the safe cigarette: four

Personification: Who Should We Trust ?

The Safe Cigarette: Visual strategies of reassurance in American advertisements for cigarettes, 1945-1964.

Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Practice-Based Ph.D. Jackie Batey www.thesafecigarette.blogspot.com

The Safe Cigarette


Volume Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


The Safe Cigarette

One: The Safe Cigarette

Two: The Cigarette

Three: The Need to Reassure

Four: Personification: Who Should We Trust ?

Five: Nature as Reassurance - The Menthol Cigarette

Six: Technology as Reassurance - The Filter-Tip

Seven: Conclusion

Eight: Glossary, References and Appendices

4

Four: Contents

The Brand Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:01

The Visual Personification of the Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:02

Who Should We Not Trust and How Can We Recognise Them? . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:03

1. Fame - Celebrity and Citizen Endorsing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:04

2. Tradition; Tobacco Farmers and Cowboys & Indians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:06

Tobacco Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:06

Cowboys & Indians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:08

The Cowboy - Marlboro Man . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:09

3. The Professional; Medical Specialists and Voice Specialists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:12

Voice Specialists - A Night at the Opera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:13

Medical Specialists - A Day at the Doctors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:15

Medical Man as Confidence Man ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:19

4. The Absurd; Animals and Imaginary People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:20

Absurd Animals - Old Gold and Old Yeller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:21

It’ll Be a Blue Christmas Without You . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:22

After the Endorsers ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:23

Endnotes to Fascicle Four . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4:24

Four: Personification: Who Should We Trust?

“...I am sick of those hearty young he-man smokers rounding up cattle and piloting gliders and skiing over snowy ridges,

I am sick of those ever-laughing young couples swimming and canoeing and patting horses and disappearing hand in

hand for heaven knows what purpose into the seclusion of covered bridges.

This may sound stuffed-shirty,

But their advertisements would lead you to believe that the sponsors don’t believe that any of their customers survive

the age of thirty...” Ogden Nash, “The Kinsey Report didn’t upset me, either” LOOK, March, 1964

The Brand Character

In the period 1945-64 images of the product in isolation (the Pack Shot) were at their most useful to

make consumers familiar with the identity of the product itself. In the U.K. Embassy used images of the

cigarette pack in isolation to avoid targeting a specific gender. Images of the pack alone however, have

not been successful in creating a strong image for a brand or in answering anxieties associated with

consumption. One supplemental visual element that might intrude into the pack shot was the Brand

Character1. Another element might be the personifier. The deployment of a brand character can assist in

re-inforcing brand image, but the brand character (e.g. “Johnny” the Pall Mall Bell Hop) will have no

other job in simulated life but to appear in conjunction with the product on all possible occasions - from

press advertisement, to TV and radio endorsements. Since it is the invention of the Tobacco Company,

the brand character is unlikely to ever say anything negative about the product.

The personification of a brand however, by showing endorsements from a person who exists, and who

is willing to be associated in the public mind with the product, was one of the most popular strategies of

the advertising agencies during the early ’fifties. The focus of personification can even be on a person

who is unknown to the general public but about whom there is sufficient detail of their personality or

career so that when they speak, (in speech bubble or panels of copy) their profile is raised from that of

an ordinary citizen to that of a “personality”. In the analysis of contemporary advertising there are few

components of a campaign that are so exclusively visual as the personal endorsement. From show

business celebrities to doctors, from housewives to Santa Claus, assorted personalities are placed

alongside the product in the hope that the associations with which they are viewed will soothe all

manner of consumer anxieties, and, through that process, sell more units. The single campaign images

here represented may be repeated over a short period, but are varied regularly during the campaign to

focus on personality and accomplishment within the choice of theme.

But which personifier would be best to address and reassure the consumer’s anxieties?

4:01

n Fig 4:01 Detail, Bassick Advertisement, SEP, September 1956

The Visual Personification of the Product

To personify is to embody a quality or exemplify in a typical manner. The use of visual personification is

different from the use of an invented brand character. A brand character can be a fictional person such

as Ronald McDonald who is not derived from literature or myth. He or she has a recognisable voice, face,

shape or costume and can be represented by an actor or actors at a marketing event. The brand

character can be a recognisable animal such as Joe Camel or the birds in Bird’s Custard, either in

animation or as a stylisation. Brand character animals can converse, wear clothes and perform complex

operations such as flying a plane (Toilet Duck). The visual form can be anything from sophisticated art

work (Borden Cows) to inert silhouettes (the NBC Peacock). Rarely is it a photographic image. Most

entertainingly the brand character can be an anthropomorphisied object (often the shape of the product

itself, the talking, walking M&M sweet or Mr.Cube of Tate & Lyle

Sugar ). In the latter incarnation, the brand character can transcend the human limitations of Ronald

McDonald, the animal tendencies of Joe Camel, to achieve a designed personality often exuding charm,

sincerity and cheekiness, qualities that manufacturer would like to be transferred onto the product.

Mr.Cube, despite the limitations of being a cartoon character, was credited with reducing public support

for the nationalisation of the British Sugar Industry after 1945.2

Brand characters can be positive additions to advertising campaigns when the product itself is

uninspiring to look at (e.g. car tyres), or difficult to define visually, (e.g. financial services or insurance).

Often these characters names are a pun on the product. Fig 4:01 shows Rolly Bassick, the friendly caster-

wheel brand character for Bassick, caster manufacturers, (September 1956). The assumption that

consumers can relate to the ‘personality’ of a caster-wheel can make brand characters ultimately appear

rather contrived.

Personification is different. The qualities associated with a person, can be adapted from

advertisement to advertisement. Unlike a brand character the featured person is often represented as

‘real’ rather than imaginary. For example, personification of a product can mean making a brand acquire

a combination of seriousness and leisure, personal competitiveness and physical strength in association

with a particular sport or activity. The selected sport can be a team activity but can encompass the

individual e.g. tennis, speedboat racing, fencing and swimming. But the endorser can

be a form of peer advisor, just like you, but demonstrably superior to you. “I use this product because it

is good. Trust me. I am on your side.” The equivalent might be seen in the role of the Court Food Taster

easing the anxiety of the consumer by intervening prior to consumption in case of poisoned food. The

consumer can breath a sigh of relief and consume.

Choosing a generic personality to associate a brand with is a difficult decision.

Strand cigarettes made a mistake selecting a Film Noir style male wearing a shabby raincoat.3

4:02

Not many consumers, it appeared, wanted to be associated with a man who looked like a stereotypical

drunk, adrift, friendless, seemingly a social outcast.

Personification can work in three main ways;

1 By association, consumers can imagine that they share the characteristics represented.

ie. “Cowboys are macho therefore I can project myself as macho.”

2 By reassuring consumers anticipated concerns about the product.

ie. “Doctors are trustworthy men of science, If they say this doesn’t harm me, I believe

them.”

3 By associating an emotion with the product, This is closer to the nature of a brand

character. ie. “Santa Claus is harmless and fun, therefore the product is harmless and fun.”

Who Should We Not Trust and How Can We Recognise Them?

