US Vogue April 2008 Controversy

[wrngco]

he has 100 milllion dollars so he does not have to do anything he does not want to do and nobody has anything on him

 

[jules4u]

I think the fact that people, regardless of race, still associate the image of "the ape" with racism is kind of telling.

Meg is absolutely right, for a lot of newer generations of people, I just don't think this kind of stuff would resonate as racist...and that has nothing to do with being naive or ignoring it. It has to do with the fact that the overall mentality has changed.

Like I said in my original post, I just didn't take away anything having to do with race from this photo. Yes it has similarities to the image of King Kong and Fay Wray, but again, my mind doesn't immediately equate giant gorilla with black man.

Maybe it's youthful idealism on my part, or just outright stupidity, but if people are going to cling to dated stereotypes and tip-toe around something as insignificant as photographing a black athlete in an aggressive and domineering pose next to the glamorous white woman, will racism ever actually end? The image itself isn't offensive, it's the meaning people put into it.

Then again, it's Anna Wintour, and she's the antichrist as far as many are concerned and no matter what she does it's always evil, malicious and cutting. No, she doesn't feature enough models of color in the pages of Vogue, but really, if she finally does shoot a black man for a cover does it automatically have to have an agenda behind it? I mean, wouldn't it just be easier for her to not include the black man on the cover at all?

While you might think it insignificant, many who lived in the era of racism and continue to face stereotyping today might not think the same way.. To say that they are clinging to dated stereotypes is albeit simplistic. This comparison might not be apples to apples but I think its worth considereing. Would you think that Jews reacting to the Holocaust experience in their past are clinging to an incident that occured in the past? Why is it so hard to acknowledge even if you don't see it the same way ( this is not directed at you), the reasoning behind why a group of people might see things differently ? Maybe Perhaps because of the past?
And this is why I think that Vogue might just be guilty of being Insensitive rather than racist!

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

They're guilty of choosing a horrible cover photo when they had plenty of other better images to choose from.Lebron is not ugly, but that photo makes him look constipated and Gisele just looks scared.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

Honestly, when I first opened my mailbox and saw the cover, the first thing I thought was "Wow, two beautiful people in a crappy picture... oh Vogue, you never cease to bore me!"



ETA: That Mulleavy Sister diet article was what really bothered me... despite the author's (was is Singer or Buck?) best efforts, I just felt like they were trying to rid the fashion world of anything plus sized.

 

[sethii]

oh my god the dress and hair is the SAME as the poster

What world is US VOGUE living in?

 

[Crescendolls]

The biggest problem I have is that they didn't choose one of the other photos for the cover. Out of all the photos they had, they decided on that one?

 

[sethii]

^ You're right, I saw one of Giselle balanced on the basketball player's shoulder and that looked OK.

I find it creepy that VOGUE US delivers special meals to people before featuring them

 

[electricladyland]

^ You're right, I saw one of Giselle balanced on the basketball player's shoulder and that looked OK.

I find it creepy that VOGUE US delivers special meals to people before featuring them

omg, what's worse, king kong or caveman.

Hey, if Anna's giving out free trainers and special meals, where do i sign up??

 

[fourboltmain]

Sounds like someone is bored and picking a fight.

 

[MulletProof]

.. I know.. why cant they be quiet dammit..

 

[Spike413]

^ But think about it, the author took a World War I propaganda poster that had nothing to do with black people and used it to build this story.

If that's not seeking drama then I don't know what is.

 

[Plisskin]

Vogue just scrapes the barrel. Not wanting to be inflammatory but a lot of the insensitive stereotyping against Black people in the US are perpetrated by Black people themselves.

Wow...I think this thread would have went along beautifully without this.

 

[laughingdisorder]

The comparison is clear to me but could be ambiguous to interpretation, none of us knows the initial intentions of the photographer.

The only problem I have with US vogue and this cover is that when they finally choose to put a person of colour on the cover, they make it as horrible as they can. Almost all the other pictures taken of Gisele and Lebron are semi decent and a few even good yet they have to choose this horrific unflattering image to put on the cover. You could say it's a coincidence and put all the racial connotations aside but the fact is this photo portrays him as angry & aggressive with her trying to get away.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

^ That's how I feel.Jennifer Hudson's cover last year was bad too.Liya Kebede's was one that they actually got right.

 

[carmen_kass]

At first when this thread started and the initial comments were like "oh it's obviously a coincidence, people have too much time on their hands" - I thought yeah, give LeBron a break, don't ridicule his achievements (I dunno why I think being on the cover of Vogue is an achievement) it's awesome that they thought his credentials as a Basket Ball Player are high enough to think his image could move covers off the shelf. This is important as this is a woman's magazines, and the cover stars need to appeal to them, hence why celebrities have taken over from anonymous models.

However after reading all the comments it has got me thinking, why is the cover so bad? Even for US Vogue. I live in England where Basketball is less popular than Soccer is in America, yet when I think of black sports stars really making a name for themselves or are already starts I think, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Thierry Henri, Serena Williams, Venus Williams, etc. Their covers and endorsements are always classy and appealing, I think wow they look great not "they're doing this to get black customers interested". That is what I think when I look at how Black people are portrayed by US Vogue. It's ridiculous. The idea that everything in media has a subtext and pre-planned message is very important, and media relies on subliminal messages.

