The most controversial editorials

[iluvjeisa]

and what about the people from those undeveloped countries travelling to Europe for instance? to say that HF spreads set on poor countries equals people going on vacation is annoying and it only shows a first country view on things, imo... but I guess that at the end of the day, what makes an editorial shocking is our cultures and points of view. At first glance, I never find "black people used as props" editorials offensive because that kind of racism is not present in my country, we don´t have native black people. But I find shocking those eds where poor people/settings are used a background because that´s what´s closer to me.

What about it? Nothing has been assumed here...tigerrouge pointed out how she did not like those more extreme editorials...and we have elaborated upon that, discussing whether it's right or wrong. If you want to discuss less typical editorials, feel free to bring your experience to the table.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I honestly find your first statement, this idea that people just travel for the sun and low cost a tad ignorant, I haven't traveled extensively but just enough to have met other travelers from all over the world (developing countries, developed countries, countries you can't even locate in your mental map) and none of them were traveling "for the sun", not even those from England.. maybe some of us were traveling for low cost but maybe some of us also prefer it that way, even if going to Ibiza was half the price, I'd still by a long LONG shot would rather go to Vietnam than just lay around some cheap resort sipping cocktails and doing and thinking nothing and I'm sure the people I met were very much on the same page.. plenty of people travel because they want to be shaken up by culture, by diversity, discover how people live in other places, find their own selves in the end of the world.. it's way beyond nicer weather or price.. the only people I know who do that, who would rather go to Bahamas than Africa are upper middle-class/middle-class overstressed office workers that seriously need a break.. maybe you're one of them but to think everyone is after the same when they go to a place that's not Europe or the United States, that's just really inaccurate..

Oh, don't feel sorry for me. I'm not one of the people I'm thinking about when I'm describing this.

I suppose we all describe things, in some ways, from the part of the world we are coming from. In the working class in Sweden, it is common for people to want to get away from it all and get cheap food and good service in other countries. Of course, that's mostly not-so-wealthy families. Students, of course, travel in a more adventurous mode...

 

[MulletProof]

^ I wish I could be sorry but no, I'm just perplexed.

and yeah, the moment I read your comment I immediately thought of your country of origin, which might explain a bit why I never saw many Scandinavians in my travels, they were mostly just packed with Dutch, Austrians, Germans, Spanish and English. It's probably some sensibility they've developed out of being imperialists at one point and having traces scattered around and the genuine curiosity that develops out of that association. I lived at one point with a girl that allegedly had royal background, I never bothered to find out what it was, all I know is that her impressions and frustrations and what she was after weren't any different than mine and I'm from a developing country so.. yeah, it's probably a culture kind of thing for some countries.

 

[iluvjeisa]

^ I wish I could be sorry but no, I'm just perplexed.

and yeah, the moment I read your comment I immediately thought of your country of origin, which might explain a bit why I never saw many Scandinavians in my travels, they were mostly just packed with Dutch, Austrians, Germans, Spanish and English. It's probably some sensibility they've developed out of being imperialists at one point and having traces scattered around and the genuine curiosity that develops out of that association. I lived at one point with a girl that allegedly had royal background, I never bothered to find out what it was, all I know is that her impressions and frustrations and what she was after weren't any different than mine and I'm from a developing country so.. yeah, it's probably a culture kind of thing for some countries.

Ok, let me explain. There aren't ice bears on the streets here but it is true that winters are really dark here. People go for days without seeing the sun and it's pitch black from 3 pm to 9 am or something like that...so people get obsessed with sun. Working class to upper middle class families try to get away on vacations once a year. Obviously, these vacations are moderately priced and the destinations are for places where they get more....it's nothing horrible that they do really, but of course it's a form of using the people of the destination country....

Traditionally, people travel to Asia sometime before they start up a family. But after that, practical circumstances lead to that the typical (for Sweden) tourist destinations are more feasible.

