This Max Factor ad is consistent within gender based expectations and stereotypes of women in the 1950s. Although the main character is identified as “today’s busy, fashionable woman” the examples of people that she interacts with suggest she is a housewife, the kind of housewife who can afford to get out of the house and see people (as opposed to having to stay home and clean/cook/take care of children). As some of her interactions are with “servers”, this brings up the issue of class and places these people are “below” her. Her wealth is also symbolized by her jewellery. The purpose of this make-up advertisement is to sell the American Dream, it sets the standards of beauty and insinuates that if you wear the same make up, then perhaps you too can become the wife of a rich man (the highest possible status for a woman according to this patriarchal, capitalist system).
Cocktail Hour 
I find it particularly interesting that the ad would celebrate a “pan-cake” complexion, especially in the context of race and racism in 1950s America. The ad not only points to the ubiquitous policing of women’s appearance and the effective mystification of women by these ridiculous dictates of constant aesthetic flawlessness, but it highlights the fact that whiteness was (and arguably sitll is) held as the standard of beauty and that any woman who was (is) not white couldn’t (can’t) be considered beautiful, the fact that this product only comes in one shade –pancake– is indicative of that exclusion.
LikeLike
Yes thank you! I really wish I had had the space to touch on this too, but you said it so well, it may come in twelve true colour shades but we can only imagine that most of these shades would just be variations of white unfortunately. She may meet over twelve people a day but none of those people are people of colour, which also brings up how issues of racism and classism intersect, especially with beauty standards. I also thought it was really interesting that it was called “pan-cake” as this cute, witty, pun humour has carried on today with make-up companies like Benefit, the balm, and soap and glory. I think Max Factor has since parted ways with this cutesy-ness, thought I am not entirely sure if that is true. Thanks for commenting 🙂
LikeLike
Each time I see this advertisement, I can’t help but ask: Why 12? This number seems random, yet it gives the advertisement a nearly scientific tone, helping it seem legitimate. As the 1950s were a decade that increasingly valued efficiency, a value that would have spread to practices of self-presentation, the scientific tone given by the specific number “12” makes the product credible to the house-wife who wishes to live with 50s efficiency.
(*To Josie: This comment is not part of Assignment 2, it is for extra conference credit. My post on “Boy’s Beware” is for Assignment 2.*)
LikeLike
Yeah I was also really confused by the choice of “12” as the minimum number of people you can see before you need to put on makeup. What I was thinking was maybe it was in relation to people with big families, like maybe you have your husband, five kids, a few neighbours, and a cashier at the grocery store you see everyday and if those are the only people you see then maybe it’s acceptable to not wear makeup, but if you’re really going out you need to wear makeup? I guess I kind of came up with that idea from watching I Love Lucy, and then decided maybe they could have a bigger family. But even that is confusing because Lucy does wear makeup, so I am just generally confused by the whole thing. But I like your idea of efficiency, I guess we’ll just never know what they were thinking.
LikeLike
We can see how this advertisement promotes the stereotype of the ideal woman by “covering complexion flaws like no other,” achieved with Max Factor cosmetics. This stereotype of the feminine gender role was reflected in the construction of women’s identity during the 1950s. Women seeking to project this perfect image of beauty should be using Pan-Cake, therefore conforming to men’s perception of women as sexual objects. By projecting women’s subordinated status as second-class to men, this empowered men and society to enforce expectations of the ideal women, thus promoting women’s departure from the postwar workforce and back into domesticity.
LikeLike
I find this post particularly interesting in regard to The Twilight Zone episode “The After Hours” that we watched in class. In that episode, Marsha walks around a department store, surrounded by all sorts of make up products that promise physical perfection. In an early scene, Marsha is offered powdered makeup from a counter – a product to physically cover up human skin. When Marsha’s plot as a mannequin is uncovered, the question becomes whether the mannequins are mimicking humans, or are humans mimicking the mannequins?
LikeLike