When Manufacturers and Advertising Agencies explore which person to associate with a brand, there are

certain images to be avoided. Perceived undesirables in the U.S. during this period have been visualised

in advertisements, popular films and in urban myths. Some individuals constitute more of a threat than

others. They range from people that should be politely ignored through to people to defend yourself

against at all costs. Many familiar stereotypes from this period would be seen as inexcusable today the

‘Sly Red Indian’ and the ‘Rotund Black Cook’, even the ‘Megalomaniac Criminal Mastermind’ still evident

today,4

The vision of the ‘Red-Neck’ or uneducated, unsophisticated person (usually male) is more of an

American phenomena than British and is usually predictably cast as the psychopath in many horror

movies.5

The established genre of gangster films and fiction has made the image of the machine-gun

toting criminal a sustained and still powerful epitome of the Unwanted.

In the marketing context the desirable and undesirable figures are visual opposites. The

desirable figure uses branded goods to keep up appearances in all conditions. The undesirable can sneer,

avoid eye contact and lurk in shadows while the desirable counterpart smiles while standing squarely in

the created spotlight of the endorsements. In fig 4:03 Du Pont (1963) five salesman are waiting to meet

the same client. “Which one will make the sale?”. We know instantly. Neatness and freshness are visually

presented as attributes of success.

In fig 4:02, a publicity still for Son Of Dr.Jeykll (Columbia, 1951), the actor gives the audience all the

outward signs they need to identify fear. The main difference between the crumpled salesman and

Dr.Jekyll’s son, are the staring eyes of the villain alert and ready to do evil deeds, whereas the salemens’

eyes register exhaustion and despair.

4:03

n Fig 4:02 Publicity still from Son Of Dr.Jeykll (Columbia, 1951)

n Fig 4:03 Du Pont, Advertisement, LOOK, September 1963

From an early age, the consumer is gradually led to recognise and understand sets of visual

archetypes which can lead to anxiety on one hand and reassurance on the other. Visual strategies for

selecting personifiers to reassure the consumer can fall into four main associated pairings;

1 Fame - Celebrity and Citizen;

2 Tradition - Tobacco Farmers and Cowboys & Indians;

3 The Professional - Medical Specialists and Voice Specialists;

4 The Absurd - Animals and Imaginary People.

We will now look in detail at how these personifiers can be made visual to reassure consumers.

1. Fame - Celebrity and Citizen Endorsing

Of the leading brands Chesterfield relied almost exclusively on actors and celebrities to endorse their

brands. The strategy of having a famous face to attract attention and infuse glamour into a brand was

used by Chesterfield for 15 years (1941-1956) with no major changes. To identify with the glamour of

Rita Hayworth in Gilda, the consumer need only buy her cigarettes.

“The film responds to the shrivelling of the aura with an artificial build-up of the ‘personality’ outside the studio. The cult

of the movie star, fostered by the money of the film industry, preserves not the unique aura of the person but the ‘spell

of personality’ the phoney spell of a commodity.” Walter Benjamin, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical

Reproduction", Illuminations, Fontana 1973 [1936], p.233.

It was also recognised that a Movie Star6

could exist on screen and attend publicity events while still

sponsoring a wide range of products and charities.

Jane Russell (see Gatefold Four, Who Should We Trust ?) could recommend Jergens Hand Lotion

(1951) fig 4:04 as well as Fedders Refrigeration Condensers (1952) fig 4:05. The partnership between

Star and Manufacturer becomes more complex when the Star’s new film is mentioned within the

advertisement. The Star now seems to be endorsing a product for selfish reasons, to promote their film

and therefore career. Fedders Refrigeration Condensers mentions “The Las Vegas Story”, while Jergens

Hand Lotion promotes “His Kind of Woman”. The product then gains from the popularity of the Star but

also gains by being seen as part of the structure of Hollywood. In her autobiography it is interesting to

note that Russell never once mentions any of the many advertising campaigns or endorsements with

which she was involved.7

Celebrities, or people who are famous for being famous, offer their glamour and aura to a

product a useful partnership until the celebrity either falls from grace or is replaced in the public’s

4:04

n Fig 4:04 Detail, Jergens Lotion, Advertisement, LOOK, April 1951

n Fig 4:05 Detail, Fedders Refrigeration Condensers, SEP, March 1952

admiration by somebody else. Celebrity endorsements can be short lived depending on the success of

the personifier.8

Celebrities, unlike brand characters, are easily made redundant. The cumulative effect

is that the rich and famous have chosen to smoke it, therefore the consumer can be reassured. Actors

such as Gene Autry and Roy Rogers, recognised for playing cowboys bring a two-fold glamour to the

brand, that of the actor and the cowboy.

In the typical advertisement using endorsements, the famous person can appear alongside the

citizen, the ‘Regular Joe/Jane’ who represents the bulk of the consuming public. ‘Regular Joes/Janes’ can

speak on behalf of the consumer by putting a human face to the product. Their faces are registered often

in monochrome and their opinions generally not given the weight of the Celebritiy’s pronouncements,

not least by being much smaller on the page. Four or five of them endorse as a team, the implication

being that one ‘star’ equalled four ‘Regulars’. The ordinary people are given names, generalised

addresses and an indicative form of employment such as teaching, accountancy and general

bureaucracy. The ‘Regular Jane’ can also be a housewife. The photographs are cropped to show only the

head and shoulders, the hand holding the cigarette is at rest close to the mouth to make sure it is not

cropped out of the final image. The ‘regulars’ clothes are glimpsed but never allowed to rival the

Celebrity’s glamour. (Fig 4:06)

From Log Cabin To White House,9

may offer the Nation the theoretical possibility of

advancement, but the cigarette advertisement relied on a clear hierarchy of consumption.

2. Tradition; Tobacco Farmers and Cowboys & Indians

Tobacco Farmers

The appeal to Tradition is often at the heart of selling, particularly in the period of mass production and

consumption after 1945, the suggestion being that because something has been tried and tested over a

long period of time, it must be good. Traditional crafts are preserved and respected, family traditions

adhered to and national traditions kept with pride. Whether a tradition is visualised as a reality or a

fiction must be carefully analysed on the printed page.10

A significant proportion of cigarette

advertisements feature images of the industrial infrastructure - growing and harvesting the crop, storing,

curing and auctioning - at each stage revealing the Expert with a lifetime’s experience. Certain other

industries, meat, for instance would never had chosen to reveal the process prior to consumption.

The Tobacco Farmer (e.g. fig 4:07) embodies national craft and heritage. The visual emphasis on

the single growing leaf itself distracts from the immensity of cigarette production and by implication, the

associated anxieties of consumption. Advertising that employs images of Tobacco itself presents a slow

and deliberate sequence involving contemplation and judgement. The human element (usually male) is

4:05

n Fig 4:13 Detail, Marlboro advertisement, SEP, February 1957

n Fig 4:12 Elliot Erwitt, Photographic Portfolio, “The Luckiest Boy”, Pageant Magazine, April 1957

n Fig 4:10 Cartoon by Barney Tobey, The New Yorker, The New Yorker 1955-1965 Album, Hamish Hamilton, N.Y, 1965.

“Oh, I beg your pardon! I thought you were extinct.”

shown as skillful, thoughtful and when contrasted with fast, unthinking automatic machinery stresses

that the human hand fashioned the product.

From 1940-48 Lucky Strike commissioned a group of American popular artists to paint images

of tobacco farming and ran them in their advertisements. The paintings were run horizontally on the

page as if for the consumer to cut out and frame, or mimicking the canvas on the gallery wall.