 

[MulletProof]

^ I understand now. I have friends that have moved to snowy places and their vacations consist of the Caribbean, and some some more Caribbean.

In some way, however, I like to distinguish tourists from travelers, travelers of course being the minority.. tourists move around for these reasons, either to escape a miserable weather, to release stress, to forget or just to get drunk or tan and the cheaper the better.. to then go back home after a couple of weeks.. that's valid, but it's definitely one of the reasons why I would avoid a place like Cancun or the entire type of experience, not only the tourism can be irritating but also the locals that are consciously there with the sole purpose of playing servants (or to take advantage if the tourist doesn't take advantage of them first!) are just depressing to look at.

Fortunately, a good portion of the world is still free of that clashing of aspirations and it's still being visited by people of all nationalities with a genuine interest of meeting the culture and learning from the locals. I think the English for instance, get a lot of bad rep for their imperialist ways but I still can't help to feel somewhat amazed by how you can find a lonely English traveler in just about every tiny unknown corner of the world, often passing by as a local because they're really living the entire experience. My family would say that's too hippie but I can't conceive a better of way of not just moving to feel better but actually understanding and sensitizing with people that apparently (via race, culture, language) has next to nothing to do with you.

It'd be interesting to find out why some nationalities have more wanderlust than others (going beyond economic means).

Anyway, I think that difference between being a tourist and a traveler transcends into some productions.. and I think it's because some of the people involved are actually travelers themselves.. and then there are the Terrys, obviously much more into immortalising Girls Gone Wild than the Real Guyana.

 

[tigerrouge]

Going back to magazines, I suppose part of the issue is that your 'success' as an editor can be defined on a commercial level - how many issues you sell, etc - and you can do that by appealing to pre-existing desires and stereotypes.

But as an editor, is there also space for you to summon up a degree of conscience, to attempt to use whatever power you have, to produce imagery that might promote more positive views? I appreciate not every editor has the licence to do that, in terms of what's demanded from them, but I do believe they have a duty to try.

An editor is someone has a relationship of sorts with the reader, and due to that position of influence and supply of information, I hold them to a certain standard, even if they're simply trying to flog me lipstick. A magazine should woo me, flatter me, charm me, but if it starts being racist, or some sort of thoughtless embarrassment, it'll go the same way as any such boyfriend.

 

[YoninahAliza]

^I love the way you described how one should have a relationship with a magazine, that is the best way to explain it in the terms of a boyfriend!

 

[fashionista-ta]

I agree that the average 'gone native' editorial is offensive ... I do remember one, though (maybe someone else will remember details of when & where!) ... it was a US magazine & fairly recent, during the height of broderie anglaise I believe. I don't remember the country/island, where it was, I believe the women were black, and they had the most beautiful all-white embroidered dresses, just gorgeous. All the women were dressed up in their own beautiful clothes, and the model was with them, wearing something rather similar, blending in fairly well, except her clothes had a designer label. What I liked about the spread was that everyone looked so joyful, the women's clothes were so beautiful, and--real women in a fashion magazine. I thought it was a great example of how to do that kind of shoot.

 

[t-rex]

Moderator's Note:

Warning ... the link posted below is suspected of hosting a trojan or spyware. Use caution and do not click on it unless you have udated virus and spyware protection.


Was it this editorial? http://www.thefashiontime.com/2009/05/india-are-we-lakshmi-menon-in-us-vogue-may-2009/

 

[MulletProof]

^ That's such a gorgeous story

I always loved the way Patrick Demarchelier captured cultures through the lens of fashion.. it sometimes showed the models perhaps in their natural state of foreigners but never detached, always very involved in the interaction with locals and the entire scenery. This one in Peru is an example.
And this one in particular feels like the kind of stories I would LOVE to see in a magazine but somehow, I realise it's not going to happen anymore, I love the fact that they dedicated two pages to talk about the location and the way people live there. A great example of a fashion story with a mission.

