UK Vogue September 2020 : The Faces of Hope

[Deleted member 144924]

I feel like he could mix fashion with the activism theme but instead he went with boring black&white portraits. I still have the feeling that Vogue US will give something worse.

 

[SRank]

I'm not that sure if I like the concept of the cover, it feels kinda weird to see such subject on the cover/foldout and the bottom line being filled with the same old names.

The image itself it's strong, it possess a kind of cinematic aura that's been missing a lot in fashion magazines.

 

[Mody]

So he should be fired for addressing racism in his magazine? That’s a very problematic statement.

Moving on.

The BLM movement (and the racial injustices) in America were the catalyst for this current global movement. So it’s not that illogical he uses a Black Panther image as inspiration for this cover to depict the fight against racism. And besides the iconography of the Black Panthers is so ingrained in pop culture that I think it resonates on a global level with a lot of people.

And why is Vogue UK not Vogue UK anymore because it’s black? It’s been white for decades. Was it more Vogue UK then?

And it’s really unfair to say that he is only making this about America before even reading the contents. A lot of people on the fold out are British and are fighting on a national level against racism and inequality.

No I don’t think he should be fired to address racism in his magazine. I think he should be fired for only doing this when it benefits his narrative and most importantly without any actual reference back to fashion which is the brand of Vogue magazine.
Fair point taken as not reading the content rather to say what he would offer for this particular issue is not that rational. However I still stand with my point that racism towards black community differs from UK and USA. And they are getting this coverage because of what is happening in USA. Not because of what is happening or has happened in UK. He did not engage with this issue with these people before. It is not like they aren’t fighting for the cause prior to tragic events happening in USA. So yes I think it is fair to call out that Edward is rather American centric. And also it is, for me, worrying to not understand that.

 

[tigerrouge]

Certainly, like never before, Edward is positioned to make UK Vogue seem pre-eminent to the American version. Wintour's reputation has always withstood the batterings, but given recent events... we'll see with her September issue.

 

[Summer Day]

No I don’t think he should be fired to address racism in his magazine. I think he should be fired for only doing this when it benefits his narrative and most importantly without any actual reference back to fashion which is the brand of Vogue magazine.
Fair point taken as not reading the content rather to say what he would offer for this particular issue is not that rational. However I still stand with my point that racism towards black community differs from UK and USA. And they are getting this coverage because of what is happening in USA. Not because of what is happening or has happened in UK. He did not engage with this issue with these people before. It is not like they aren’t fighting for the cause prior to tragic events happening in USA. So yes I think it is fair to call out that Edward is rather American centric. And also it is, for me, worrying to not understand that.

But no one was really addressing the issue of the plight of black people before. It is now on a global scale with the events that unfolded over the past few months. Edward made it a point to include black faces in the magazine from day one, something that was missing from Shulman's tenure. And after all, Edward is a black man, so it's only natural that he would want faces that resemble his to he featured. UK readers were only presented with white faces for nearly 30 years. Black people buy Vogue as well, so why is it an issue to have their faces on covers and in editorials? No matter how you clean it up, your statement still stands that Edward should be let go because he dared to put black people on the cover, the third time he has done so, which is an achievement in itself. He does not only feature black faces to benefit his narrative, again this has been done since he took the reigns and its not always to pander. Zoe Kravitz's cover offered fashion, so did Rihanna's and Adowa's first cover. The diatribe and attacks on Edward becomes old and stale from some of you.

 

[KoV]

Certainly, like never before, Edward is positioned to make UK Vogue seem pre-eminent to the American version. Wintour's reputation has always withstood the batterings, but given recent events... we'll see with her September issue.

The pre-eminent version to whom, though? I wonder if it’s just to the twitter mafia who don’t actually purchase Vogue. The way they talk about Edward, it’s almost as if he didn’t just commission 14 artists, the overwhelming majority of which are white and/or male, to create the last issue’s covers. They forget that until the BLM movement regained media prominence, his 2020 covers featured *less* Black subjects than American Vogue. He’s getting praised for commissioning the first Black photographer to shoot a September cover in UK Vogue history, likely by many of the same people who were just dragging Anna for not using Black photographers. Meanwhile American Vogue’s April cover was shot a Black photographer. His second cover, his first being a September cover years ago. Anna has admitted she has work to do, but I hope it doesn’t become the case that we pretend Edward or any of the other editors or editions are leaps and bounds ahead, let alone where they should be, in terms of inclusivity.