(See fig 4:07) The painting was apparently painted from life on a Carolina farm by Peter Hurd, (later to

be commissioned to paint the official portrait of President Johnson). The series often featured farmers

examining cured tobacco leaves. The tobacco shown is usually Burley tobacco known for its golden

leaves and widely used in the U.S. cigarette production. The alchemist farmer with inherited skills flaunts

these large golden leaves making the cigarette all the more special. The style of Hurd’s art, a rural

realism, is typically non-threatening and easily understandable by the consumer.11

These readily understandable ‘traditional’ images emphasised the hand-made quality of the cigarette

even though the mass-production of cigarettes was by this date well established. Images of rows of

machines, (e.g. like Wrigley’s advertisements during World War II), would have perhaps been more

realistic but not exactly a visual strategy of reassurance for the consumer concerned about using the

product.

During the Second World War an image of an idyllic homeland could not help but reinforce

national identity. The Carolinas are quiet and peaceful - the smoke from the cabin outside shows that it’s

not even windy outside. Husband and wife (or older daughter) work silently together checking and

packing the leaves. The gold is reflected in the farmer’s face. Even the brand name Lucky Strike (also Old

Gold) harks back to the Klondike and the riches of the land. The strategy of showing people associated

with tobacco farming continued well into the late ’fifties but the images after 1955 were predominantly

photographic, intending to show the consumer ‘real’ people rather than their idealisation. Chesterfield

frequently ran advertisements (fig 4:08) containing small inserts of Tobacco Farmers testimonials. Insets

of tobacco farmers included photographs, detailed captions were regularly included with a printed

signature, as if the farmer had signed his name to verify the product. Appearing as an inset, the Farmer

‘Sam McLawhorn’ is shown, cigarette in hand, the tobacco plantation behind. “I’ve smoked Chesterfields

steady for 30 years. They’re MILDER and they’re made of the best tobacco because Chesterfield buys the

highest quality, mild, ripe leaf.”

Cowboys & Indians

Native Americans (or ‘Red Indians’, in the terminology of the 1950’s) are allocated a generous visual

proportion of selling imagery. It was indeed the native population of the continent that introduced

tobacco to British and Dutch Immigrants. (It is said that Captain John Smith was more than interested in

4:06

Pocohontas’ skill as tobacco farmer). Rather than show a vintage photograph, or scenes from a

reservation, Native Americans were shown in a romantised form. The Santa Fe Railroad regularly showed

a proud warrior with feathered head dress smiling benignly over the streamlined engine thundering

through the desert. In the tobacco advertisements there was an even safer solution, further removed

from racial tension and economic neglect - the Cigar Store Indian. A skill in producing and consuming

tobacco is then coded into the life-sized carved wooden figurine of a ‘Red Indian Chief’ standing outside

a tobacconist’s shop. Cigar Store Indians helped remove the associations of the product to the

anaesthetised nostalgia of traditional America, synonymous with small towns and root beer. The Cigar

Store indian stood for an earlier mode of advertising with a single art object rather than a mass media

campaign.

Old Gold cigarettes exploited these associations in an ingenious way as part of their battle with

the Health Lobby during the ’fifties. Fig 4:09 shows a ‘Medicine Man’; A traditional Native American

healer often referred to as a charlatan by ‘sophisticated’ Americans during the ’fifties. The Old Gold strap

line from this full page advertisement from 1950 is, “No medical war whoops from Old Gold... We’re

Tobacco Men not Medicine Men !” Another Old Gold advertisement also from 1950 shows a Cigar Store

Indian with the lame strap line, “No heap big medicine talk... Old Gold cures just one thing: The World’s

Best Tobacco”. Old Gold’s Medicine Men survived until 1955 when replaced by female glamour. During

the height of Old Gold’s puns the advertisements featured dogs, cats, cigarette packets with legs,

pumpkins, rabbits, fish, fishing bait, flowers and budgies. It was the most profitable brand for Lorillard,

the fifth largest selling brand in 1953 in the U.S. By 1960, it had declined steadily, holding less than one

half of a percent of the ‘regular’ market. By the early ’sixties Old Gold had been supplanted by Filter-Tip

brands.12

The status of the ‘Red Indian’ (fig 4:10) as perceived as both good and bad made him a risky

choice as a brand personifier.13

The cowboy however was a much safer and flexible personifier.

The Cowboy - Marlboro Man

Marlboro was re-launched by Philip Morris in 1925 having been unsuccessfully introduced in 1902 as a

woman’s cigarette, “Mild as May”. The new Marlboro sold about 400 million cigarettes in its first two

years, the novelty of a new brand started to lag until the re-design of the product with an added ivory

tip. Since the brand was primarily intended for women a ‘Beauty Tip’ was also available, coloured red so

as not to show lipstick stains. By 1936 Marlboro was selling over 500 million cigarettes a year, still

targeted at women and in 1951 speaking directly to first-time mothers. An image of a baby was displayed

asking “Just one question, Mom...can you afford not to smoke Marlboro?” Suggesting that smoking

helped with the daily pressures of bringing up a baby.

4:07

The waning popularity of the brand in the early 1950’s prompted another major change in

Marlboro’s image. Philip Morris commissioned Leo Burnett Company of Chicago, to supervise re-

branding Marlboro in 1955 as a brand for the male consumer. In copy and imagery the advertisements

created a context of male toughness and individuality as epitomised by the image of the cowboy, or to

be more precise, the Ranch Hand, the Cattle Driver or whatever was most associated with machismo.

Joseph Cullman, president of Philip Morris explained, "We felt that West of the Alleghanies we could

secure a better understanding and feel of grass-roots America and what it wanted in a cigarette”.14

The

brand re-appeared with the cowboy figure and other men with tattooed hands. Marlboro’s

transformation was aided by the introduction of the novel flip-top box and widely imitated. The visual

association with cowboys has made Marlboro advertising one of the most visibly recognisable brands. It

is despite health campaigns, a recognised definition of masculinity.

Fig 4:11 (1956) presents the instantly recognisable conjunction of stetson and denim shirt. The

use of monochrome was unusual at this time especially when space was so expensive in the popular

magazines. The use of colour is reserved for the packet itself with its geometric ‘V’ reproduced in red. It

was as if the protagonist was so real and down-to-earth that black and white, the conventions of

newsprint and documentary photography, was the appropriate visual vehicle, as if a richness of colour

might suggest self-indulgence and pampered celebrities. Marlboro was by no means limited to cowboys;

the tough manly feel was personified by fisherman, gardeners, wrestlers and golfers.

The Armed Forces were also featured in Marlboro advertisements from 1955 to 1962,

recognisable by the tattoo on the back of the right or left hand.

Marlboro despite its recourse to the rugged individuality of the male smoker, could not, and did

not ignore the filter revolution. Yet in the definitive Malboro filter advertisements, the selling strategy

seemed to ignore the presence of the Filter-Tip. A filter’s purpose, after all, was to filter out the smoke.

Marlboro was a Filter-Tip cigarette but the selling strategy implied that it wasn’t, suggesting that

consumers expected filtered cigarettes to be tasteless. Filter-Tip cigarettes were indeed made with

cheaper, stronger grades of leaf to allow stronger flavours through the filtration system to the smoker.

