What were they thinking? Does this picture make you cringe? Does reading the copy make you feel better? Would you enroll for dance classes because it says doing the cha-cha-cha or samba can be violent unless you are under the kind and trained care of a choreographer-teacher and you join the academy?
You might do so because you want to learn or you think the person in charge is worth it. But I doubt it would be for the reasons mentioned: “In a month’s time you’ll move swiftly (not to mention non-violently)”.
Since when has dance become associated with violence? There are passionate forms with some level of aggressiveness, but they are not meant to physically hurt. By using images such as these, the truly demonic aspects of domestic and social violence are reduced to nothing; in fact, they are shown as accepted facets of life.
The character in the photograph does not look like she was on the dance floor just before getting hurt. Her expression does not seem nonchalant about accidental wounds. The use of the word 'victim' is revealing. These are photographs that denote real violence and the ad is using a negative message to lure the readers to notice. As I said, people will not sign up for the classes because of this, but there will be an internalisation of what they see, whether they dance or not.
Violence has become a marketable commodity. And you need to buy it to protect yourself because danger lurks – at the borders, in the street, at home and by a process of reductionism on the dance floor.
- - -
This is another ad for the same. Look at the bruise. Is this about jiving? Damn, why am I so angry?