 

[Mody]

But no one was really addressing the issue of the plight of black people before. It is now on a global scale with the events that unfolded over the past few months. Edward made it a point to include black faces in the magazine from day one, something that was missing from Shulman's tenure. And after all, Edward is a black man, so it's only natural that he would want faces that resemble his to he featured. UK readers were only presented with white faces for nearly 30 years. Black people buy Vogue as well, so why is it an issue to have their faces on covers and in editorials? No matter how you clean it up, your statement still stands that Edward should be let go because he dared to put black people on the cover, the third time he has done so, which is an achievement in itself. He does not only feature black faces to benefit his narrative, again this has been done since he took the reigns and its not always to pander. Zoe Kravitz's cover offered fashion, so did Rihanna's and Adowa's first cover. The diatribe and attacks on Edward becomes old and stale from some of you.

Your statement seems to make out I’m the bad guy here. I never said anything in relation to my suggestion of him should be let go is because he put black people in his magazine. If that come across that way that is not what I meant. I simply say that if he want to champion black beauty and make his magazine more diverse in the form of black beauty than he certainly can and should do so. But not in the name of diversity. The word diversity is not black and white. And I also further explained that he should be let go because he forgot about the actual core of the magazine which is fashion.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

I think the issue is not about his talking about racism and featuring a diverse cast, its how boring and borderline pretentious it all seems. Once activism is associated with boredom and monotony it will be shoved to the side once it stops being a trending topic. His challenge and his team is to ensure that activism and fashion are combined because it is a fashion magazine not a political or news magazine. As creatives they should be able to combine the two flawlessly but have opted to take the easier way out to please the internet. Its the same issue I have with the recent inclusion of creatives of colour in fashion. Some of the black creatives especially photographers being pushed by the industry have at most mediocre skills but because the industry must tick that inclusivity box they dont really care about putting in more time to find lots of extremely talented people out there instead opting for and recycling the same mediocre talent case in point the model on the cover of this magazine who unfortunately rarely produces anything groundbreaking yet is featured in almost every issue. There are black talents as good or some even better than the greats but the magazines must be willing to put in time to find them.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

The problem today is « how to dream and escape from reality » at a time when major things are happening?
Can Vogue US/UK can afford to sell a dream? Maybe the new dream is the reality of diversity, inclusivity and all...

‘The issue for me is how can we merge social discussions and glamour in a magazine where at it core, the main goal is to sell things we don’t need!

Now I realize that This is the first time a black photographer is shooting a cover of UK Vogue.
It’s great and yet quite embarrassing. It’s insane it took all of that time for Edward to do that...

I guess, this September will be the blackest month in the entire history of fashion publications! I

There's still a way to sell a non tone deaf dream case in point Beyonce's 'Black is King' which was lavish and rich but also told a very important and authentic message.

 

[Lola701]

There's still a way to sell a non tone deaf dream case in point Beyonce's 'Black is King' which was lavish and rich but also told a very important and authentic message.

Yes, Beyoncé’s « Black is King » project is very beautiful and quite interesting. That being said, I don’t think such a statement works for a publication like Vogue, and even more Vogue UK.

The beauty of an Artist like Beyonce is in the fact that she can personify and people can identify to her vision.
I feel like people can easily identify with the AA representation of « being black » as American culture is anyway infused in everybody.
The UK black experience (and French too) is slightly different.

Beyoncé’s project is unapologetically black. I don’t think she is at the stage of her career where she cares about mainstream success. But her mainstream success allowed her to make « niche » projects on a wider scale!
An institution like Vogue cannot do that but I hope some magazines will use that opportunity to tap into that.

ID had the most beautiful story by Rafael Pavarotti and Ib Kamara. Stunning!

 

[Deleted member 1957]

At least he can make an effort to diversify his cast maybe a more talented model would have brought out this concept

 

[greenlandgem]

This cover is emblematic of why I cancelled my British Vogue subscription last year after fifteen years. I fully support improving diversity and inclusivity in all industries, not just fashion - but as many of you have said, the focus of Vogue has now shifted from its primary subject to the change itself.

