Shieh 1

Erotic Advertising Fashion Photography: Case Studies of the Male and Female Gaze Modes of

Viewing Between Tom Ford and Chanel Photographs

ABRSTRACT

Contemporary attitudes are mostly disparaging towards sexuality and eroticism portrayed

in advertising and editorial fashion photography. However, through an analytical, photographic

perspective, there is evidence for much artistic merit in erotic posing decisions of photographers

for female models depicted in such fashion photography. Eroticism cleverly imbedded in

advertising and editorial fashion photography serves to justify the expected voyeurism from the

imagery’s target audience of consumers. I have conducted multiple case studies by analyzing the

photographic posing decisions made by notable fashion photographers of Tom Ford and Chanel

and by referring to scholars’ analyses in sociology, fashion merchandising, and fashion

photography disciplines. I investigated the positioning of female models’ bodies and body parts

relative to their setting and presence of other models. Additionally, I correlated my analyses of

such posing to sociological perspectives on the vicarious nature erotic fashion imagery embodies

to interact with viewers. Contrary to contemporary views considering only the male gaze, I

discovered that two gender-specific modes of viewing female models in fashion photography

exist: the heteroerotic male gaze and the homoerotic female gaze. I also discovered that the

concept of competition and conformity, the sociological factor that describes the natural

tendency for people to self-identify with upper class statuses, explains why consumers are

equally as susceptible to envision themselves in such photographed scenes featuring sexuality.

An explicit distinction between sexuality and eroticism exists, wherein sexuality disregards the

mental and emotional connection between imagery and viewers, while eroticism embraces it.

Regardless of possible latent functions, the manifest function of engaging a scopophilic audience
 Shieh 2

through viewers’ imagined fantasies with erotic fashion photography indicates a successful

alloerotism interaction.

INTRODUCTION

With the onset of the mass production of affordable, fashionable clothes and the well-

understood sociological concept that people tend to self-identify with upper classes, came the

widespread accessibility for consumers to view contemporary fashion photography advertising.

Many examples of such fashion photography heavily employ female sexuality and eroticism,

especially in western fashion photography (the focus for this paper), as seen in shopping malls,

magazines, the internet, among other highly accessible mediums of advertising, which allures the

attention of the viewers through the viewers’ imaginations and fantasies. Instilling fantasies,

thereby reaching into the viewers’ minds to endorse either a lifestyle or an idea, is the primary

intention of fashion brands’ advertising. Even though some may disapprove of the sexually-

charged fashion photographs of females taken by photographers of the fashion labels Tom Ford

and Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel, the genuine artistry embedded in such photographs should be

viewers’ main focus. This artistry stems from the photographers’ attention to detail with

photographic posing techniques of the female body depicted, but most notably the overarching

power derived from embedded symbolism to make viewers identify with the images.

PHILOSOPHIES OF TOM FORD AND CHANEL

Fashion photography often portrays nudity in an effort to seduce viewers into the

merchandise or lifestyle advertised. However, the focus doesn’t always stay on the clothes

advertised, as fashion authority Tom Ford focuses on the beauty of the human form instead. The

photographic posing and lighting techniques employed for depicting such a concept showcase

the artistic merit of such fashion photography in everyday society. On the other hand, Gabrielle
 Shieh 3

Chanel’s core philosophy behind her fashion design was to emancipate women from the tight

bustiers and corsets of her time that were thought to elucidate or emphasize the beauty of

women. The Chanel label has been well-recognized and successful, even with no explicit

intention to allure customers and followers based on eroticism, the technique of eliciting emotion

from viewers of advertisements.

In “Tom Ford,” Tom Ford asserts several of his philosophies, one of which is that Ford

“people naked the best” (23). Ford continues to note “if I can cut the clothes to accentuate the

physical body underneath, I will. But it isn’t just a marketing ploy. It’s part of my taste. It’s my

vision of what is beautiful. I think a naked woman and a naked man are beautiful” (23). This is

especially evident in Terry Richardson’s photograph of two females undressing each other in

black and white Tom Ford dresses (see fig. 1). Since the advertised products are dresses and

because homoeroticism is pictured, the targeted audience for this image are women with the

homoerotic female gaze. Ford additionally contends that Gucci’s image of sex isn’t about the

sexual acts, rather it resembles the animalistic nature and behavior of humans who are drawn to

attractive things and people (21).