Surrounded by rising health concerns the consumer was under pressure to either cut down smoking or

switch to a less harmful (filtered) brand. Marlboro could appeal to the smoker who was anxious enough

to choose a filter but wanted to still seem carefree and strong. Filter-Tips seemed somehow a choice for

the nervous, weak or effeminate. Marlboro suggests it is “...easy to change to a filter cigarette” because

of the “man-size flavor”. If the filter seemed normal for the rugged cowboy then it was fine for the

consumer with less machismo.

The visual strategies used by Marlboro in the 1950’s provided two distinct advantages for

selling. Firstly the fantasy of the cowboy appealed to the urban smoker, the largest section of consumers,

with the depiction of hard physical labour combined with moments of relaxation - the product as a

4:08

reward for labour. The image of the cowboy did not prevent him from being seen as his own boss,

wandering through a wide open landscape with unpolluted air. The American cowboy was also

recognised outside the domestic market and had become, through TV and feature films a Global Icon.

On a more dangerous level the cowboy also appealed to the juvenile market15

(fig 4:12).

Cowboys were able to offer a clear role model for a new generation of smokers. It is interesting to note,

as cigarette manufacturers expand into world markets, the dominant advertising images are of those

cowboys and woodland landscapes.

The Marlboro Man appeared in 1957 under the slogan “The Marlboro Man speaks for himself”

(fig 4:13) a double-page advertisement that showed seven images of the Marlboro Man going about his

daily routine. Image one sets the scene with the Marlboro Man on horseback saying, “I’m a rancher.

Grew up in this part of the country...” He has a plain-speaking, matter-of-fact tone “No huffin’ or puffin’

with this one.” The Marlboro Man explained filters and reassured women "the cigarette made for men

that women like". By the sixties the Marlboro Man was such a familiar concept that he ceased needing

a monologue, but could appear relaxed on horseback, sufficient alone to lure the consumer to Marlboro

Country.

The urban dream of the Wild West is exploited skillfully drawing upon years of Western

histories, legends, TV and films. Images of cowboys act to remind the consumer of how heroic Alan Ladd

was in Shane16

(1953) or how exciting the Lone Ranger’s life could be could be. Wayne Maclaren the

actor playing the Marlboro Man was later to die of throat cancer but the lure of the image of the cowboy

is still more enduring than the factors of death, disease and incapacity. The advertising strategy of using

images of cowboys survived into the ’seventies and can still be seen currently in China or Malaysia where

tobacco product billboard advertising is still legal. The Marlboro campaign was so successful that only

eight months after the brand was launched sales had increased by 5,000% and, by 1975, Marlboro was

the top selling cigarette brand in the U.S. responsible for a quarter of all cigarette sales. Philip Morris

brands held 43% of the domestic market, and made $4.6 billion from tobacco sales alone.

The exact definition of the job of the ‘Cowboy’ in the American economy was in most cases

blurred, floating conveniently between the specifics of animal herding and the fictional presences of

Shane and the Lone Ranger. The solution had clear advantages over my next category where the jobs

were more clearly defined, and focussed on specific areas of the human body. If the cowboy offered a

role model that sought the consumer’s most impractical fantasies of rugged individuality in the struggle

against the forces of Nature, the personifier in a respected profession sought instead to make an appeal

to respectability and gravitas.

4:09

n Fig 4:14 Camel advertisement, SEP, June 1950

n Fig 4:15 Cartoon by Dana Fradon, The New Yorker, The New Yorker 1950-1955 Album, Harper & Brothers, N.Y, 1955.

3. The Professional; Medical Specialists and Voice SpecialistsIn Fascicle Three I identified the core anxiety experienced by the consumer as being seated in the vicinity

of the throat. The most obvious solution was to choose a personifier for the product from those

professions that earned their living, from the human throat - Medical Specialists and Opera Singers

although it is noticeable that at no time is a personifier a Fire Swallower.

People who used their voices for their careers became the focal point for many brands’

strategies. Opera singers, radio announcers, actors and telephone operators all explained which brand

they smoked and how it did not affect their throats. An alternative to this strategy was to tackle any

health concerns head-on by invoking individuals who looked after the public’s health, e.g. Camel’s

campaign “More doctors smoke Camels than any other brand of cigarette”. The medical endorsement

was an opportunity not to be overlooked, the value of a throat specialist answering imagined questions

from the consumer provided a rich seam indeed for the manufacturers’ imagery.

Voice Specialists - A Night at the Opera

When your career depends on your voice, can you be trusted to look after it? Singers’ endorsements

appear frequently in Camel’s advertisements from 1948 through to 1955, along with radio presenters

and telephonists who had tried the “30-Day Mildness Test” with attributed comments such as “When I

smoke, I have to think of my voice.”

Opera Stars appeared frequently during this period. The Metropolitan Opera of New York

providing most of the performers, hired and derived extra publicity thereby.17

Fig 4:14 dated 1951

features Nadine Connor, ‘Metropolitan Opera Star’. She is dressed in her stage costume holding a long

lit cigarette in a relaxed grip near to her mouth and an open fan in the other hand. She is smiling directly

at the viewer. The name of the star is written in large italics with a smaller line of text above

(“Metropolitan opera star”) in case the consumer isn’t familiar with the medium. Nadine Conner is

quoted as saying, “When I smoke, I have to think of my voice...” The consumer is led to believe that if

famous people are taking the ‘test’ seriously and are really willing to smoke only Camels for a month

then it’s good enough for them. Coaxing existing smokers to switch brands to Camels for a month would

increase sales, the text implying urgency by suggesting the consumer start their test ‘Today!’ written in

italics with and an exclamation mark.

The implied theatrical context is a useful one where glamour and coquettishness can be sustained with

the license of High-Art. The copy used in the advertisement is complex because it contains seven

separate tones of voice;

Voice 1. The invisible narrator speaking on behalf of the product, introducing the other celebrities and

endorsers to the consumer. This is the main tone of voice and while the featured

4:10

n Fig 4:11 Marlboro advertisement, SEP, May 1956

n Fig 4:08 Detail, Chesterfield Advertisement, SEP, July 1949

n Fig 4:09 Old Gold Advertisement, SEP, August 1950

n Fig 4:06 Detail, Camel Advertisement, SEP, May 1950

n Fig 4:07 Lucky Strike Advertisement, SEP, November 1943

personalities comment on the product the narrator interjects comments to help the

consumer remember concepts such as, “MAKE A NOTE... REMEMBER YOUR THROAT!”

The hidden narrator also makes a point of stating the job first e.g. “HOUSEWIFE Polly

Barker...”, or “VOICE COACH Roy Campbell...” Meanwhile the celebrity is given a greater

gravitas e.g. “...lovely Metropolitan star Nadine Conner has added role after role to her

operatic triumphs.” The journalistic tone of the narrator allows the easy transfer from

medical explanation to Star portrait. Four smaller endorsements supplement the main

portrait and to complete the page there is a T-Zone reference and a final appeal to the 30-Day T e s t .

This all takes place within about 16 lines of text making the flow of the copy incredibly quick with

ideas racing at the consumer.

Voice 2. Nadine Conner’s speech appears in quotation marks to suggest that was what she really said

about the product. The quote appears in a large point size and is one of the main focuses on t h e

page.

Voices 3, 4 and 5. Smaller endorsements supplement the concept of mildness by using direct quotes

from the ‘regulars’ e.g. Polly Barker “Housewife”.

