Dolce & Gabbana: China Campaign Controversy

For the last few lessons we have been examining the Dolce and Gabbana advertisement designed to penetrate the Chinese upper class market. The ad was deemed highly controversial and even racist due to the way it vacuously represents Chinese culture and mindlessly humours eastern customs. We un-packed the advertisement down to the smallest details, highlighting the elements that created such a demeaning tone.

Here are some points and details we considered about the advertisement video campaign:

  • Traditional Chinese music in the background
    • Stereotypical and out of context (inappropriate)
  • Model (women) is expensively dressed in D&G clothes
  • A lot of red colour in the frame
    • Again stereotypical, like they are trying to make it a very traditional scene even though little thought or effort has gone into representing traditional Chinese culture
  • Model is laughing at the use of chopsticks
    • Mocking her own culture
    • Making her seem stupid –> misrepresenting easter women
  • Dominant male narrator
    • Paternalistic
    • Makes women seem submissive, subservient
    • Demeaning portrayal of women
  • Chopsticks described as ‘small stick shaped cutlery’
    • Makes fun and degrades Chinese culture
  • Model and narrator come across as embarrassed about the use of chopsticks
    • They are trying to disown their own culture
    • Might be trying to imply D&G brand is an escape from the ‘uncivilised’ eastern culture
  • Italian food is presented as being superior to Chinese food
    • Spaghetti > noodles (“its not as simple as noodles”)
    • Chopsticks struggle to keep up with Italian food
  • The ad polarises the two cultures
    • Chopsticks fails to facilitate Italian food -> western culture is superior to eastern culture
  • Model is presented as immature, naive, childish
  • Classist themes presented in the ad
  • Western centric/colonial view
  • Makes uneducated assumptions about Chinese culture

 

Here is a short summary of my work:

The Dolce & Gabbana China Campaign was deemed highly controversial and racist due to the way it vacuously represented Chinese culture and mindlessly humoured eastern customs. The advertisement mocks the use of chopsticks as a Chinese model struggles to use them to eat Italian food. The model’s interactions with the chopsticks are as if she is completely oblivious as to how they are supposed to be used. A comedic offstage voice instructs the model trying to help her eat the Italian dishes using the ‘small stick shaped cutlery’. The portrayal of Italian food as being too sophisticated for the chopsticks to eat trivializes Chinese culture. Although the intent of the advertisement was not to demean Chinese customs in this way, the message it seems to convey is that D&G is a way for Chinese people to escape the inferior eastern traditions and be a part of the more dominant western culture. For-example, the way the expensive D&G jewelry and shiny dress make the model stand out in-front of the traditional Chinese backdrop polarises the two cultures. Of course a wholesome representation of China is not expected in such a short video, however, there are certain empty stereotypes that are not appropriate especially when trying to reach a new group of people for the first time. The use of traditional Chinese music and the overuse of the colour red comes across as a cheap representation of Chinese culture. In a western context this may have been overlooked, however to the people in China these aspects could be interpreted as ignorant and offensive. It is as if D&G is trying to tend to a new group of people without putting in the effort to truly understand or appreciate them. 

 

With the growing use of mass media advertisements can reach a lot of people in a very short amount of time. Whilst this puts a lot of power and influence in the hands of advertisers, it also leaves them vulnerable to the diverse set of interpretations that their content will attract. Should producers be held accountable if their content is interpreted in a negative way? And who ultimately decides what is or isn’t accepted as an appropriate form of publicity?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *