I have a confession to make. I have a strange obsession with many things retro. Retro posters, apparels, musical instruments, lifestyle, food make up a small bit of a long list. This week I decided to look at more retro ads from the past, except this time around i chose to look at more controversial ones.
I came across a particularly shocking vintage ad from way back in the day.
What were they thinking right? What does that mean? Could it mean that African American children can be used to improve a costume someone could wear to a costumer party?
The answer is, yes.. if we were to read it in the today’s context. However, the answer is no, if we were reading it in the correct timeframe.
This ad clearly relies on the play on words used. At the time, ‘colored’ was a term used to refer to African Americans. ‘Kids’ was a slang for Kidskin boots, very much like the use of the word ‘kicks’ in modern times to refer to shoes. However, ‘colored kids’ also literally meant black children. So the wordplay then, is blending the real meaning ‘dyed kidskin boots’ and the alternative meaning ‘black children’.
Another condescending aspect of this picture is how the black children are portrayed playing with a rodent tied to a string. Does this suggest the lower, poorer and unsophisticated status of the black community? This, coupled with the fact that the white women is wearing relatively upperclass apparel, the answer is certainly a strong yes.
Reading this ad in modern times would obviously elicit angry and offended responses. However, back in the day it might have been a different story. This ad was probably released in the end of the 1800’s, or more realistically, in early 1900’s, and society’s view of racism wasn’t what it is today. The public in that timeframe were not as aware of the harm racism can cause. That, and the lack of rights the African American community suffered from allowed for such ads to be used. Presumably, there was a non-existant fear of public revolt when this ad was created. The majority of its target segment was most probably white, and this probably gave the marketers reason to act insensitively.
Now, in the beginnings of the 2000’s, no such racially provoking pictures would be dared to be released anywhere. Marketers have learned a long time ago to adapt to political changes in society, in this case it was the abolishment of racial discrimination and the least we could do is thank God that mankind have made positive steps in terms of racial equality.