called ‘gentleman’s’ brand to have an unclothed female in their advertising? Surely they should be trying to reflect what a gentleman is? Instead of the complete opposite

In this advert there are many problematic ethical issues. I think that the main issue though is the dominating male. Jennifer Craik writes ‘It is in this way that fashion photogrophy exceeds the seams of the clothes it portrays by playing with current definitions of sexuality and identity. Its conventions are neither fixed nor purposeful, instead constituting a nexus between fashion and selfhood – and above all, embracing the instabilities, conflicts and contradictions in sexuality. As a representational technique, fashion photogrophy has far reaching practical consequences.’  (Craik 1993) This advert definitely ‘exceeds the seams of the clothes it portrays’, The advert is not focused towards the clothes of Duncan Quinn but almost suggesting a lifestyle that will be achieved with buying from Duncan Quinn. This is scary as the suggested lifestyle is the male superior which goes against our common view in the 21^st century.  For example in this image, the male is the focal point. He is standing upright, looking directly towards the camera whereas the female is lying down looking away from the camera. He is portrayed as being well dressed in a suit which completely contrasts to the female who is represented with no clothes on.

These contrasts in how the individuals are shown, with the male dominating the photograph almost automatically reflect society and the inequality of the sexes. The general view of society though is working to change this inequality. Therefore this image is shocking as it goes against the general view of society and therefore its viewers of the advert, it is displaying an almost old fashioned view that would make many people nowadays angry.

Another ethical issue is the media and their influence on society with the wide availability of images like these. Most people would be shocked by how this man is acting to the female with his tie tied around her neck, even more so that the female is only in her underwear.  Disturbingly, Duncan Quinn sell ties and for some reason think that this is an appropriate way to display their product, again this is the most opposite to gentlemen like! This pose could almost suggest rape, to the viewer it looks like the female is not in control of herself by the way she is shown. Duncan Quinn should be aware of their influence to whoever will see this image. Jennifer Craik mentions ‘fashion photography has far reaching practical consequences’ (Craik 1993) and I think that this is an example of a far reaching consequence as scarily this advert is available to be seen by everybody, including children. It could give an impression as to what Duncan Quinn seem to consider to be gentlemanly and supposedly ok.

Bibliogrophy:

Craik, J. (1994). The face of fashion: cultural studies in fashion. London, Routledge.

Duncan Quinn (2014)  Shop. Availible from: http://duncanquinn.com [Accessed 28 November 2017]