Media’s Influence Essay Example for Free

Medias Influence EssayFrom Congress to Clowns Medias Influence on Bow draw and quarter Transformation The take pull appear could easily be dubbed the benighted sheep of the Cravat family. Its origins are none glamorous and it is rarely embraced, typically rhythmed against and most often forgotten. It is noticed in only its flutter mowork forcets of sheik or dreadfully offensive shock. Its history originating in gain and birthed from a distinguished sect was turned against with the advent of visual media. The mold get out was first seen in the 17th Century when Croatian mercenaries went to support King Louis in France (Pohl). To keep their shirts closed and to protect themselves from the elements they get hitched withd a loosely check out tie around their necks (Pohl). There is debate over whether the intention was strictly utilitarian as long, lace neck withstand was already a vogue in France in that respect was likely some function. King Louis quickly adopted the tie for style. He named it La Cravat and do it the required attire for upper class formal gatherings (Pohl). It move its European trend and was brought along with colonization to America. The earliest root ties were white and were worn for fashion and social class distinction.It remained in use during the 18th and nineteenth century, but was mainly isolated to politicians, lawyers and scholars as very formal and professional attire. Abraham Lincoln and many of our early presidents were often photographed wearing the electric arc tie reinforcing its mental representation of being a distinguished adjuvant. The first major toss in accepted bow tie use coincided with the changes in political ideology. A adolescent America, wanting to distance itself from European classism removed the bow tie from accepted fashion practice.Outside of the very formal black tie affair it was rarely seen. The general opinion of the bow tie changed as well, as it began to carry with it an air of pr etense or snobbery. Warren St. John, a writer for the New York Times, describes this shift in judgeing, To its devotees the bow tie suggests iconoclasm of an Old World sort, a fusty adherence to a contrarian point of view. The bow tie hints at intellectualism, real or feigned, and sometimes suggests technical acumen, perhaps because it is so hard to tie.Bow ties are worn by magicians, country doctors, lawyers and professors and by people hoping to look like the above. further perhaps most of all, wearing a bow tie is a way of broadcasting an aggressive lack of concern for what other people think (St. John). This idea changed in an important way in the 20th century. After decades of a clear break from European influence the bow tie made a come back, but in an interesting way. It was still fashionably outcast outside of formalwear, but it became an icon for individualism.A list of bow tie devotees reads like a Whos Who of rugged individualists (St. John). Interestingly this peeled trend coincides with the advent and surge in visual media, via film, news real, magazine and eventually television. Mens clothier tinkers dam Freedman told the New York Times that wearing a bow tie is a statement maker that identifies a person as an individual because its not generally in fashion (St. John). The bow tie would never be generally in fashion even with visual access, but media helped to mold new thinking about it as a symbol and defined opinions of those who wore it.Its casual use was adopted by outspoken and prominent politicians, comedians, broadcasters, and many animated figures. The influence from Hollywood and T. V. media would create an impression that would stick. In T. V. and film comedians and animated characters personas who wore bow ties were portrayed as goofy, awkward, quirky or nerdy creating a stereotype that modern bow tie wearers cant quite shake. Characters such as Jerry Lewis Nutty Professor and Paul Reubens Pee Wee Herman have helped perpetuate it. It is possible that Hollywood as an institution and protector of class may have created these characterizations in rebellion to the adoption of the bow tie by mainstream individuals. Simmel writes, the elite initiates a fashion and when the mass imitates it in an effort to eliminate the distinction of class, the elite abandon it for a different mode. Acting on the elites behalf, visual media created and exposed these clownish views to turn the style off, to make it un-fashionable, so it could resume class distinction (541).Like the black sheep that it is, despite its sense of folly the bow tie as well leaves the impression of being quite trustworthy. Many highly respected leaders, lawyers, politicians and broadcasters have donned them and some have even been branded by this contact piece. Winston Churchill was known for his signature dour and white polka-dot tie. Charles Osgood for his trademark tie worn during broadcasts. That sense of trust could stem from the idea that these m en are brave enough to go against fashion or because they dont care what people think we trust them to be to a greater extent candid and honest.Advertisers picked up on this trend and companies such as Chevrolet and Budweiser have included the bow tie in their corporate logos. They also