Voice 6. The T-Zone character is not quoted, his copy comes from earlier Camel advertisements when

the T-Zone image was featured more prominently. This has the effect of another narrator

speaking within this advertisement.

Voice 7. The report by throat specialists, ‘Not one single case of throat irritation due to smoking

Camels!’ This does not appear in quotation marks but the implication and layout suggest it

is a quote from the featured medical report. Its tone is direct.

Singers and voice specialists that have successful careers have much to lose if their voices fail them. The

quotes and strap lines all underline the risk that smoking could damage their throats. The singer’s anxiety

about the effects of the product has led them to experiment by trying to find a milder product. As well

as the throat specialist’s report, the consumers are encouraged by the personifier to do the tests

themselves, and make their own decisions.18

The consumer’s attention is constantly drawn to the throat

with typical lines appearing in various Camel advertisements during the period, “My career depends on

my voice, and “My throat gave me the answer to the mildness test. My choice is Camels!” If the testimony

of singers, no matter how exalted the artistic station, failed to reassure, then a more direct testimony

was needed.

Medical Specialists - A Day at the Doctor’s

4:11

Since the late 1970’s most medical practitioners have been reluctant to be filmed or photographed near

a lit cigarette (with the BMA and AMA at the forefront of direct opposition to the marketed products of

the Tobacco Industry). All the more uncomfortable then is the well established visual convention of the

Medical Man cheerily, brazenly, brandishing a lit cigarette and staring out at the potential consumer.

Smoking doctors have been appearing in magazines along with Cowboys before and during the health

scares of the early ’fifties. Fig 4:15 shows the doctor as the natural successor to the Cigar Store Indian.

This cartoon reveals that doctors advertising cigarettes, was so familiar, that it could be successfully

satirised. Philip Morris were quick to realise the advertising potential of having doctors smoking their

brand rather than their competitors.

The Industry’s Own Doctors

During the ’thirties the Philip Morris research laboratories had identified that the chemical ‘acrolein’ was

being produced during cigarette combustion, and was the main factor in irritation of the lining of the

mouth and throat. The ‘acrolein’ was produced during the combustion of the hygroscopic agent

‘glycerin’ (a substance mixed with tobacco to help attract and retain moisture within the cigarette as well

as aiding combustion). The new hygroscopic agent ‘diethlene glycol’ supposedly made Philip Morris less

irritating on the lining of the mouth and throat. Philip Morris advertised the chemical change, but in the

process inadvertently drew attention to its very existence. Previous reassurances were open to

suspicion, and by implication, other companies’ brands were tainted in the public mind. Philip Morris

quickly dropped the ‘acrolein’ claims after a short period of time when the results of the experiments

became too complex to be clearly explained in a one page feature to a lay consumer.

More conventionally Philip Morris sought to influence the medical professionals more directly.

The head of the Philip Morris Research Department and its chief medical advisor, Willard F.Greenwald

regularly attended the major medical conventions during the late 1930’s. Free packets of cigarettes were

handed out to doctors while the representative stressed the addition of ‘diethylene glycol’. Between

conventions Philip Morris’ team called on doctors in small towns and again gave cigarettes away while

showing doctors charts about the effectiveness of ‘diethylene glycol’. Philip Morris also ran a subtle but

pointed series of advertising in over 40 medical journals including that of the American Medical

Association. The object of all this was not only to make doctors smoke Philip Morris and thus set an

example for impressionable patients but to implant the arguments and research findings so strongly that

doctors would actually advise patients to switch to Philip Morris on the grounds that they were less-

irritating. Any later research based on doctor’s opinions would then hopefully lead to the conclusions

that Philip Morris was a milder smoke. Philip Morris were not the only brand using medical

4:12

endorsements Chesterfield, Camel and Viceroy among others hired doctors, throat specialists, scientists

and dentists.19

There must have been a temptation among advertisers to include the reassurances any doctor

can provide in copy or statistical form. The Doctor as Personifier was such a powerful device that distinct

images regularly, even brazenly, appeared in a way that few other products dared show. Doctors and

their opinions were often mentioned in the copy but they also appeared in images. The images

represented trustworthy doctors to the consumer.

Depicting the Doctor

For much of this period the average American had a certain trust in the medical profession. But

the identification had to be clear, as certain details of dress, environment and gesture might easily create

associations of the Doctor not to be trusted, the fake, the patent medicine seller or that other icon of

American culture in the 1950’s the ‘Quack’ (see Fascicle Seven).20

What visual detail, nuance of language

is to be presented to create the appearance of the genuine article? Camel ran perhaps the most

infamous campaign using as a basis a report by throat specialists. Fig 4:16, shows a Camel advertisement

from 1946, the main slogan is,

“According to a recent nationwide survey:

MORE DOCTORS SMOKE CAMELS THAN ANY OTHER CIGARETTE”

The copy goes on to explain that 113,597 doctors in “every branch of medicine” were consulted in a

survey asking “What cigarette do you smoke, Doctor?” The research organisations are not named and

the results not displayed. What is presented here, by the advertisement’s own admission, is the “gist of

the query”. The doctor in the main image is not named and no quote is attributed to him. Like so many

other personifiers he is holding a long lit cigarette near, but not in his mouth. Lacking a theatrical context,

the doctor’s smile is less exaggerated than the opera singer’s and voice specialist’s suggesting that a

medical career is more serious and worthy. He appears to be over 50, with greying hair, implying he has

had a long medical career and has had much experience. The copy goes on to say that the consumer

should respect the doctor because he works hard. The consumer should also value the doctor because

of his bedside manner, “The doctor is a scientist, a diplomat, and a friendly sympathetic human being all

in one, no matter how long and hard his schedule.”

Camel were using the same sales strategy in 1950 but this time the focus was upon a new

report, commissioned by Camel, from throat specialists (Fig 4:17) The Throat Specialist looks very similar

to the doctor above except he is wearing glasses. They are similar ages and race, and both have grey hair

4:13

n Fig 4:16 Camel advertisement, SEP, November 1946

n Fig 4:17 Camel, advertisement SEP, January 1950

and white coats. The Throat Specialist’s tool is held like the cigarette, near but not in his mouth, although

like a cigarette it is an item intended to be placed in the mouth. The number of people in the test (2,470

examinations) is not explained, the throat specialists are not named and the criteria not made clear. The

colour inset image shows Elana O’Brian, Real Estate Broker, one of the consumers who tested the

product. She actually queries the need for a throat specialists opinion at all. “...I didn’t need my doctor’s

report to know Camels are MILD!” With the elements of the advertisement querying the need for each

other within the same page the result is that the throat specialist appears stuffy and the consumer

arrogant, not particularly likable a type of person for the consumer to identify with.

Viceroy tried a similar strategy to Camel in 1947 by turning to a variant - the Dentist (fig 4:18).

Viceroy use sheer numbers to impress consumers with “19,293 DENTISTS ADVISE Smoke VICEROYS!”

(Not as impressive as Camel’s 113,597 but bigger than Camel’s 2,470). Viceroys are promoted with

reference to the consumers’ fear of the staining of the teeth. This is an early alert to the dangers of

‘Nicotine’ and ‘Tars’. The concept of a filter able to alleviate these dangers is here clearly stated. The

insert of the dentist is again from the same visual mould as the doctor and throat specialist. The dentist

like the throat specialist also doesn’t smile unlike the grinning consumer beneath him in the design.

