Download PDF
Contents
The Grim Reaper Campaign and its Unruly Metaphor
HIV/AIDS: Perceptions and Policy in the 1980s
Defining Hidden Public Health Risk in the Grim Reaper PSA
The Grim Reaper Campaign and its Unruly Metaphor
The entirety of the Grim Reaper Campaign is a layered metaphor. The ad begins amidst darkness and fog; men, women, and children descend from the ceiling in neat rows (NACAIDS, 00:02-00:07, 1987). These people are playing the roles of both the general public of Australia, as well as bowling pins in the Grim Reaper’s game. The Reaper tosses huge bowling balls at the groups of people, sending them flying towards the ground as the narrator discusses the impact AIDS has had on Australia. Throughout, the audience can see shots of dead bodies strewn about on the ground. By the end, multiple Grim Reapers can be seen throwing bowling balls (NACAIDS 00:14-00:19, 1987). In the metaphor, the Reapers are supposed to represent the AIDS virus, violently devastating the innocent and defenseless Australian children and adults.
Metaphor is a figurative language tool, used prominently in the ad, that is used to compare two things by referring to one as something else. For example, “AIDS is the Grim Reaper of diseases.” The tenor is the object of discussion, while the vehicle is the figurative representation of the object (Foss, 2018). In the PSA, the AIDS virus is the tenor that is being represented by the vehicle of the Grim Reaper.
The use of metaphor has shown to be effective in grabbing the attention of the audience because, as research has shown, metaphorical language can be understood quite quickly (Thibodeau, 2017, p. 854). However, as Ceccarelli points out, metaphor can also constitute the ways in which we know a given phenomenon; consequently, they are not trivial. Specifically, she discusses the implications of comparing scientific advancement (the tenor) with the “frontier” (the vehicle). Ceccarelli describes this specific comparison as “flypaper of our mental world” because it has become so common in the American consciousness (2013, p. 3). This also proves that metaphor can provide a “terministic screen” that narrows our perception of a given subject (Ceccarelli, 2013, p. 3). Metaphors can be sticky in this way, shaping all kinds of thought processes. This type of language is powerful, but it is also unpredictable. Metaphors are “capable of sudden twists and shifts of meaning, meanings considerably more interesting than the conventional” (p. 4). This also raises concern regarding specific audiences becoming attached to different—and sometimes unintentional—meanings. Metaphors become more influential when they are left up for interpretation, making them extremely volatile (Thibodeau, 2017, p. 857). Certain groups may be searching for a specific meaning, so to obtain it, will only acknowledge aspects of the metaphor that suit their narrative (Ceccarelli, 2013, p. 12).
Throughout history, certain diseases have been conceived as punishment for sin (Brandt, 1988, p. 416). Looking at any disease as a metaphor, then, would be inherently problematic, because it leads to the inevitable stigmatization of a specific group (p. 415). The person with the disease becomes a pariah because the disease itself has been culturally imbued with negative meaning. In the case of HIV/AIDS, “homosexuality—not a virus—causes AIDS. Therefore, homosexuality itself is feared as if it were a communicable, lethal disease” (p. 429). When audiences watched the Grim Reaper PSA, they interpreted the character as a representation for the gay community. “Rather than ‘de-gaying’ AIDS, the monstrous figure of the ‘Grim Reaper’ may be understood as representing a story of ‘unacceptable sexualities’ and in particular ‘male homosexuality’…. the disassociation of homosexuality with AIDS in the Grim Reaper TV campaign may be understood as a process which figures ‘homosexuality’ as dangerous and diseased” (Vitellone, 2001, pp. 36-37). This is an example of the potentially negative, and perhaps dangerous implications of metaphor choice, especially when made by the government. “There is danger in allowing governments the power to publicize health risks. Knowledge and risk factors may be misinterpreted; interventions may be ineffective or counterproductive” (Cited in Lupton, 1993, p. 431). Despite the deep implications of metaphor in the Grim Reaper ad, it has almost exclusively been studied by social scientists (Stylianou, 2010, p. 2), leaving the rhetorical implications of the campaign uninterrogated. As such, the importance of vehicle choice must be analyzed from a rhetorical perspective as it regards the cultural situation of public health campaigns.