Alongside his perspective on how men and women should be portrayed, Ford also states

that the power of fashion is to increase the pleasure of life, as long as fashion designers do their

jobs by transforming the zeitgeist into physical, fashionable objects (21). Ford references his

project to make fashionable items such as shoes, handbags, and blouses because of the public

aura on September 11th (21). In "Sociology of Fashion: Order and Change," Patrik Aspers and

Frederic Godart support this creative process of transforming public opinions and attitudes into

fashionable items by alluding to the etymology of ‘fashion.’ Aspers and Godart claim that

fashion was defined as “conforming to prevailing tastes and to imply an idea of change” and is
 Shieh 4

also defined by its pattern to follow trends (173-174). Aspers and Godart consider the

perspective of cultural studies, which explains that the way people dress can be aligned with their

lifestyles and attitudes (177-178). Additionally, Aspers and Godart claim that fashion can be

regarded as “artistic and political expression,” although fashion’s social commentary may not be

completely valid (177-178). Aspers and Godart consider another perspective that differs from

that of Ford’s, in which some perceive fashion as a means of communicative expression. Aspers

and Godart explain this idea by stating that the garment worn is given meaning by the wearer and

that relatability is established when the meaning is understood by others, a concept which will be

further detailed in following sections.

Even though sexual and erotic content is present in Tom Ford and Gabrielle Chanel

photographs, Chanel’s foundational philosophy behind her fashion designs differ in that Chanel’s

fashionwear liberates the female body from tight corsets and bustiers. In Chanel: The

Vocabulary of Style, Jerome Gautier claims that Chanel’s philosophy was to construct dresses

that would only be defined by the bare minimums of what is necessary (18). Chanel’s

foundational philosophy did not explicitly detail the incorporation of eroticism seen in fashion

photography with Chanel commodities, implying that the role of fashion photography itself

serves as the major promoter of sexuality and eroticism. Gautier points out that Chanel did this

by abandoning the excessively elaborate details added to dresses at the time, motivated by the

desire to stay comfortable while remaining austere (18). He also states that one of Chanel’s most

successful designs sold to the public was the sailor blouse, with which Chanel ended the era of

corsets (22). However, it is fundamental to keep in mind that by ending the widespread adoption

of corsets, Chanel’s influential underlying philosophy for all women to deserve to be

 Shieh 5

comfortable continues to justify the potential erotic implications derived from erotic posing in

fashion photographs.

Juergen Teller demo nstrates this concept well in his photograph of Gisele Bündchen

wearing the infamous Chanel ‘little black dress’ for W Magazine USA’s June 2005 issue (see

fig. 2). Bündchen is not only wearing the bare minimums of what is necessary, as seen with her

panties discernibly through the diaphanous frills on the edge of her dress, but she is also living

up to Chanel’s philosophy to stay comfortable, for Bündchen expresses her playfulness while

lounging on the orange chair. Consequently, the potential erotic implications of remaining

comfortable are apparent by the wide spread of her legs. Some may even argue that the emphasis

on her gaping mouth, with boldly-colored red lips, may signify a deeper sexual connotation

linked with sexual activity. In “Who’s That Girl?: ‘Alex Eats,’ A Case Study in Abjection and

Identity in Contemporary Fashion Photography,” Paul Jobling suggests that the human mouth

can serve both civil and animalistic purposes (218). Jobling cites another photo shoot’s fashion

photograph, which conveys similar meanings from a gaping mouth, for its allusion to prostitution

(220). Although this image may not imply such a far-fetched inference, the posing of

Bündchen’s exposed tongue and open mouth provides the possibility to infer sexual

connotations. Even with analyses in favor of supporting the heteroerotic male gaze mode of

viewing for this photograph, women adopting the female gaze are targeted because of the

marketed comfort that is paired with the Chanel dress.

Furthermore, Gautier writes that Chanel’s prime revolved around the early 1900s to the

1950s, since Chanel began to oppose certain fashion trends, specifically of the Swinging Sixties

(22). This is where Karl Lagerfeld, current creative director of the Chanel fashion house, steps in

with his adoption of current trends and further manipulation of Chanel’s core philosophy. It is
 Shieh 6

evident that Lagerfeld uses eroticism for his designs for women through his career, as he

employed female strippers during his fashion show in 1993 (Morris).

