Lolita
You don’t normally think of the words “Dakota Fanning” and “scandal” in the same sentence…But today The Guardian reports that a new ad for Marc Jacobs’ Lola perfume, which features an image of the 17-year-old sitting with a bottle of the fragrance between her legs, has been banned in the UK.
Why has this particular campaign been deemed “sexually provocative” by the Advertising Standards Authority? “We considered that the length of her dress, her leg, and position of the perfume bottle drew attention to her sexuality,” they say. “Because of that, along with her appearance, we considered the ad could be seen to sexualize a child. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible and was likely to cause serious offense.” They also feel like Fanning looks to be younger than she actually is. What do you think of the ad? Is the controversy warranted or is it just as “provocative” as what you normally come across in magazines?
I think the ad is okay – not provocative at all, but it doesn’t sit well with me mainly because of what Dakota represents to me and “society” – innocence.
The first thing I thought of when I saw this was “Lolita”, the novel by Vladimir Nabokov… Lola/Lolita … Dakota/Delores … This may be a stretch, but I’ll be surprised if this was entirely unintentional. And even though Dakota is no longer a 12-year-old girl, she’s still a symbol of ‘child stardom’. I don’t think this falls into the same boat as all the other nameless, childlike models we see in popular culture. Dakota, my girl, because I’ve made the “Lolita” connection, I’ll appreciate this. But it’s borderline.