It's like buying a car magazine and finding that its entire contents revolve around the oil industry.

I just want to read about and look at beautiful clothes! (Recommendations for online content that doesn't fall into the influencer clone realm very welcome...)

 

[San Marco]

Since the majority of Europeans are hitting the beaches these days. And probably they are quite a few who go to newsstand to buy some kind of magazines to shorten the day.

It is really hard to imagine that anybody would opt for a magazine where a woman looks like some asexual strickt secretary a la Rosa Klebb, and a man has the look like he saw something in the bushes.

Why would you even need a magazine with a cover and subjects like these when everything in front of you is much hotter and brings more enjoyment and fun than this.

Certainly not a read for hot summer nights, cause the mood is just too dark.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

‘The issue for me is how can we merge social discussions and glamour in a magazine where at it core, the main goal is to sell things we don’t need!

I

To be honest i do not think we can, and more to the point even should.
I think frivolity, self indulgence and purely aesthetic pleasures have a place in life, but if we decide they do, we need to unashamedly own it, and never lose sight of the fact that the T-shirt you just bought could feed a whole village in certain parts of world and that is something you will never be able to justify. Fashion is using activism as form of whitewashing and frankly i find that disgusting.

And Ben, i think I lost the power of speech when you pointed out that in fact this is not the first black photographer to shoot a cover.

 

[8eight]

Its interesting how much Alexandra played the advertiser game, especially with the covers. Im thinking Alexa Chung in Michael Kors.
Edward doesn't seem to do this. I wonder if just featuring and appearing in his Vogue is enough for people?

 

[8eight]

Many of Edwards issues have been sold with a discount.

 

[mikel]

This cover is emblematic of why I cancelled my British Vogue subscription last year after fifteen years. I fully support improving diversity and inclusivity in all industries, not just fashion - but as many of you have said, the focus of Vogue has now shifted from its primary subject to the change itself.

It's like buying a car magazine and finding that its entire contents revolve around the oil industry.

I just want to read about and look at beautiful clothes! (Recommendations for online content that doesn't fall into the influencer clone realm very welcome...)

Hmmmmmm, let me deconstruct the first part.

So you’ve been a subscriber for 15 years until last year. When you cancelled your subscription Edward was in charge for like two years. The other 13 years of your subscription Alexandra was in charge. A white woman doing the bare minimum of making a diverse magazine or addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. After Alexandra’s tenure Edward became the editor in chief. A black man trying his very best to make a more diverse magazine and addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. It only took him two years of being editor in chief for you to cancel a subscription of 15 years. Yet you gave Alexandra the benefit of the doubt for 13 years and didn’t cancel your subscription.

Choices.

All because you want to look at beautiful clothes. And I get that. I want to see beautiful clothes too. But to say that Edward has not been giving us fashion and beautiful clothes in his Vogue is just ridiculous and simply not true.

 

[San Marco]

Hmmmmmm, let me deconstruct the first part.

So you’ve been a subscriber for 15 years until last year. When you cancelled your subscription Edward was in charge for like two years. The other 13 years of your subscription Alexandra was in charge. A white woman doing the bare minimum of making a diverse magazine or addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. After Alexandra’s tenure Edward became the editor in chief. A black man trying his very best to make a more diverse magazine and addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. It only took him two years of being editor in chief for you to cancel a subscription of 15 years. Yet you gave Alexandra the benefit of the doubt for 13 years and didn’t cancel your subscription.

Choices.

All because you want to look at beautiful clothes. And I get that. I want to see beautiful clothes too. But to say that Edward has not been giving us fashion and beautiful clothes in his Vogue is just ridiculous and simply not true.

So you are alleging between the lines that he is a racist for cancelling his subscription, due to the fact that he liked Alexandras Vogue more than Edwards. And the only explenation for it has to be that Edward is a black editor and brought apperently some diversity.

Does it ever occur to you that they might be any other reasons than the colour of the skin? Be it of the editor or his cover subject.

Maybe the mood of the magazine.
Maybe the written content (which during Alexandra’s times was great).
Maybe it’s because of better photography.