Even in Lagerfeld’s own photographs, sexuality and eroticism are apparent (see fig. 3). In

figure 3, model Kate Moss is ornamented with many Chanel-branded beaded accessories, as she

stares intently into the camera, and thus at the viewers. She covers her breasts with her left arm

and her genitalia with only her black bikini, creating a simple, yet powerful and sexually-charged

image. This image appeases both the homoerotic female gaze and the heteroerotic male gaze

modes of viewing, for females might see Moss as an empowering figure while males might

objectify Moss because of her adornment of accessories. Regardless, the transition of creative

directorship and power of the Chanel brand from Gabrielle Chanel to Karl Lagerfeld marked the

onset of increasingly sexual portrayals of female models.

Lucia Ruggerone argues that “each decade seems to produce its own ideal of feminine

beauty, spread through mass communication” (356). Ruggerone continues that the 1950s began

to depict women in active poses in outdoor settings, the 1960s portrayed women as more

independent, active, and dynamic, and the 1970s, during the height of Chanel’s directorship

turnover to Lagerfeld, pictured women in more seductive poses (356).

One especially seductive pose, for instance, is carried out by Bündchen in her photograph

by Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott for Pop Magazine’s Spring 2004 issue (see fig. 4). The Barbie-

like depiction of Bündchen, as she lay completely naked on the floor face-down serve to

demonstrate the exaggerated adherence to the core belief that women should always be

comfortable, even if that means one were to disregard wearing clothing completely. The

supposed public setting and relative positioning in which Bündchen lies suggests sexual

availability, as it is societally-accepted to wear clothing in public. Bündchen’s physical

 Shieh 7

positioning relative to the setting connotes a submissive persona that may border on self-

abjection. Jobling supports this with his analysis on the model Alex in the photoshoot 'Alex

Eats,’ of which he analyzed, by stating that fashion imagery can “[blur] the distinction between

what is public and private and interior and exterior with regard to both physical and mental states

of being” (214). Jobling also contends that Alex, similar to Bündchen in this example, “dons

underwear, literally, as outerwear, or items of clothing outside their expected context,” which

adds to the degrading identity Bündchen personifies. All these items derived from analyzing

figure 4 serve to support the targeted male gaze mode of viewing, since this image offers little

evidence for targeting the homoerotic female gaze, concepts to be detailed in following sections.

Ruggerone explains this by stating that “in the history of fashion photography, male

photographers have dominated” and that “the personality of the ‘artist,’ and especially his sexual

orientation (be it hetero or homosexual), has played an important role in the creation of the

images, downplaying and sometimes disregarding the fact that the pictures are mainly consumed

by women” (357). Because of this, an audience of women viewing such imagery must assume

the male gaze, otherwise regarded as the female gaze, when viewing fashion photography.

HOW FASHION IMAGERY FUNCTIONS

Before attempting to conduct any photographic case studies, it is essential to define the

parameters of fashion and how fashion’s hierarchy structure influences the consumer mindset to

relate with ambitious ideals. One of these ambitious ideals is the upper class. With historical

roots imbedded in favoring the upper classes, fashion today is still indirectly classist because of

fashion authorities––fashion designers, celebrities, other people of influence––who determine

what clothes and accessories consumers want and buy. This concept is explained by the well-

known sociological axiom of reverence and emulation of upper classes, otherwise known as
 Shieh 8

competition and conformity. As the advertising medium which disseminates perspectives on

fashion, fashion photography plays a key role in influencing observers to revere and emulate

fashions, lifestyles, and ideals through visual imagery.

In “Sociology of Fashion: Order and Change,” Patrik Aspers and Frederic Godart

contend that even in today’s society, there is a hierarchy that determines what fashionable

clothes, accessories, and thus lifestyles are available for purchase for consumers (181). However,

Aspers and Godart assert that this is not a social class hierarchy like it was back in the 1800s

(175-176); instead, it is an economic and fashion industry hierarchy composed of textile

suppliers, fashion companies and houses which act as producers, gatekeepers, and the consumers

themselves (181). This hierarchy may not be as evident in current society, as the advertised

products have shifted from physical merchandise to desirable lifestyles which picture the

physical merchandise subliminally.

One easily discernable example of technique to ‘sell lifestyles’ is in Craig McDean’s

photograph of Scarlett Johansson wearing a Chanel outfit relaxing poolside (see fig. 5).

Compositionally, McDean selected a bright location with the scintillating blue color of the pool

and the white color of the tufted ottoman pictured, adding to the mood of Johansson’s pose.