A few more:
Zanzibar.
India. I remember this one getting its share of controversy but I for one loved the colors fest and just how genuine it feels.

 

[YoninahAliza]

I love the editorial with Lakashmi... this is such a classy way to combine the aspects of clothes, models and culture so that it shows everything off in a positive light. I think editorials are best when you can see interaction between the model and the locals instead of these people posing in the background as props. This way it shows that everyone is equal, no one culture is inferior to another, which is unfortunatly how it is often portrayed in magazines.

 

[zacatecas570]

^I love the one with Gemma and Lakshmi they represent a great culture in a very beautiful way

 

[Jessica18Toronto]

What with there being the "All black issue" and everyone thinks it's such a great,progressive thing, how would you feel if a magazine was being advertised as "all white" one month?

 

[BerlinRocks]

^ Wouldn't that be like an "invisible" issue ?
or are you referring to Malevitch ? Yves Klein ?

But what I would hate is an "All Orange Issue" ... I just hate orange ...

 

[ultramarine]

Did you guys see the "Killed" post from Showstudio.com???

its about eds that got killed because they were way controversial (mostly Sep 11th)

You can find em here:

http://www.showstudio.com/projects/kil/kil_appendix.html

Ok .. Ill add one sample pic per ed .. there are more up there and many more pics!

'McDonalization' by Richard Bush, Styled by Jane How
Commissioned for Oct 01 issue of i-D and killed after 9/11 attacks.

'Crushed car' by Nick Knight and style byJonathan Kaye and Simon Foxton, W mag, Oct 01.

Images from Raf Simons SS 02 Collection show

Who can forget Dior A/W 01 by Nick Knight himself?

'Sabotage' by Terry Richardson & Camille Bidault-Waddington
The Face, Sept 01

'Falling to pieces' Vogue Nippon, Jan 02.
Originally commissioned by Vogue Italia and killed after 9/11 attacks.

 

[BerlinRocks]

^thanks a lot ...

and some texts, too, can be find ...
Here is one :

The Worst Thing in the World Text by John Taylor

The worst thing in the world varies from person to person. It may be death by
fire, or by falling, or fifty other deaths. Whatever is worst or disgusting varies,
and everyone has their own threshold. But the worst thing in the world also has
a public face. Of course, no news picture is the real thing, or even the same as
being there. The face of terror never appears in full. Besides, the daily press in
Britain is not a forensic report or a freak show.
News stories recur eternally. News is an endless loop of different examples. Planes
crash routinely; bombs routinely explode; huge buildings collapse; thousands die
in single, man-made incidents on a regular basis. The press squeezes these events
into stories. Journalists write the narrative from any one of many angles, all with
photographic support. Popular formats include ‘Heroes’, ‘Survivors’, ‘Victims’ and
‘The Bitter Deaths of the Youngest/Bravest/Most Famous/Most Promising’.
Photographs exist of most types of event, but not all of them. Some of the most
spectacular or dreadful events are not recorded in any photographs – events such
as the destruction of whole cities or whole armies and whole peoples.
Almost everything happens out of sight. Thousands died in the 9/11 attacks,
but, not surprisingly, very little of that appeared in the press. One controversial
picture, taken by Richard Drew, staff photographer for Associated Press in New
York, showed a man falling to his death. Some people reckoned they could name
him, which would be a cruel burden for his family. Naming is not normal practice
in Britain, where the dead are seen at a distance, if at all. Drew’s picture is rare,
but in a tradition of ‘falling’ imagery. Given that news value derives from stories
that are the-same-but-worse, what makes this picture so poignant, even savage,
is the height (and therefore the time) of the drop. The unknown, suffering stranger
falls to his death. We know that happened, though we do not see it fully.
Few unknown, suffering strangers die in photographs. This may be a mercy
for those living, and is not even irresponsible. When such pictures are published,
blame is often attached to them for inducing ‘compassion fatigue’. This special
blame attached to photography is unnecessary, because our whole culture is
a contract of mutual indifference. We learn the art of mis-meeting, allowing our
eyes to graze over and fail to see whatever is potentially disturbing. It is not
even irrational to feel nothing and fail to respond to the misery of others.
News photography is blamed for being there, for its authenticity. No matter what
technological changes take place in picture gathering and printing, the press
derives its authority from the truth-value of its stories and pictures. But no one can bear too much reality, so editors present it in euphemistic forms. The
aftermath of terror is twisted metal, not blown flesh. Bad news often appears in
pictures that are aesthetically pleasing. In fact, photographs always have some
aesthetic appeal. Speaking about the collapsed towers in New York, a British
photojournalist remarked that he could not help noticing the lovely effect of
sunlight filtering through the debris – but then he was born into a culture that
invented the Sublime. This ‘art‘ response is as normal as curiosity, and neither
is to be condemned.