Chesterfield presents the consumer with an image of a laboratory based scientist instead of the

doctor but repeating the same grave expression over white coat (fig 4:19). This Chesterfield

advertisement from 1951 shows a man of unknown profession looking through a microscope while

smoking. The copy never actually refers to him or what he is doing. It alludes to their own commissioned

taste test in which, “CHESTERFIELD IS THE ONLY CIGARETTE of all brands tested in which members of our

taste panel found no unpleasant after-taste.” the “well-known research organisation” is not detailed.

The constant use of stringent medical reassurances during the ’forties and early ’fifties sought

to soothe consumer anxiety contained the hidden assumption that consumers were indeed anxious.

Consumers that weren’t particularly concerned about health risks had to view doctors and singers telling

them of anxieties they didn’t possess. This constant barrage of information about throat damage and

possible health risks seems very negative now but perhaps indicates firstly unease within the industry

and secondly the dangers of making oblique references to half-formed anxieties.

“Never before has an industry spent so much money trying to talk itself out of business. The ‘commercials’ keep reminding

us that tobacco contains tars, resins, and other bronchial abrasives. Smokers are quite obviously committing slow suicide,

but each brand claims that its own product is somewhat less lethal than other brands.” Anon, “Embattled Tobacco’s New

Strategy”, FORTUNE, 1963, p.125.

It wasn’t only the strategy that was a problem, the images of doctors and throat specialists who were

personified did not necessarily get the right reaction in the consumer.

“Maybe it’s the TV commercials. They make you hate everything they try to sell. God, they must think the public is a half-

wit.Every time some jerk in a white coat with a stethoscope hanging around his neck holds up some toothpaste or a pack

4:14

n Fig 4:18 Detail, Viceroy, advertisement SEP, June 1947

n Fig 4:19 Chesterfield, advertisement SEP, August 1951

of cigarettes or a bottle of beer or a mouthwash...I always make a note to never buy any. Hell, I wouldn’t buy the product

even if I liked it.” Raymond Chandler, The Long Good-Bye, Penguin Books, 1998 [1953], p.285.

Through government pressure and the manufacturers’ realisation that they were slowly impugning their

own products, the Tobacco Companies began to drop all health claims from their advertisements. In

1955 a regulation from the Federal Trade Commission published rules prohibiting references to the

"throat, larynx, lungs, nose, or other parts of the body" or to "digestion, energy, nerves, or doctors."

In the U.K. after The Royal College of Physicians, “Smoking and Health”, (a Report of the Royal

College of Physicians on Smoking in relation to cancer of the lung and other diseases, Pitman Medical

Publishing Co., London, 1962) all health claims had been abandoned and the dominant strategy in

cigarette advertising became ‘the pleasure of smoking’. The organisation Doctors Ought to Care (DOC)

was formed in 1977 in order to provide a focal point for physicians opposed to smoking. Medical claims

proved ultimately unsuccessful as consumers realised that neither doctors nor scientists could

necessarily be trusted. It was apparent that mistakes could be made, even by men in white coats.

Medical Man as Confidence Man ?

Fig 4:20 is an Old Gold advertisement from 1951, it shows a staged scene from a NBC TV program “The

Original Amateur Hour”. The host is standing behind a desk made out of giant Old Gold packets, there is

a Wheel of Fortune hanging on the red curtain behind him and he is about to strike a gong that stands

on his desk. The show appears similar to the ‘Gong Show’ where hapless members of the public made

their bid for fame by performing on stage in front of a TV audience and panel. The strap line of the

advertisement is; “We give the gong to cigarette cure-alls - Old Gold cures just one thing: The World’s

Best Tobacco” The pun on “cures” functions adequately, but is not persuasive. The smile of the host and

use of a pun seeks to debunk the earnest claims made by Camel, Chesterfield and Philip Morris in their

advertisements. The phrase “cure-alls” is interesting as it is a term usually associated with patent

medicines peddled by disreputable characters. The Old Gold advertisement manages to suggest that the

brands using medical endorsements resemble the patter of the Snake-Oil salesmen. The use of the

setting as the gong show suggests that the interfering Medical Man’s performance is as annoying and

incompetent as the performers who ‘get the gong’. Lorillard, makers of Old Gold were in fact the only

one of the top six tobacco companies not to use medical claims in their advertising during the ’fifties.

What other personifiers could be used to add only positive connotations to a product that was

becoming increasingly distrusted by its consumers? When a distinct and supportive personality was

required, and the human being such as the Regular Joe/Jane, the Star, the Cowboy & Indian, the Doctor

and Singer exuded unwanted, even uncontrollable associations, it was possible to assemble all the

4:15

n Fig 4:20 Old Gold, advertisement SEP, March 1951

benefits of personification by adopting animal forms, still without resorting to the solution of the brand

character.

4. The Absurd; Animals and Imaginary People

When the presence of a personality was required, and the selection of a human being might be a hostage

to fortune, the advertiser could reach for an animal. Dogs, cats, rabbits and penguins have all appeared

in the cause of selling. Associating animal characteristics with products is still heavily used today with big

cats for power and speed, dogs and for loyalty and obedience, cats for intelligence and independence,

horses for endurance and elephants for memory. Advertisements featuring animals are prone to the well

worn and over-used cliché. The multi-page montage “American Bazaar”, (1947) by Will Burtin21

makes a

wry comment on heavily used advertising clichés. He includes the use of babies to promote products,

beautiful women and, as seen in the spread (Fig 4:21) “Animals are Identifiers”.

Although many marketing devices have changed since 1947, the use of animal identifiers is not

one of them, the Andrex puppy, the Frosties tiger, the Lychos dog, the Bacardi cat and the Budweiser

frogs still assist in making products recognisable. Animals have been used as central figures in cigarette

advertisements as well as appearing occasionally as cigarette brand characters (e.g. Joe Camel or Black

Cat).

Animal personifiers can bring the qualities and charm of the animal itself to the product. Any

animal can provide a wide range of associations, and even provide mythological overtones and we doubt

that their presence has been achieved with monetry payment. They are present in their innocent way to

disarm us in ways impossible for other agents of personification.

Absurd Animals - Old Gold and Old Yeller

Old Gold continued the strategy of making weak puns within images that explained the joke. They

continued targeting medical claims insinuating that the claims were somehow a sham or a distraction

from the real issue - the taste of the cigarette. Animals were often used to draw the consumers attention

to the page in the hope that the brand would benefit from the positive animal associations. Fig 4:22 is

an Old Gold advertisement from August 1954. The bloodhound is talking to the consumer, “I’ve been

patient up to now, boss, but isn’t it time you turned to Old Gold...a name you can trust!” If as a

consumer, celebrities, cowboys, singers or tobacco farmers can not tempt you to switch to their brands

maybe a talking dog will be more persuasive.

4:16

n Fig 4:21 Will Burtin, “American Bazaar” feature, FOR, November 1947

n Fig 4:22 Old Gold, advertisement SEP, August 1954

4:17

The bloodhound stares out at the reader, providing a mournful and chiding sentiment that could

not have easily been attached to an equivalent human face. But, the reality that dogs can’t talk makes it

apparent who the advice is really coming from - Lorrilard. The absurdity of this proposition, and the

implicit assumption that the consuming public can be deceived or at least distracted by its capacity for

infinite sentiment is something explored in my multiple Surely Not. It includes animal endorsements, a

smoking beagle and budgies that respond to the smell of cigarette smoke, along with reassurance from

talking cigarette packets with legs. It is an inherent paradox that the animals who cheerfully fronted the

tobacco product, were the same creatures upon which the product was tested. Talking dogs however

was only one of the strategies to reassure using the picture of an animal. Twenty years before dogs

started telling smokers what to do, KOOL penguins were lighting-up for our entertainment but without

any unwanted associations of the Laboratory. (See Appendix 4:1 The KOOL Penguin).