Although, Johannson’s legs are not spread open, the curvature of her back and the resulting

enlargement of her buttocks add to the wide-open angle of her arms, suggesting sexual

availability. In Photographing Women, photographer and author Jeff Rojas claims that posing

women lying on their side has “a lot of emotion” and “creates a well-defined bust” (pars. 8). Yet,

she seems to occupy this relaxing pose in her soft-looking, body-tight Chanel bodysuit, a

nominal, yet careful detail added to enhance the luxury of her relaxation. This feeling of

relaxation Johannson portrays is aligned with Gabrielle Chanel’s core philosophy in that women
 Shieh 9

should have the ability to be comfortable. Consequently, the freedom that is coupled with

comfort may lead to greater ease to be depicted in sexually suggestive poses. Considering the

two modes of viewing analyzed in this paper, this image would incite viewers with the

heteroerotic male gaze to conjure up fantasies of accompanying the female model, the identity

Johannson is playing, while viewers with the homoerotic female gaze may desire to be in

Johannson’s position by relying on attaining the same bodysuit. Since women would assume the

homoerotic female gaze, they would serve as the targeted viewing audience for the branded

merchandise, as photographs provide more powerful messages for viewers who imagine they can

attain the model’s lifestyle as opposed to those who imagine they can only be with the model.

Another prime example of the transition from the advertising and selling of a physical

product to the advertising and selling of a lifestyle, or aspect of a lifestyle, is in Bruce Weber’s

photograph of Inès de la Fressange (see fig. 7). Used primarily as an advertising piece for the

‘Coco’ Chanel fragrance, de la Fressange is topless, with her arms wrapped around her chest,

exposing some cleavage. Despite these details, among others, in the photograph, it is impossible

for the photographer to create a pose that provides viewers of the image to smell the fragrance,

so Weber resorts to eroticism to allure these viewers. This image induces the homoerotic female

gaze, as the marketed product is a fragrance for women and because the product’s advertising

photograph intends to immerse female consumers into the de la Fressange’s seemingly

ornamented and blissful lifestyle.

Within today’s economic and fashion industry hierarchy, Tom Ford agrees that fashion

authorities indirectly determine what fashions are disseminated to consumers. In “Tom Ford,”

Ford accredits Karl Lagerfeld, fashion designer, photographer, and Creative Director of Chanel,

for his work in “democratiz[ing]” the Chanel brand, among other brand names, for a wider
 Shieh 10

audience so that more people can revel in a luxurious lifestyle (26). This dissemination stems

from the depiction of desirable lifestyles advertised via the medium of fashion photography.

Additionally, Ford contributes to the concept that fashion authorities determine what is

fashionable and attainable by revitalizing Gucci’s previously narrow-minded marketing

perspective into one which draws on eroticism, resulting in Gucci’s “sleek, sexy, [and] modern”

image it stands for today (28). Ford affirms his influence over consumers by declaring that one

who deserves to have and wear Gucci’s luxury products is one who “is the playboy…has

sex…has a life…loves luxury…loves expensive things” (30). In support of Ford and Aspers and

Godart, Jerome Gautier also writes about Karl Lagerfeld and how Lagerfeld has massively

influenced what types of women’s clothing consumers would find interest in throughout

Chanel’s history (42). Gautier additionally references Gabrielle Chanel’s personal ability to

permeate the Parisian population of her time by ending the era of corsets by designing

comfortable women’s blouses, suggesting that many women excitedly adopted “the sailor

blouse, a loose-fitting garment that did away with the need for a corset and allowed a woman to

breathe at last by freeing up her vital organs” (22). Gautier points out that with Chanel’s

booming success and fame came the mass publication of her label, fashion, and philosophy

throughout acclaimed “beautifully produced [fashion] magazines” such as Harper’s Bazaar and

the Women’s Wear Daily (25). An advertising and public relations adept, Chanel iconizes a

notable fashion authority who dictates what Parisians desired. Establishing a brand,

representative of a fashion authority, garners followers who have a penchant for the brand’s

designs. In an effort to fulfill the desires of these followers, fashion authorities, or influencers

such as Gabrielle Chanel and Tom Ford, publicize new designs, merchandise, and lifestyles via

erotic fashion photography.

