Yesterday I pulled some lines from some vintage ads and placed them out of context into a post. If you haven’t seen that post you may want to take a look at it first here.
Or not..since these vintage ads are fun to look at just as they are.
No longer out of context…
Square
The thing I like most about the babies thing is the clear implication that the baby is some kind of amusement. The problem isn’t oh no, is thin baby’s health at risk? No, the problem is that thin baby is rarely interesting.
I am more than sold on that Chase & Sanborn coffee. Say, what is it with all the cute wives lately eh? You trying to promulgate some kind of cute wife fetish agenda?
I am craving some Chase & Sanborn at this very moment. Guess I’ll have to settle for some 8 O’clock.
Well whadda you know. Just checked and they still make C&S. No whole bean however..boo.
Oh and you want your cute wives?…cause I got your cute wives. Plenty more where they came from buddy. 🙂
On a more serious note, the marginalization-for-life of a human being to a purely domestic function is atrocious, but there’s no denying the power of the iconography! The graphic designers knew their work, but how knowing were they at it?
Were they truly the self-aware, sinister architects of the patriarchy? “We must gild the shit deal we have inflicted upon these women, and lionize them for playing the role so well!”
Were they simply being pragmatic? “Somebody’s got to cook and clean. Might as well make it seem enjoyable!”
Or did they perhaps, truly respect and uphold the role of housespouse? Is it possible that they were sincere and devout worshippers at the cute wife altar?