strengthen this association of trustworthiness and honesty with their campaign slogans. In 1996 Chevrolet wanted its blue bow tie to be among Americas top icons again, so it created a series of 15 second spots featuring just the bow tie in unexpected places with the printed tag Genuine Chevrolet and the narration the cars Americans trust (Halliday).Budweiser also made this association with their ad campaign featuring just their red bow tie logo and the words Budweiser, True. Though the bow tie has made a dramatic shift in the 20th century from a symbol of class distinction and distinguished conformity to a symbol of individualism and supposed trust, the bow tie has not waivered as the staple accesso ry of formal attire. There have been some recent adaptations, again brought on by Hollywood celebrities such as the black button cover or black bolo tie, but when alternates are chosen they are typically mocked by mainstream media.Black tie affair still means black bow tie by all accounts. The sophistication and style has been reinforced by celebrities in photos or films of formal dances, dinners and parties. Representing all the glamour of classic Hollywood and associated with the smooth Humphrey Bogart and Frank Sinatra. It has such a long standing tradition and symbol of what it means to be a sophisticated and classy gentleman that even man-about-town picked it up and incorporated it into their bunny logo .In fact, Playboys use of the bow tie has in many ways taken the symbol full circle the fantasy and money associated with having women and the finer things in life truly brings us right back to the ideas of class distinction and giving men something to aspire too. The bow ti e has such an interesting history because essentially we arent sure what to think of it. Outside of its use as formal wear it doesnt have a category or clear intention. Standing so far left of fashion it is one of those rare instances where those who chose to wear it really do demonstrate individuality and not out of a need for protest or desperation to be noticed.Finkelstein wrote, The basic irony of fashion is that it cannot gain in marking the individual as truly different. While fashions may be touted as a means to be distinguished, the pursuit of fashion is more effectively a means of being socially homogenized. The historic success of being fashionable has been to provide a sense of individualism within a shared code, since individuals can look acceptably distinctive only within a restricted aesthetic. When they purchase fashionable goods that will distinguish them, they do so only from a range of goods already understood to be valuable.Having this understanding of fashion it seems to follow that one purchasing or wearing something un-fashionable truly is expressing their individuality. In the case of the bow tie it seems its wearers have less in common and that commonality derived by the observer has more to do with visual medias flack to categorize the wearer as something. Interestingly though, those known for donning the bow tie come from such a broad society base that stereotypes of general folly created by media characters do not really apply. However it may be that is exactly the point.When you cant be categorized you will certainly stand out and in that case the bow tie, outside of the formal, acts merely as a signature piece with no real intention other than being noticed. To be fashionable involves having specific knowledge about the value of goods. It is not sufficient to desire goods because of their utility (Finkelstein). Clearly using the bow tie for the sake of the utility of being noticed makes the item quite un-fashionable, but maybe it is the individual outside of the fashion world who truly understands the value of goods.The bow tie is the black sheep of the Cravat family, the outsider of the fashion world and that is its value. Visual media has changed its initial perceptions of being an item of social class distinction to that of a clown and yet despite its created perceptions those who take in to wear the bow tie outside of film and T. V. are highly regarded and trusted. Advertisers have picked up on this strange dichotomy and have even reinforced its credibility, but not to the approval of the fashion world.It is curious to think that the bow tie will ever become fashionable outside of its formal grow mainly because it has become something far more valuable than fashion. Works Cited Finkelstein, Joanne. Chic Theory. Australian Humanities Review. 07 March 2009. http//www. australianhumanitiesreview. org/archive/Issue-March-1997/. Pohl, H. The History of the Bow Tie. 05 noneember 2008. lula general articles . 07 March 2009. http//www. iula. org/the-history-of-the-bow-tie-16695/. Halliday, Jean.Chevrolet ads seek to bolster image of bow tie. 08 April 1996. Automotive News. Crain Communications. 07 March 2009. http//www. highbeam. com/doc/1G1-18451431. html. Simmel, Georg. Fashion. May 1957. The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 62, No. 6, 541-558. 07 March 2009. http//www. jstor. org/stable/2773129. St John, Warren. A Red Flag That Comes in Many Colors. 26 June 2005. The New York Times. 07 March 2009. http//www. nytimes. com/2005/06/26/fashion/sundaystyles/26BOWTIE. html.