...

 

[BerlinRocks]

...

The destruction of iconic buildings and the huge loss of life in the USA on 9/11
was, for a while, the worst thing in the world. The next day the broadsheet
newspapers dispensed with advertising and devoted whole pages and double-page
spreads to full-blown single images. The scale of the attacks was astonishing, but
the coverage was so extensive because Americans had experienced attacks that
were altogether more significant than the sum of their parts. These acts seemed
at first incomprehensible in scale and in meaning. Yet what Americans were
looking at was what Robert de Niro meant when he held up a bullet in The Deer
Hunter and screamed ‘This is this!’. De Niro's American bullet and the aircraft
attacks were unequivocal. In pictures, ‘This is this. It is not something else’.
Choice words in the headlines of the US press were AMERICA, NIGHTMARE,
ATTACK and TERROR. The choice picture was of Manhattan as one tower burned
and the second plane approached the other. The picture was a terrible and
complex moment of realisation. Photographs suspend everything for a moment
and keep it still, preventing it from moving on. In this case, they create a gap for
onlookers to fill in their own sense of America, nightmare, attack and terror. They
are the equivalent of ‘This is this’ in journalism. They are unequivocal: one tower
burns and a plane flies towards the other. A photograph of a plane shows it fixed
on flying into a tower, or a whole tower fixed in falling. In Drew’s picture, one man
is fixed in falling from a tower. We see him hanging there, never falling any
further, so the man is dying and living forever.
However, sustaining the moment has implications: it is a charm or perhaps a
curse. Time is fixed in a news photograph, certainly, but that results in other kinds
of disorder in time and space. The curse of photography is to ask an onlooker to
face something that may be personally uncomfortable, to say the least. Any
photograph may be poignant, but news photographs such as these go deeper.
They wound and bewilder; they invoke cries of anguish and anger. In this light,
calls for swift revenge seem justified, if not right. Popular story formats also
include ‘Mourning’, ‘Unity’, ‘Retaliation’.
The result is that Americans have dealt out their own unequivocal ‘This is this’.

The Afghans have discovered, as did those on 9/11, that ‘This is not something
else’. The unequivocal retribution is, for unknown strangers, the worst thing in the
world, though we who look at photographs see almost nothing of it. For us, that is
something, and somewhere, else.

Taken from the SHOWstudio project Killed by
Richard Bush & Jane How/Jo-Ann Furniss/John Taylor
Text ©2001 John Taylor

showstudio.com

 

[cologne_rocks]

Can somebody put other pictures online of that last editorial, it's so striking.

 

[YoninahAliza]

Well... it is quite obvious why these photographs were all controversial... they portrayed volence and death an odd light. I've always felt that it is best to leave violence/death out of editorials since it is often offensive to many people and can stimulate even more problems.

 

[kokobombon]

To me, the Dior ads were not offensive at all... they portrayed the anime spirit very well and though it showed violence it was done in a very cartoonish way for someone to take it seriously...