Want more Internet exposure? You’ll get it with an ad on Adult Cyber Mart. Contact Gene Ross for details: [email protected]

from www.stylecaster.com – American Apparel has released new denim ads, and no one should be surprised that there’s nipple involved.

I initially wrote them off as just another inappropriate, cheap ad campaign. I then came across a post on Fashion Copious, wherein the blogger decides, “American Apparel ads are in actuality Fine Art. I’m still processing the thought, as it’s quiet fresh in my head, but what you might be surprised hearing me say is that while the images are presumed to exist-in or be conveyed through a sexual or pornographic nature, are in actuality not.”

The blogger compares the ad to the work of Sally Mann, a photographer who throughout her career has come under fire for photographing young children in ways that might be construed as inappropriate – mainly by those outside of the art community (and accusations that I think are incredibly unfounded). People and even artists have questioned what constitutes art for centuries, but the line between art and pornorgraphy is often an even finer line.

I can see how if one of these ads suddenly had a Richard Prince signature on it, no one would question its validity. It’s well composed, well lit, the model is beautiful yet has a vulnerability that makes you wonder about her – something a model in art should do.

However, I have a difficulty separating the ad or the image from the man behind it. Perhaps, if Dov Charney weren’t a completely creepy, horrifying individual, I could look at any of these ads through a lens other than exploitive.

In the lowest common denominator, sex sells, but for American Apparel, a company that faces bankruptcy and an endless barrage of lawsuits – the public doesn’t seem to be buying it.