For example, until I watched the Gilette Champion ad carefully I didn't realise that it ridiculed Tiger Woods right at the end, it just didn't occur to me, but it is disrespectful. When I saw it I didn't think two black stars and one white one, I though they were all presented fantastically, they all look distinguished, handsome and well groomed and on the whole the ad has a great message to young aspiring sportsmen. When I checked youtube however there's quite an uproar about it. Had I not seen this thread I would have said "people have too much time on their hands".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4L3bm6m3KQ

An example of where I a cover got it right is Richard Hamilton’s GQ cover. Sharp suit, slick photography, great pose, very typically GQ-esque, on par with the covers before and after it with people of different colour. The only problem is I wouldn’t have guessed he’s a Basketball player, but I can definitely tell he’s an athlete even though he’s in a suit. Unlike the Vogue cover, Richard Hamilton looks very poised and in control of the shot.

LeBron looks crazy, they can have him in his Basketball outfit in a strong stoic pose and we’d still know he’s an established sportsman. People may argue that like Jennifer Hudson’s cover it’s the Shape Issue so there needs to be action in the shot, well to that I say why do the editorials inside with Trentini and Michael Phelps and Doutzen and Apollo look so elegant and great? They could have had LeBron in a suit holding a basketball, they could have had him in his sportswear about to "shoot a hoop", that would be him in action, he looks like he’s going to tackle someone in a fit of rage as a football player would, which is why it’s disturbing.


I have the same issue with Jennifer Hudson’s cover, she’s a singer who acted in a blockbuster musical, much like Nicole Kidman did in Moulin Rouge, yet they always make Nicole, Drew and Kiera look like Princesses. Jennifer looks like she wants to eat the camera.
Then again Liya Kebede’s Vogue Cover was gorgeous.


However when Chanel Iman made the fold out cover of the May 2007 Top Models cover, everyone screamed affirmative Action. Despite the fact that in a sea of sleepy looking Blondes, Chanel looks GORGEOUS. So in a way I do feel bad for Wintour, she can’t win.

Also can someone tell me why Gisele is on the cover? What new milestone has she achieved? I don’t remember anything, that’s quite perplexing in itself, she’s made the front cover before, she’s not an athlete, by all accounts her chest area is surgically enhanced. So why is she on the cover of a shape issue? Why not a female sports star who is at the top of her game? Maria Sharapova maybe? There’s countless young tennis stars who are getting really famous with fantastically toned and sculpted bodies, this would have been good for young aspiring female athletes who read Vogue, or maybe they’d see this on a shelf and think "WOW, she’s sporty and femine/glamourous". Maria is also tall, younger than Gisele and actually a sports star who is a model so seeing her in Calvin Klein with LeBron would be so exciting, not to mention more fitting. Instead it looks like LeBron is kidnapping a Leo Dicaprio’s girlfriend. Which frankly makes no sense until you buy the magazine and read the contents. The other thing that just occurred to me was just how old the cover image makes LeBron look, he’s born December 30th 1984, whereas Gisele is born July 20th 1980, she looks so much younger than him yet he’s 4 years younger than her, I would have guessed his age at around 30 because it’s the first time I’m seeing him.

Having said that this shot with Raquel Zimmerman seems to have the same undertones of aggression against females but I don’t feel like it’s a great shot anyway. Definitely not cover worthy.

They Managed to make Michael and Trentini look like Adonis and Aphrodiete.


In Summation (sorry for the tediously long read) why wasn’t this the cover, it’s a beautiful and serene shot.


sources: Youtube, afrobella.com, desktopwalpaper.com, need4sheed.com, adventuresofara.blogspot, ebay, jezebel.com

 

[bismarck]

That athlete (don't know his name, sorry) holding Raquel resembles Lebron...that weird pose, and his strange "interaction" with a chic model.

The poster and the Vogue cover have an uncanny resemblance, but now I just think Vogue is crap in general; there's not enough evidence that they put unflattering pictures of Lebron and Hudson due to racism; as someone else said, beautiful Liya's cover was done right. They could just dislike plus-sized people in Hudson's case, and in Lebron's, I just think that the Vogue people had a weird idea about athletes and fashion models in general. The lack of black models, on the other hand, could definitely point to racism....

 

[honeyisle]

Sometimes I think when people say "this is being blown out of proportion" or "some people have too much time on their hands", I think to myself that they aren't living the life of a black person, and it's dismissive and disturbing that they don't understand that a cover like this can be troubling. Let me not even get started on "clinging to the past". As a black women I usually hear something ignorant or just plain f*cked up at least a couple times week, and it's 2008.

Anne could've done better.

 

[Mchunu]

i quite think that if you think this is just a coincidence, you have to be a little naive. i mean come on. just look at the similarity between the covers! it's a conspiracy! With LeBron being the first black man on the cover this happening & it's just a "coincidence"; THEY (the editors) chose the shot. Don't be so naive. How many frames do they have to chose from when doing a cover?! AND THIS is the shot they chose?! come on! Don't be so naive.

Undisputeably one of the most horrendous covers ever. Everyone knows that this was an outrage when we first saw this weeks ago under the magazines section.

 

[JeanAvril]

Sometimes I think when people say "this is being blown out of proportion" or "some people have too much time on their hands", I think to myself that they aren't living the life of a black person, and it's dismissive and disturbing that they don't understand that a cover like this can be troubling. Let me not even get started on "clinging to the past". As a black women I usually hear something ignorant or just plain f*cked up at least a couple times week, and it's 2008.

Anne could've done better.

What? I'm a black male and I personally am not troubled by this cover. The only time I've heard of stereotyping and racism about this cover is from this thread, and an article on MSN. I even showed my mother the cover and the MSN article and she didn't see anything wrong with it.

 

[Mchunu]

^i'm a black male & i'm not troubled either. however, i just think it's an outrage if people believe it's "just a coincidence". if so, i feel so sorry for how easily the public can be mislead.