In my conclusion I shall refer to the suggestibility of the consuming public who genuinely sought

information about a product, and yet seemed satisfied with fictitious or visual indulgences. When a sugar

cube on legs can generate sympathy for a Sugar Industry faced with nationalisation by the British post

war government, it is not unfair to speculate what impact was made on the public imagination by images

of penguins smoking cigarettes. Faced with the mounting evidence of danger of the product to

consumer’s health, what does it say about our culture, and the means of persuasion it uses that the

KOOL campaign to sell a ‘mildly mentholated’ cigarette was sustained by images of the product clamped

in a long sharp penguin beak?22

It’ll Be a Blue Christmas Without You

For one moment on the Sales Calendar the choice of personifier was almost automatic, not a Movie Star

susceptible to scandal, not a doctor prey to financial inducement or the family pet, but a positive image

of unfettered consumption and gift-giving on a heroic scale. This option is a personifier possessed of a

dramatic range of association with products, caught in a permanent state of jollity, who has no agent nor

costly infrastructure. So what is the image of the jolliest, cheapest, safest personifier whose help you can

enlist to generate positive association with your product? Father Christmas, Santa Claus, Saint Nicholas

provides the supreme visual solution. This instantly recognisable character who needs no caption name

is probably the most heavily used of all personifiers. Equally at home with any product or brand, Santa

Claus stands for generosity and goodwill to all. He will endorse anything and say exactly what the

manufacturers want him to, and with delight. Santa Claus will endorse any product speaking in favour

n Fig 4:23 Chesterfield, advertisement SEP, December 1955

n Fig 4:24 Detail, Old Gold, advertisement SEP, December 1952

4:18

of, pens, guns, food, clothes, cars, bowling balls, kitchen appliances and cigarettes, all with equal

sincerity.23

Santa Claus features in these two advertisements, for Old Gold (fig 4:24), and for Chesterfield

(fig 4:23), both from December 1952. He is illustrated in art work in both, rather than a photograph. (

‘Santa Claus’ training courses had only started five years earlier in 1947). Like an animal or brand

character, the figure of Santa Claus realised in art work will look and say what the client wants him to.

The Santa Claus images in these two advertisements can be recognised by the familiar red hat and coat

with white fur trim. The thick wavy white beard, eyebrows and sideburns cover the majority of the face.

The skin has a rosy glow with shiny cheeks, as if Santa has been sitting too near a roaring fire. He has his

mouth open in both images suggesting he is ‘ho ho ho-ing’. He wears gloves and a thick coat. Santa

seems to prefer Chesterfields rather than Old Gold which are being delivered not opened. Santa Claus is

allowed to stare back at the consumer viewer, but unlike Doctors or Singers, with an exaggerated

expression that responds to the anticipated smile of the consumer.

Santa Claus is an image popular with children and Santa’s delight at smoking Chesterfields, or

delivering puppies and cartons of Old Gold seems intended to appeal to a younger market. The main

drawback with using images of popular fictional characters is they can be used by any brand, making

Santa appear as the desperate celebrity who will endorse any product as long as they’re paid. The

advertisements, when seen together also suggest that the brands taste the same, since Santa doesn’t

seem to mind which one he smokes. Trusting a fictional character does not come naturally to a consumer

aware that the fictional character is obviously a puppet of the manufacturer. With endorsements from

‘real’ people there should be the belief, however misguided, that the personifier is independent and

speaking truthfully. In visual terms the portly figure can be seen as defying impulses to control rates of

consumption, a convenient excuse for eating, drinking and smoking during the festive season. Perhaps

he defies smoke anyway by descending through the chimney. He is seen as representing the

bacchanalian impulse to be regretted by the New Year, by which time the

cigarette advertisements were urging calm and relaxation after the orgy of consumption - with a quiet

cigarette.

After the Endorsers ?

These distracting images of personifiers as offered by the Advertising Industry in the ’fifties and ’sixties

proved difficult to control and impossible to rely on year after year. Misunderstandings and counter

attacks by other brands made putting a ‘face’ to a brand unreliable in terms of success. In the next two

Fascicles I will explore the way that the Advertising Industry used visual strategies that extended the

repertoire of reassurance beyond the personifier, be it a Doctor, Penguin or dancing legs. (Fig. 4:25)

In the 1960’s the health issues raised about the product, the aggregating impact of

governmental and quasi-governmental reports were such that the range of visual devices available with

corresponding copy and marketing innovations were not considered sufficient to meet the challenges. In

a period where many Americans were challenging the orthodoxies of their culture, the urgings of the

‘Quack’ and the Penguin were laughably inadequate.24

The developing cigarette market demanded a root and branch re-structuring of the product itself. The

Tobacco Industry provided two major technical developments to reassure consumer doubts about

safety, the Mentholated cigarette and the Filter-Tip.

1 The Menthol Cigarette “Fascicle Five: Nature as Reassurance”

2 The Filter-Tip Cigarette “Fascicle Six: Technology as Reassurance”

4:19

Fig 4:25 Old Gold, advertisement SEP, July 1951

Endnotes to Fascicle Four

1

For Trademarks and Brand Logos from the period, see Eric Baker and Tyler Blik, Trademarks of the ‘40s & ‘50s, Chronicle Books,

San Francisco 1988. For Trademarks designed as characters, see, John Mendenhall, Character Trademarks, Chronicle Books, San

Francisco, 1991.

2

See H.H.Wilson, "Techniques of Pressure - Anti-Nationalisation Propaganda in Britain", Public Opinion Quarterly Summer 1951,

U.K. The public face of the Company's anti-nationalisation campaign, was headed by a cartoon character called Mr Cube. (Drawn

by artist, Bobby St. John Cooper, see below) Mr.Cube was to become a household name. He appeared on sugar packaging, in the

media and even travelled the country with the Speakers Team, formed of Tate & Lyle employees, who presented the Company's

case wherever they could get an audience. Lord Lyle later told the stockholders of Tate & Lyle "it is fair to claim that that we have,

with the help of Mr.Cube, won the first round" against the Government.

3

For a fuller account of the failure of the Strand cigarette brand,

see Nigel Rees, Slogans, Allen & Unwin, London, 1982.

4

For examples of the cliché of the ‘Evil Mastermind’ see the films, Dr.No, Dir. Terence Young, 1962, 5,000 Fingers of Dr.T (The),

Dir.Roy Rowland, 1953, Forbidden Planet, Dir. Fred McLeod, 1956, Goldfinger, Dir. Guy Hamilton, 1964 and The Wizard of Oz,

Dir.Victor Flemming, 1939.

5

The following examples are popular feature films that are based around the cliché of the ‘Hick Psycho’ in America;

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (The), Dir.Tobe Hooper, 1974; Hills Have Eyes (The), Dir.Wes Craven, 1978; Southern Comfort,

Dir. Walter Hill, 1981 and Deliverance, Dir. John Boorman, 1972.

6

For an excellent account of the aura of celebrity in relation to film, see Walter Benjamin, "The work of Art in the age of

mechanical reproduction", Illuminations, Fontana, 1973 [Zeitschift für sozialforschung, V.1, 1936]. Chapters VIII - p.230; IX -

p.231 and X - p.232-234 are particularly relevent in this context.

For more detailed studies on the cult of celebrity see;

Leo Braudy, The Frenzy of Renown : Fame & Its History, Vintage, London, 1997.

Richard Dyer and Paul McDonald, Stars, British Film Institute, London, 1998.

Joshua Gamson, Claims to Fame : Celebrity in Contemporary America, University of California Press, CA, 1994.

7

See Jane Russell, An Autobiography, Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1986.

8

E.g. The cartoonist Al Capp appeared for Chesterfield during the ’fifties until his outspoken criticism of McCarthyism became an

embarrassment to the company. For more on Al Capp and his best known creation Li’l Abner see: www.cartoon.org/

F4:01

9

For a ‘rags to riches’ account of an ‘ordinary’ American citizen who grows up to become the President, see William M. Thayer,

From Log Cabin To White House, James H.Earle, Boston, 1881.

10

Some ‘traditional’ events e.g. ‘The Ploughman’s Lunch’ far from being an expression of heritage were invented by marketing

executives. In this case, to promote the consumption of cheese in public houses in the U.K., see Richard Ayre’s film of the same

name of 1983.

11

Peter Hurd was associated with the landscapes and industries of Texas, wide open spaces and honest folk, for more examples of

his work see, Paul Hogan, Peter Hurd, Amon Carter Museum, Fort Worth, 1965.

12

See Anon, “Embattled Tobacco’s New Strategy”, FORTUNE, January 1963, p.100ff.

13

Native Americans were often portrayed in film and literature as either noble mystics, tourist attractions or violent and aggressive.

Chief Tenderfoot, better known as ‘Tonto’ played both good and bad characters in movies although he appears here (below),

playing a villain in the “Rogues Gallery”, from, F. Maurice Speed, The Western Film Annual, Macdonald & Co., London, 1953, p.40.

14

See Martin Mayer, Madison Avenue U.S.A., The Bodley Head, London, 1958,

quoting Joseph Cullman, President of Philip Morris.

15

Elliot Erwitt (photographic portfolio), “Luckiest Boy”, Pageant, April 1957, Vol.12, No.10., pp.17-21, Hillman Periodicals, Chicago.

The article examined what life consisted of for a boy aged 11 growing up on a farm. The short narrative, purportedly in the words

of the featured 11 year old, ends with the affirmation “It is really much fun on the ranch and I would not trade my life for anything”.

16 Alan Ladd appeared in advertisements for Chesterfield during 1950, as did John Wayne and Gary Cooper.

17

Camels featured many ‘voice specialists’ including: Opera stars - Patrice Munsel, Rise Stevens, Nadine Conner, Robert Merrill.

Popular singers - Lisa Kirk, Dick Haynes, Martha Tilton, lanny Ross, Nanette Fabray, Vaughn Monroe. Screen and Radio - Robert

Young, Bill Stern.

18

This is in the old American tradition of the vendor of patent medicines, the diagnosing and curing of your own conditions rather

than seeking expensive medical advice. Taking advantage of this D.I.Y attitude ‘Quacks’ were common in the U.S. during this period.

It was pointed out by the American Medical Association, that one of the main reasons so many cancer quacks remain in business

is that many of their victims, the chief witnesses, die before the case can be brought to trial, as is also the case with much tobacco

company litigation.The absurdity of many of these advertising claims qualify Camel for inclusion in studies of fraudulent behaviour,

For a good example of such a medical charlatan, see the case of ‘Doctor’ Norman Baker in Carl Sifakis, Hoaxes and Scams, A

Compendium of Deceptions, Ruses and Swindles, Michael O’Mara Books Limited, London, 1994,

F4:02

“Cancer Cures Cons”.

19

For a good source of images of early medical apparatus and pharmaceutical packaging see, Ann Novotny/Carter Smith (editors),

Introduction by William D.Sharpe, MD., Images of Healing; A Portfolio of American Medical & Pharmaceutical Practice in the

18th, 19th & early 20th Centuries, Macmillian Publishing, New York, Collier Macmillan, London, 1980.

For an excellent and fully illustrated history of medicine including, ‘Medicine Men’ and ‘Witch Doctors’ see, Dr. Earle Hackett

(editor), Devils, Drugs and Doctors: A Wellcome History of Medicine, Museum of Victoria, Wellcome Trust, International Cultural

Corporation of Australia, 1986.

20

American history is full of characters of confidence men. Perhaps the most well-known is P.T.Barnam, for an excellent account of

his life and strategies see his autobiography , P.T. Barnum, Struggles and Triumphs, Penguin Books, New York, 1981, [1855].

For a detailed account into the techniques of the confidence man see, Walter B. Gibson, The Bunco Book, Citadel Press, New

Jersey, 1986 [1948]. For a more satirical and darker version of the role of the confidence man in American society during the 1850’s

see Herman Melville’s powerful novel, The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade, Oxford University Press, U.K. 1984 [1857] of

particular relevance here, is the suspicious ‘Herb Doctor’, pages 110-116. For a general alphabetical survey of confidence men and

their scams see, Carl Sifakis, Hoaxes & Scams, A Compendium of Deceptions, Ruses and Swindles, Michael O’Mara Books, London,

1994. Perhaps one of the most useful and interesting accounts of the figure of the confidence man in American history, from the

Pilgrim Fathers through to the depression, is Zeese Papanikolas, Trickster in the Land of Dreams, University of Nebraska Press,

Lincoln and London, 1995.

21

This visually daring spread (over 13 pages) is a largely unknown montage by the distinguished Swiss modernist Will Burtin bringing

a European perspective to marketing solutions while working as an Art Director for FORTUNE.

See “American Bazaar” feature, FORTUNE, November 1947 pp.108-121.

22

Mr.Kool the penguin, in 1958, changed into the more informal, ‘Willy’ and then later gained a female partner ‘Milly’.

For more detail about the KOOL penguin see Appendix 4:1 The KOOL Penguin.

23

In the December 1946 edition of Esquire Magazine, Santa Claus appeared on behalf of 26 different products, all with equal

enthusiasm. For an account of the commercialism of Christmas in America, See William B.Waits, The Modern Christmas in America

- A Cultural History of Gift Giving. The American Social Experience, New York University Press, 1993. Of particular relevance here

is chapter 12, “Riches and Uncertainty: Superabundance and Retailers’ Anxieties since 1940”, p.191ff.

24

By the mid ’seventies Andy Warhol was asking what groups of people were to have portraits painted, and observed that show

business was a tainted sector and that the public trusted and were more interested in athletes and sports personalities.

See Frayda Feldman (Editor), Andy Warhol Prints:A Catalogue Raisonne 1962-1987, Distributed Art Publishers, New York, 1997.

See Mark Francis, Dieter Koepplin, Andy Warhol and Offentliche Kunstsammlu, Andy Warhol : Drawings 1942-1987, Bulfinch Press,

New York, 1999.

F4:03

The Safe Cigarette


Volume Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


the safe cigarette: four

Documents