Causation and escalation
Advertising people describe themselves as storytellers. They tout themselves as culture makers. They puff out their chests and proclaim themselves as the builders of brand worlds. It comes across as pretentious. However, having been there myself, I think it’s less about delusions of grandeur and more about insecurity. Agency people always want to swim further upstream. They want to be seen as serious, strategic people. Even though advertising has been the making of countless businesses, it’s not quite top-table enough for the people who make it.
It’s as if agency folk are embarrassed by whimsy and wonder; the very things that make ad agencies uniquely valuable. So they dress things up with impenetrable bombast. This “upstreaming” of advertising has a lot to answer for.
Storytelling actually sounds quite gritty and grounded compared to culture making and other preposterous positioning statements. And it has the benefit of being true.
In his fabulous book, A Swim in a Pond in the Rain, Booker Prize winner George Saunders states that the two qualities that separate writers who get published from those that don’t are their willingness to revise and their skill with causality. In my experience, the same applies to advertising creatives. The good ones are ruthless critics of their own ideas. And they have an intuitive grasp of short-form narrative.
Here’s what Saunders said about causality (and escalation) to Hattie Crisell on her In Writing podcast.
I'm going to make a case for causality, in the same way that, if I was talking to a bunch of dancers, I would make a case for gravity. It's just what we have to work against... You know, a woman sees her old boyfriend in the store. If it doesn't cause anything, that's an anecdote. But if she sees her old boyfriend in the store, goes off to the car and the baby starts crying, and she begins to doubt her marriage, then suddenly we've got some causation going on. And the story starts to sort of narrow its focus a little bit... For me to think about story as an intense system of causation and escalation, it helps me write them.
George Saunders, In Writing with Hattie Crisell, 26th February 2021
An intense system of causation and escalation
This is the Saunders formula for a good story. It’s also the formula for some of the greatest TV ad campaigns.
Causation gives these campaigns consistency. Every idea has a similar cause or, in filmmaking parlance, a similar incitement. Causation is a solid and fertile basis for a campaign idea. And it’s therefore the root of all those lovely, long-term compounding effects.
Escalation is unique to each execution. It’s the source of novelty and surprise and delight. Escalation brings variety and gives these campaign ideas longevity.
For Kit Kat, the causation is always someone taking a break. That’s common to every ad. The escalation is different every time but it usually has a Sod’s Law irony to it.
Causation: photographer takes a break.
Escalation: pandas go nuts behind his back.
Causation: duck hunters take a break.
Escalation: hiding ducks take flight.
Causation: International Rescue takes a break.
Escalation: Thunderbirds are NOT go.
For Specsavers, the causation is always someone attempting a task without being properly able to see what they’re doing.
The escalation - the consequence - is different every time:
Causation: shepherd can’t see properly.
Escalation: he shears his dog.
Causation: boy can’t see properly.
Escalation: he destroys his dad’s car with the wrong remote.
For Heineken, the causation is always the refreshing effect of the brand. The escalation is different every time, but it’s always a before-and-after transition from lacklustre and lethargic to vigorous and vital.
Causation: Heineken refreshes.
Escalation: a reverse-Pygmalion; from Sloane Ranger to East End barrow girl.
Causation: Heineken refreshes.
Escalation: Wordsworth is no longer stuck for words.
Causation: Heineken refreshes.
Escalation: beat-weary feet are revitalised.
Not clever but funny
A lowfalutin word for “an intense system of causation and escalation” is “sketch.” These ads are all sketches. The sketch show format involves telling the same basic joke over and over again but with enough variety for it to never get tired. Not only do people not mind the repetition, it’s core to the appeal. You know what’s going to happen but not exactly how. The appeal compounds over time, just as brand effects compound over time for an ad campaign that repeats the same causation over and over.
This causation/escalation structure isn’t clever but it is funny. It isn’t clever but it works. And just because it’s not clever, that doesn’t make it easy. These campaigns are icons because they’re few and far between. Specsavers is my only contemporary example for a reason.
Apparently clever but sad
Today’s ad industry doesn’t seem to like things that work without being clever. They are like moths to the flame of apparent cleverness. It’s apparently clever to have a laughable, gobbledygook positioning statement. And it’s apparently clever to have a business model based on AI “creativity” and AI production. I’ve been gladly out of that world for five years now, so what do I know? But it looks like suicide to me.
For the ad industry, the causation is deep-seated professional insecurity and the urgent desire to be more upstream.
The escalation is a headlong rush to ditch what makes you special and embrace misunderstood technology whose promise is to do things faster and cheaper. Where’s the fun in that? Where’s the margin in that?
Maybe try this too: Stitching it together - a post about creative consistency in advertising.