 Shieh 11

It is also substantial to note that Chanel and Tom Ford are luxury fashion brands which

target consumers of the upper classes. Aspers and Godart explain this strategy marketing strategy

by stating that such influence works on consumers through the sociological “imitation process

rooted in… ‘sympathy,’ a feeling though which individuals relate to others. By imitating the

fashions of the rich…individuals participate in their glory and happiness” (176). Just as Ford

suggested, luxury brands such as Chanel and Tom Ford truly do democratize their availability by

immersing social classes like the upper middle class to associate with the upper class and buy

into the latter’s lifestyles as a result. Additionally, Aspers and Godart explore the economic

implications of fashion by considering the perspective that “fashion, and especially women’s

fashion, is merely an expression of the wealth of the head of the family of its wearer” (176). This

further explains the wide array of targeted consumers who feel the need to imitate those in the

upper class, assuming the innate necessity for such consumers to flaunt their wealth and

participation. When viewing fashion as a mode of communication, wearers of clothing use

fashion to convey various meanings. Aspers and Godart consider the implications of wearing

fashionable clothing by stating that “the signifier, which may be a word or a garment, is given

meaning by the signified” (183). In this theory, people attribute different meanings to their

garments, consequently allowing select groups to better understand each other. By employing

this method of thinking, Chanel and Tom Ford can better adapt photography advertising

techniques, and thus photography posing techniques, to their respective targeted audiences. In

“Reflections on Victorian Fashion Plates,” Sharon Marcus adds to Aspers and Godart’s

perspective by considering how fashion can influence consumers on the macro-level by

contending that “fashion confers membership in a generation and this becomes a transaction
 Shieh 12

between generations,” which also considers the consumer-to-consumer influence model in

addition to the authority-to-consumer influence model (9).

THE MALE AND FEMALE GAZE

Much of the controversy against publicly-viewed erotic fashion photography stems from

the notion that the fashion photographers, models, creative directors, and advertising campaign

managers always cater such photography to the male audience, and thus the male gaze. However,

catering to the female gaze is just as valid a marketing strategy. This strategy is to allure viewers

based on relatable imagery and to mentally subject them into the lifestyle pictured, in terms of

appeasing both genders with gender-subjective symbolism based on established gender roles. In

the domain of advertising photography, the concepts of the male and female gaze are founded on

the basis that people of the targeted gender can imagine fantasies in which they see themselves

in. Historically, the Victorian era offered much evidence for the existence of the female gaze, as

Victorian women gazing at the beauty of other Victorian women was a part of culture at that

time, whereas in contemporary society, the misconception is that erotic fashion photography

attempts to illicit only male gaze fantasies.

In “The simulated (fictitious) body: The production of women’s images in fashion

photography,” Lucia Ruggerone claims that “fashion photography is a context in which the gaze

is of the utmost importance for understanding the construction, contextualization and

presentation of the portrayed subjects,” of which the male gaze is the widely accepted

perspective (356). However, Ruggerone contends that most of the actual audience of these

fashion photographs sexualizing women is most likely women (356). Ruggerone conducted a

comparative study on women’s responses between the fashion imagery of two fashion companies

Piazza Sempione and Iceberg. Ruggerone states that “most interviewees were negative and often
 Shieh 13

scandalized” in response to the female-sexuality-driven images of Iceberg (366). Ruggerone

references Iceberg photographer David La Chapelle’s image reenacting a scene from Scarface

This scene posits a “culture…where women and their bodies are highly objectified” and “a world

where men are gangsters and women appear only as their belles,” alluding to the desirable,

object-like nature of the woman depicted (364). Ruggerone cites Chapelle’s other work for

Iceberg, in which “sexuality (both hetero and homo) takes centre stage and clothes appear as a

mere reinforcement for this hyper-sexual allure” (365). Ruggerone claims that these images,

among Chapelle’s other work, incite the “male gaze because [the] women are portrayed as icons

of sexuality” (366). However, in “Reflections on Victorian Fashion Plates,” Sharon Marcus

argues for the existence of a female gaze. Marcus argues that “the sexual is a subset of the

erotic,” differentiating eroticism and sexuality (6). Marcus elaborates on this point by claiming

that “the relationship between people and fashion imagery…is erotic, not sexual, because

discourse and imagery do not reflect what people do but how people think and feel, consciously

and unconsciously, about their desires” (6). Because of this distinction, it is essential to note that

eroticism is an interaction between people and imagery. Marcus even states that “although some

Victorians criticized female fashions as improper, the majority who endorsed fashion understood

it as something mothers conferred or imposed on daughters. Victorian fashion discourse revolved

around mothers making their daughters fashionable, which often meant exposing their daughters’

flesh or accentuating the outlines of their breasts, waists, and hips…. Older women shaped,

displayed, and adorned the bodies of younger women for an admiring, discerning gaze that

belonged far more often to women than to men” (9). Marcus explains the role of fantasy in

fashion by stating that “pornography and fashion imagery were structured by fantasy; by the play

between infinite desire and finite satisfaction; by rule-bound systems for creating distinction; and
 Shieh 14

by extremes of idealization and degradation, adoration and aggression, submission and

dominance” (7).

