Search

This image was likely chosen because it is a rather blunt and provocative. The add is so simple, yet clear, direct, and thought provoking. It is also remarkably different from any other drug advertisements that I have ever seen, which indicates an appeal to a specific audience. Although the message is clear, I am left with so many questions about who made it and posted it. This delayed satisfaction makes it all the more intriguing and appealing as an image to think with/about. 

I am so curious to know more about where photograph was taken and how commonplace these sorts of advertisements are.

My eye was immediately drawn to the the large bold letters "fuck raw." I then processed the image of the pill and the rest of the advertisement to understand that it was marketing the drug PrEP as a way of preventing the transmission of HIV. I then began to notice the context, how the add plastered onto wooden panels running along a brick wall. I can see the graffiti in the background, the trash and leaves building up in the crease between the panels and the black granite floor.

Post-abstinence.Spreading the good word.The new New Testament.

This image immediately made me smile. It's subversive. It's optimistic. I found it delightful.

This image can be understood as ethnographic in that it shows one way in which options for protection against HIV are being publicized.In the design statement, Guilberly discusses the design of the add, but I am curious to know what he thinks about the construction of the photograph of the add. Of course, the add is quite interesting in itself, but personally I would love to know more about the context its placement: where it was discovered, what that might mean about the intended audience, who created it the add, why resort to this sort of rhetoric?

Guilberly is using this image to discuss the divide between the "competing HIV prevention discourses" that frame the pursuit of safe ways to engage in casual sex. This image directly confronts and contests the idea that sexually active gay men should be silent and ashamed. I think there is plenty to work with here for opening up the concept of toxicity, but I would like to know more about what Guilberly thinks personally. Is it the coerced silence that Guilberly finds to be toxic? If so, perhaps that could be indicated in the title of this particular artifact?

Toxic Silence?

The image's subject is the discourse around HIV prevention. This comes through quite clearly.