Read Online Make Art Make Money: Lessons From Jim Henson on Fueling Your Creative Career by Elizabeth Hyde Stevens - Free Book Online Page A
Authors: Elizabeth Hyde Stevens
Ads: Link
do the advertisers. The message underlying all these
skits is that advertising is not a very helpful profession.
How did Henson get away with insulting his
client, Wilson’s Meats, and his partner, the Campbell Mithun ad firm? In these
films, he showed them their worst selves—money-hungry, thoughtless to their
customers, trying every stupid method of brainwashing there is. And yet, Wilson’s
Meats liked this film. They must have, because they contracted Henson to
do a second round of commercials and another presentation film. In order for
Henson to get more work out of them, he showed them just how recklessly he was
spending their money—on silly skits and pranks. It’s a pretty crazy strategy, actually. But it worked. Why?
Perhaps there is something, as Falk suggested,
about puppets that makes it okay. Kermit, Henson once said, “can say things I hold back.” [41] If a puppet insults you,
you might be hurt, but you likely feel foolish for being angry at a puppet.
Puppets are play things, so the insult is perhaps a play-insult. Perhaps it is
all part of a game. Even so, the puppet has got your attention—has got you to
engage with it. And for some reason, when working with puppets, negative
emotions seem to be converted into play—into laughter.
Henson’s strategy seemed to imply that people
value laughter more than basically anything else—more, we see here, than their
own pride. As a pitch reel, the film has done its job. The Wilson’s Meats
parody shows the client that Muppets can produce laughs. It shows them by
making the client laugh. If Henson can make the client laugh, they know
he can make their audiences laugh. Even as the presentation parodies the very
idea of advertising, it is literally a demonstration of Henson’s skill with
engaging the viewer.
Henson’s parody also worked in television ads.
The over-the-top violent Wilkins coffee spots mock the very notion that ads can
compel loyalty. A cowboy puppet shoots a prop gun at the character who doesn’t
drink Wilkins, then turns the gun on the viewer and says, “Now what do you think of Wilkins coffee?” [42] What exactly goes through a viewer’s mind? I should buy that coffee? More
likely something like, Things I hear on TV can’t really control me. If
it is true that people become immune to violence over time, perhaps these ads—by
upping the ante to the point of ridiculousness—produce an immunity to the
message of advertisers.
Henson even used this underlying message of
skepticism in a commercial for his own line of Kermit toys in 1966. The puppet
Kermits and Rowlfs sang in unison:
Oh buy us, oh buy us, oh buy us we beg
And if you don’t buy us, we’ll bite you in the leg.
Buy us at once, we’re a bundle of charms
And if you don’t buy us, we’ll break both your arms. [43]
The ad essentially calls attention to the empty threats and
promises ads wield. There is no real power behind their persuasion. His ads
seem to teach young viewers the magic words of Labyrinth ’s protagonist,
“You have no power over me.”
The ad for these trash-talking Kermits is transparently capitalist, and because of that transparency, not really very capitalist at
all. In this way, Henson’s ads functioned more like public service spots,
alerting the viewer to the motives and tricks of Madison Avenue. It was
education, teaching anti-ad-literacy.
Henson occupied a
complex position in the 1960s—one of being a successful advertiser while at the
same time a very skeptical critic of the industry. We can see why Henson
would give up ads in 1969, and yet, ironically, ads led him to the nonprofit
stage of his career, Sesame Street .
AD VS. ART
AD AS ART
It is easy to see how the Esskay promos attracted the
attention of Chicago ad agencies. If Henson could get laughs for Esskay, why
not get Henson to do it for them? The same thing happened when the creators of Sesame
Street saw Henson’s ads. They realized that if he could make bathroom
tissue
skits is that advertising is not a very helpful profession.
How did Henson get away with insulting his
client, Wilson’s Meats, and his partner, the Campbell Mithun ad firm? In these
films, he showed them their worst selves—money-hungry, thoughtless to their
customers, trying every stupid method of brainwashing there is. And yet, Wilson’s
Meats liked this film. They must have, because they contracted Henson to
do a second round of commercials and another presentation film. In order for
Henson to get more work out of them, he showed them just how recklessly he was
spending their money—on silly skits and pranks. It’s a pretty crazy strategy, actually. But it worked. Why?
Perhaps there is something, as Falk suggested,
about puppets that makes it okay. Kermit, Henson once said, “can say things I hold back.” [41] If a puppet insults you,
you might be hurt, but you likely feel foolish for being angry at a puppet.
Puppets are play things, so the insult is perhaps a play-insult. Perhaps it is
all part of a game. Even so, the puppet has got your attention—has got you to
engage with it. And for some reason, when working with puppets, negative
emotions seem to be converted into play—into laughter.
Henson’s strategy seemed to imply that people
value laughter more than basically anything else—more, we see here, than their
own pride. As a pitch reel, the film has done its job. The Wilson’s Meats
parody shows the client that Muppets can produce laughs. It shows them by
making the client laugh. If Henson can make the client laugh, they know
he can make their audiences laugh. Even as the presentation parodies the very
idea of advertising, it is literally a demonstration of Henson’s skill with
engaging the viewer.
Henson’s parody also worked in television ads.
The over-the-top violent Wilkins coffee spots mock the very notion that ads can
compel loyalty. A cowboy puppet shoots a prop gun at the character who doesn’t
drink Wilkins, then turns the gun on the viewer and says, “Now what do you think of Wilkins coffee?” [42] What exactly goes through a viewer’s mind? I should buy that coffee? More
likely something like, Things I hear on TV can’t really control me. If
it is true that people become immune to violence over time, perhaps these ads—by
upping the ante to the point of ridiculousness—produce an immunity to the
message of advertisers.
Henson even used this underlying message of
skepticism in a commercial for his own line of Kermit toys in 1966. The puppet
Kermits and Rowlfs sang in unison:
Oh buy us, oh buy us, oh buy us we beg
And if you don’t buy us, we’ll bite you in the leg.
Buy us at once, we’re a bundle of charms
And if you don’t buy us, we’ll break both your arms. [43]
The ad essentially calls attention to the empty threats and
promises ads wield. There is no real power behind their persuasion. His ads
seem to teach young viewers the magic words of Labyrinth ’s protagonist,
“You have no power over me.”
The ad for these trash-talking Kermits is transparently capitalist, and because of that transparency, not really very capitalist at
all. In this way, Henson’s ads functioned more like public service spots,
alerting the viewer to the motives and tricks of Madison Avenue. It was
education, teaching anti-ad-literacy.
Henson occupied a
complex position in the 1960s—one of being a successful advertiser while at the
same time a very skeptical critic of the industry. We can see why Henson
would give up ads in 1969, and yet, ironically, ads led him to the nonprofit
stage of his career, Sesame Street .
AD VS. ART
AD AS ART
It is easy to see how the Esskay promos attracted the
attention of Chicago ad agencies. If Henson could get laughs for Esskay, why
not get Henson to do it for them? The same thing happened when the creators of Sesame
Street saw Henson’s ads. They realized that if he could make bathroom
tissue
Similar Books
