The Pantene commercial showcased a deaf asian girl who played the violin. The girl was constantly bullied and put down by others because she was disabled, therefore she felt discouraged to play. At one point in the commercial another girl smashed the deaf girl's violin, thus silencing the deaf girl even more. The violin literally smashed to pieces, so the audience would infer that the deaf girl will not ever be capable of making music on her instrument again. However, at the classical music competition the deaf girl plays "Pachabell's Cannon in D major" once more, yet the audience can observe that her broken violin is taped. As a violin player, I know that it is impossible to make a pleasant sound out of a taped up instrument, so I ask myself, "Why is the audience clapping after her performance?"
After watching the commercial, the four minutes of what I thought was a touching story of passion ended up being a commercial for Pantene hair products. So perhaps the deaf girl was not really playing at all during the classical music competition, because how could she on a taped up violin. Maybe the audience was so taken-aback by her luscious locks of hair, and not her actual violin performance. This commercial is definitely abstract, but if it weren't for these minute observations one would totally misconceive Pantene's message.
I like how this argument is advancing. It seems though as if a step is missing -- between the paragraphs or as the end of the first. I guess I'm looking earlier for your claim that the audience is effectively applauding her lovely hair.
ReplyDelete