Christine Rosen's Article: The Impact Of The Traditional Image

Juan Basualdo

Professor McGuire

English Composition 101:02

22 October 2014

The Impact of the Traditional Image In modern day society images play a fundamental role in how people communicate with one another. Images are mass-produced and distributed for all of society to enjoy. Do these images impact society in a positive way? In Christine Rosen’s article “The Image Culture” she argues that images impact society in a negative way. Rosen argues that the mass production of images unconsciously impacts society; people view these images without knowing the negative impacts they have. Kay Hymowitz the author of “Scenes from the Exhibitionists” shares a supporting argument; she discusses how women are exposed far too often because of these mass-produced

In Rosen’s article she emphasizes how mass-produced images are playing a negative role in society; Hymowitz supports this by showing that these images lead to the overexposure of women. Hymowitz discusses how Britney Spears “revealed her waxed nether-regions” (Hymowitz 234), and how there were so many cameras there to capture the moment. Within hours the images of Britney were flooding the internet and were all over social media. Hymowitz argues that images like Britney’s are exploiting women and promoting negative gender roles by displayng women as sexual objects. The mass production of these promiscuous images are used to please society, all the celebrities that Hymowitz mentions are forced to conform to society and as a result are seen as sexual objects. Hymowitz’s argument emphasizes society will mass-produce these images while unconsciously promoting the sexualization of women. Hymowitz is warning women that if they continue to overexpose themselves with these images, then people will never respect them for who they are. Rosen would

In her article Rosen discusses how anybody with a camera and photoshop has power in today’s society. Rosen goes on to say “the power of the image has been diluted” (355); what Rosen means is that the technologies to alter an image are so inexpensive that anyone can do it. Images have become oversimplified, anyone with a camera and editing software can produce an image and upload it anywhere or even broadcast it on television. Hymowitz would support Rosen’s argument by saying how these images that people produce destroy both a woman’s privacy and self-identity. Furthermore Hymowitz would talk about how altered images make women disposable. The media can alter these images to get a headline then just dispose of the image without realizing the damage they have caused. Hymowitz also discusses how the media obtains “details that only their Brazilian waxers should know” (Hymowitz 235); the media then puts this in magazines and even on television. Hymowitz argues that it’s overexposure like this that ruins privacy for women. Rosen would support this argument by saying that the reason women are overexposed is because anyone can produce these images and put then anywhere they please. Hymowitz would emphasize that the average member of society has the power to ruin a woman’s