Spring/Summer 2018 campaign by Raf Simons
The male figure in this campaign communicated a sense of vulnerability and a delicacy that are of a woman. The hat resembles a bonnet and the umbrella a parasol, which were fashionable items of the early 1900’s, around the Victorian and Edwardian era. In what was traditionally seen on the women for decades, the bonnet and parasol are seen as strongly feminine, including the posture for displaying them – the parasol over the shoulder can communicate a sense of vulnerability, like a need for protection. This campaign challenges this traditional gender norm by converting objects typically for women into contemporary pieces for men.
The function of these objects that carry gender norms are also different. For example, the parasol was traditionally used by women to maintain a creamy and flawless complexion by keeping the sun away. Although the way the model carries the umbrella on his shoulder resembles that of a parasol, it is translucent. This completely diverts from the original function of the parasol.
In addition, there is a slight tilt in his head that indicates that he is looking up. This adds to the feeling of vulnerability because looking up indicates a certain child-like inferiority than if the model was looking straight or down at the camera.
Other photographs part of this campaign support this diversion of gender norms in the manner the male model poses. He is often gazing far off and by laying down seems almost helpless. These qualities are often seen in fashion photography with women whereas for men, usually there is a strong gaze that claims authority and alertness.
There is nothing wrong with men being vulnerable and in wearing bonnets and hold an umbrella in the same manner as one would with a parasol (especially since bonnets are for both sexes). However, there is a gender construction around these objects, looks and characters that challenge the male model’s masculinity. As stated by Susan Kaiser, “navigating masculinities can be described as a process of negotiating the boundaries between what is ‘safe’ and what is ‘dangerous.'” Is it possible to communicate vulnerability and masculinity at the same time? Most men would agree that the outfit and character of the model in this campaign are closer to the dangerous territory for masculinity.