Fantasy, ‘infinite desire,’ and ‘finite satisfaction’ in fashion imagery are especially

evident in photographer Sebastian Faena’s image of models Carolyn Murphy and Martin

Landgreve (see fig. 6). Faena captures an intimate moment between two lovers, where the female

model is clothed in a Chanel dress and the male model is seemingly naked. Intimacy is

established by the direct eye contact and by the models’ physical contact with each other’s

bodies. The Chanel photographer blatantly attempts to reel in viewers based on the ineffable

promise that such ‘perfect’ romance can be just as easily attained for the viewers, even though

the models have been directed to pose. In addition to the female model being completely clothed

and the male model being naked, the female model’s physical position is higher up than that of

the man, who seems to be emerging from a pool of water, indicating the dominance of the female

figure and the submissiveness of the male. Even though the image doesn’t physically depict

much sexuality, eroticism still fuels the strength behind this image’s ability to induce fantasies in

the viewer’s minds, especially for females with the homoerotic female gaze. As for ‘idealization

and degradation,’ Bündchen in figure 4 serves as an ideal for heterosexual males adopting the

male gaze, although conversely, Bündchen also plays the role of self-degradation by posing

naked in order to provide the male gaze idealization. Photographer Sergio Veranes pictures the

‘adoration and aggression’ of fashion imagery well in his photograph of two female models in

lingerie engaging in BDSM for Tom Ford (see fig. 8). Here, the homoerotic and intimate

interplay between the two female models suggests adoration for each other, although the blatant

masochism and misogyny, illustrated by one model’s use of a snakeskin flogger, provides visual

evidence for the complementary aggression component. Due to the homoerotism within the
 Shieh 15

image, it can be inferred that the photograph attempts to target the females with the homoerotic

female gaze. The extremes of ‘submission and dominance’ are especially demonstrated in Tom

Ford fashion photography (see figs. 9 and 10). Photographer Mario Testino’s photographs of

male models physically appear over the depicted female models exemplify the ideals of

submission and dominance, exhibited by the female model and male model respectively in these

photographs for Tom Ford. Figure 9 illustrates female model lying face-down atop of a male

model’s lap. The male model’s posing denotes the gentle placement of his hand atop the female’s

buttocks, although it connotes the masochistic aspect of slapping. The female’s submission to the

male figure is further depicted by the physical placement of her head being much lower than that

of the male. Her arms pressed up against each other resemble that of one cowering in fear.

Overall, the more rigid body language of the female contradicts that of the male, who is posed to

look relaxed with the wide spread of his legs and the slightly bent posture of his back, evoking

the heterosexual male gaze. As for figure 10, a similar situation is captured, with more obvious

symbolism for the ideals of submission and dominance. Aside from the gaping difference in

clothing worn between the two (where the male is dressed complete with a Tom Ford pinstripe

suit and the female dons panties and a kimono that just barely covers her breasts), Testino poses

both models so that the male model towers over the female model. The male juts his arms out

from his side while straddling the female, while the female lies on the floor, one arm behind her

head, her chest mostly exposed, and her legs spread open. Such a sexually-charged photograph

also engenders the male gaze for the ineffable promise of a heterosexual male’s dominance over

a female in one’s fantasies.

In the Victorian era, there has been much homoeroticism between women, especially

because “Victorian fashion plates depicted women as objects” as well, similar to Chapelle’s
 Shieh 16

work recreating a scene from Scarface for Iceberg (12). Marcus refers to several fashion plates,

essentially fashion photography, in which female subjects are perceivably involved in sexually

intimate gestures and actions. Marcus writes that “in many fashion plates where women touch

but one does not look at the other, tracing the direction of the apparently empty gaze shows that

the figure who seems to stare into space is looking, not at nothing, but at another woman’s

breasts, hips, or genital area” (20). This explains the homoeroticism present within Terry

Richardson’s photograph of two female models unzipping each other’s Tom Ford dresses (see

fig. 1). Richardson’s direction for the model on the left to expose some of the cleavage of her

buttocks and to unzip the black dress of the model on the right as well as for both of them to gaze

into each other’s eyes, leads viewers to believe that the two will completely undress each other,

connoting ensuing sexual activity.

Marcus uses the phrase ‘voyeuristic scopophilia’ in addition to the aforementioned

distinction between ‘eroticism’ and ‘sexuality’ to describe the fact that “fashion iconography

produces a structure of visual pleasure” (27). In “Visual seduction: eroticism in fashion

photography,” Iva Milivojević further explores the term ‘scopophilia,’ arguing that “photography

fantasy went deep into [the] private, intimate and hidden making…erotic content available to the

eye of an observer” and that “scopophilia dominates in terms of a passive subject and an active

eye with the absolute power of invisible presence of the one who observes in relation to that

what is seen” (3). In this theory, ‘a passive subject’ connotes the role of model playing a

submissive part in some fashion photography, while ‘an active eye’ connotes the role of the

scopophilic viewer that is executing the objectification and judgement of models in a given

fashion photograph. These two roles are noticeably played out throughout all fashion

photography analyzed.
 Shieh 17

In “The simulated (fictitious) body: The production of women’s images in fashion

photography,” Lucia Ruggerone explains that scopophilia in successful advertising fashion

photography “depends on visual pleasure and provides the viewer with an opportunity to come

into contact with new, fashionable, dangerous, or sexy images, stimulating curiosity,

astonishment, envy, repulsion, or a combination of all these emotions” (356). Ruggerone

attributes such advertising campaigns’ effectiveness to the campaigns’ ability to “reduce the

consumers’ perception of the distance between the ideal worlds it shows and real life. When a

balance between appeal and accessibility is achieved, commercial images are successful. In the

case of fashion (and of course even more so in the cosmetic industry), the main function of

images is to set and reinforce conceptions of beauty and standards of self-presentation that are

socially accepted and shared by many members of the community” (356). By immersing targeted

consumers into fantasies resulting from successful exposure to suitable modes of viewing, all

analyzed fashion photography integrates the viewer and the photograph effectively.

CONCLUSION

Fashion imagery of Tom Ford and Chanel exhibit qualities in favor of targeting

consumers adopting both the homoerotic female gaze and the heteroerotic male gaze. By keeping

the model and her amount of skin exposure constant, this differentiation is still representative

and evident between the two brands’ fashion photography (see fig. 11). When comparing and

contrasting David Armstrong’s portrayal of Scarlett Johansson for Tom Ford in figure 11 and

Craig McDean’s portrayal of Johansson for Chanel in figure 5, it is evident that Johansson in

figure 11 is demurer and guarded in terms of her body language, as opposed to Johansson in

figure 5 who is more open with her body language. Of the selected fashion photography

analyzed, assuming the selected fashion photography is representative of all the fashion
 Shieh 18

photography of both brands, photographs for Tom Ford incline to depict more misogyny and

thus incite the heteroerotic male gaze more often than do the photographs of Chanel, despite him

believing that both “a naked woman and a naked man are beautiful” (23). On the other hand, the

photographs of Chanel tend to empower women, which is seen in the female models being in

more open, brightly-lit settings, posed more openly, and superior to any male models in

comparison.

Appendix
 Shieh 19

Figure 1. This is Terry Richardson’s photograph of two females wearing black and white Gucci dresses (Richardson 190-191)

Figure 2. This is Juergen Teller’s photograph of Gisele Bündchen

wearing a Chanel dress for W Magazine USA’s June 2005 issue
(Teller 59).
 Shieh 20

Figure 3. This is Karl Lagerfeld's photograph of

Kate Moss wearing Chanel Vogue Paris’s Spring
2004 issue (Lagerfeld 257).

Figure 4. This is Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott’s photograph of Gisele Bündchen wearing Chanel for Pop Magazine’s
Spring 2004 issue (Alas and Piggot 258-259).
 Shieh 21

Figure 5. This image, shot by Craig McDean for Vogue USA’s April 2007 issue, depicts Scarlett Johansson lounging by the pool
and wearing a Chanel bodysuit. (McDean 40-41)

Figure 6. This is Sebastian Faena’s photograph of Carolyn Murphy and Martin Landgreve wearing Chanel for V
Magazine USA’s Spring 2010 issue (Faena 52-53).
 Shieh 22

Figure 7. This is Bruce Weber’s photograph of Inès de la

Fressange fo the ‘Coco’ Chanel fragrance advertisement in
1989 (Weber 260).

Figure 8. This is Sergio Veranes’ photograph of

two females in lingerie engaging in BDSM for
Esquire UK (Veranes 280).
 Shieh 23

Figure 9. This is Mario Testino’s photograph of a female wearing a Gucci party dress laying
on a male (Testino 274-275).

