QuestionHi! I saw your comments on my Smithsonian posters and I really wanted to respond. First, I appreciate you trying to find the source for them. Most people just don't give a shit. You can find the originals on my website, in my portfolio. (http://jennyleighb.com) They weren't done by the Smithsonian. They were just an advertising project a copywriter and I did in ad school.

Our assignment was to create ads for the Smithsonian that would appeal to college students, which I think we achieved, but I have seen a few comments like yours popping up as these have spread around tumblr. I've gotta say, being so close to the project, that I don't think my partner and I ever looked at the Ghengis Khan thing as offensive. However, I can def. see why some people would take it as glorifying his sexual role in history. I think we just used the phrase "got with" because it fit with the audience we were trying to attract. I would hope that if this campaign was actually real, that a poster like that might get someone interested in learning more about a historical figure such as Khan, after which, they would find out the more serious truth behind his story. Also, I think we were using the phrase "got with" to mean simply "had sex with", whether it be consensual sex or not.

Anyways, I found your comment to be pretty insightful, and I appreciate you taking the time to write about it. :)
Answer

Hey! Thanks so much for the backstory! They’re really great images, it’s awesome to get more information about where they come from while simultaneously having a Positive Internet Conversation. 

I see where you’re coming from, and it’s definitely interesting to look at the usage of the comparison in an ad meant to encourage further learning. The amount of time and space you have at your disposal to attract an incredibly specific type of person can create some interesting images, and while I still feel the same way about the comparison made, it’s good to be reminded of the process to think of ways to get that same message with the same cleverness across as opposed to just sitting back and saying, “Neh. Wrong, hatred, emotions!” I’ve seen a lot of articles/media that call Genghis Khan the world’s most prolific lover, which is….all kinds of wrong, and with far more space to be exact. Oi.

But yeah, one of the reasons I respond to this in public is that I wanted to say that even though the ads aren’t ‘real’ per se, you should know that it’s awesome to see someone involved in the business of advertising who responds so considerately to concerns. I checked out your portfolio, and your stuff looks great, so it’s neat to see someone talented who’s eager to engage.

  1. cptfunk posted this