And if you cancelled your subscription during Alexandras time, what would be the exact reson for doing so????

 

[greenlandgem]

Hmmmmmm, let me deconstruct the first part.

So you’ve been a subscriber for 15 years until last year. When you cancelled your subscription Edward was in charge for like two years. The other 13 years of your subscription Alexandra was in charge. A white woman doing the bare minimum of making a diverse magazine or addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. After Alexandra’s tenure Edward became the editor in chief. A black man trying his very best to make a more diverse magazine and addressing issues of racial injustice and inequality. It only took him two years of being editor in chief for you to cancel a subscription of 15 years. Yet you gave Alexandra the benefit of the doubt for 13 years and didn’t cancel your subscription.

Choices.

All because you want to look at beautiful clothes. And I get that. I want to see beautiful clothes too. But to say that Edward has not been giving us fashion and beautiful clothes in his Vogue is just ridiculous and simply not true.

I debated whether or not to reply to this. But the implications in your deconstruction commentary were quite upsetting - and incorrect.

Firstly, I didn't "give Alexandra the benefit of the doubt for 13 years". I very consciously didn't cancel my subscription during that time because I wanted to read about clothes. And British Vogue, more than most magazines I could find, wrote about clothes. Was it perfect? Nope. But it filled the entertainment/escapist role I sought for that particular tiny aspect of my life.

I was excited when Edward was appointed - I was interested to see what he did with the magazine. It was clear that his appointment was a long-overdue step to make major changes in diversity and inclusivity in not just the images produced, but in the overall message and the behind-the-scenes work. I am behind that 100%. And, as you pointed out, I continued to subscribe for two years - and I still do buy the occasional issue at a newsstand - so I certainly didn't make any snap judgements. Yes, Edward's Vogue does still include beautiful clothing. He has made overwhelmingly positive changes in terms of representation. And his vision is clearly expressed in the very different tone of the magazine.

I have simply found that the magazine's content has evolved outside of what I personally am looking for in a fashion-focused magazine. The emphasis has swung to social and political issues (which yes, are intimately intertwined with fashion) whereas I am more interested in literal clothing design and styling. This is why I have never really read US Vogue - its emphasis is too much on celebrity and pop culture for my taste.

Please be more careful about over-interpreting the comments of others and casting insulting aspersions at them.

 

[mikel]

I debated whether or not to reply to this. But the implications in your deconstruction commentary were quite upsetting - and incorrect.

Firstly, I didn't "give Alexandra the benefit of the doubt for 13 years". I very consciously didn't cancel my subscription during that time because I wanted to read about clothes. And British Vogue, more than most magazines I could find, wrote about clothes. Was it perfect? Nope. But it filled the entertainment/escapist role I sought for that particular tiny aspect of my life.

I was excited when Edward was appointed - I was interested to see what he did with the magazine. It was clear that his appointment was a long-overdue step to make major changes in diversity and inclusivity in not just the images produced, but in the overall message and the behind-the-scenes work. I am behind that 100%. And, as you pointed out, I continued to subscribe for two years - and I still do buy the occasional issue at a newsstand - so I certainly didn't make any snap judgements. Yes, Edward's Vogue does still include beautiful clothing. He has made overwhelmingly positive changes in terms of representation. And his vision is clearly expressed in the very different tone of the magazine.

I have simply found that the magazine's content has evolved outside of what I personally am looking for in a fashion-focused magazine. The emphasis has swung to social and political issues (which yes, are intimately intertwined with fashion) whereas I am more interested in literal clothing design and styling. This is why I have never really read US Vogue - its emphasis is too much on celebrity and pop culture for my taste.

Please be more careful about over-interpreting the comments of others and casting insulting aspersions at them.

Why am I the one who should be more careful with over interpreting comments? That’s just simply how your words came across to me. And that’s why I said what I said to make sense of it all. And I don’t care if that’s upsetting. I’ve had many upsetting and uncomfortable conversations on this subject over the last couple of months. If it took such a long extra post to clarify what you said earlier, than maybe your should be equally careful with commenting when it comes to a sensitive subject like this, so your comment cannot be misinterpreted. But anyway thanks for explaining. I’m glad I’m incorrect It makes more sense now and I take back what I said.