Figure 10. This is Mario Testino’s photograph of a female lying on

the ground with the male wearing Gucci standing (Testino 281).
 Shieh 24

Figure 11. This is David Armstrong’s photograph of Scarlett Johansson

posing for GQ USA (Armstrong 307).
 Shieh 25

Works Cited

Alas, Mert, and Marcus Piggott. Gisele Bündchen Wearing Chanel for Pop Magazine. Spring 2004.

Chanel: The Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press,

2011. pp. 258-259. Print.

Armstrong, David. Scarlett Johansson for GQ USA. N.d. Tom Ford. By Bridget Foley. New York:

Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 307. Print.

Aspers, Patrik, and Frédéric Godart. "Sociology of Fashion: Order and Change." Annual Review

of Sociology 39 (2013): 171-192. Web. 7 Nov. 2017. doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-

071811-145526.

Faena, Sebastian. Carolyn Murphy and Martin Landgreve Wearing Chanel for V Magazine USA.

Spring 2010. Chanel: The Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale

University Press, 2011. pp. 52-53. Print.

Ford, Tom. “Interview.” Interview by Bridget Foley. n.d.: 19-33. Print. Transcript.

Gautier, Jérôme. “Introduction.” Chanel: The Vocabulary of Style. By Gautier, Jérôme. New Haven:

Yale University Press, 2011. pp. x-xiii. Print.

Gautier, Jérôme. “The Body Liberated.” Chanel: The Vocabulary of Style. New Haven: Yale

University Press, 2011. pp. xiv-xxxxv. Print.

Jobling, Paul. “Who's That Girl?: “Alex Eats,” A Case Study in Abjection and Identity in

Contemporary Fashion Photography.” Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body and

Culture 2.3 (1998): pp. 209-224. Web. 21 Oct. 2017. DOI:

10.2752/136270498779476190.

Lagerfeld, Karl. Kate Moss Wearing Chanel for Vogue Paris. Spring 2004. Chanel: The
 Shieh 26

Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. pp.

257. Print.

Lindbergh, Peter. Meghan Douglas Wearing Chanel for Harper’s Bazaar USA. January 1993.

Chanel: The Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press,

2011. pp. 36. Print.

Marcus, Sharon. “Reflections on Victorian Fashion Plates.” Differences: A Journal of Feminist

Cultural Studies 14.3 (2003): pp. 4–33. Web. 7 Nov. 2017.

McDean, Craig. Scarlett Johansson Lying by the Pool for Vogue USA. April 2007. Chanel: The

Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. pp. 40-41.

Print.

Milivojević, Iva. “Visual seduction: eroticism in fashion photography.” Academia. N.p. N.d.

Web. 05 Sep. 2017.

Morris, Bernadine. “Review/Fashion; Mere Meets More in Milan.” New York Times, 7 Oct.

1993, www.nytimes.com/1993/10/07/garden/review-fashion-mere-meets-more-in-

milan.html. Accessed 11 Dec. 2017.

Richardson, Terry. Female Wearing Gucci in Black Dress. N.d. Tom Ford. By

Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 184-185.

Print.

Richardson, Terry. Two Females Wearing Gucci in Black and White Dresses. N.d. Tom Ford. By

Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 190-191. Print.

Rojas, Jeff. Photographing Women. N.p.: Rocky Nook, 2016. Web.

Ruggerone, Lucia. "The Simulated (fictitious) Body: The Production of Women's Images in

Fashion Photography." Poetics 34.6 (2006): 354-69. Web.

 Shieh 27

Teller, Juergen. Gisele Bündchen Wearing Chanel for W Magazine USA. June 2005. Chanel: The

Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. pp.

59. Print.

Testino, Mario. Louise Pedersen Wearing Chanel for Allure Magazine. April 2003. Chanel: The

Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. pp.

256. Print.

Testino, Mario. Female Wearing Gucci in Party Dress Laying on Male. N.d. Tom Ford. By

Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 274-275.

Print.

Testino, Mario. Female Wearing Gucci on Ground with Male Standing. N.d. Tom Ford. By

Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 281. Print.

Veranes, Sergio. Two Females in Lingerie Performing BDSM for Esquire UK. N.d. Tom Ford. By

Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 2004. pp. 280. Print.

Weber, Bruce. Inès de la Fressange Wearing ‘Coco’ Chanel Fragrance. 1989. Chanel: The

Vocabulary of Style. By Jérôme Gautier. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. pp.

260. Print.

Wintour, Anna. Foreword. Tom Ford. By Bridget Foley. New York: Rizzoli International

Publications, Inc., 2004. xiii. Print.