-
sponsorship
A post from DoubleX writer Lauren Bans:
There’s always been something a little obnoxious about French Vogue’s attention-pleading “artistic” endeavors. Two years ago, the September issue featured some devil-worshipping size zeros drawing blood crosses on goats and last April’s rebellious motherhood spread unsurprisingly had the mom-o-sphere’s collective panties in a bunch. So what was left on the roster to draw gasps this month? Blackface, obviously ... (Read more in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
Jenny Sanford has been fairly quiet in the months since her husband, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, held that bizarro, totally captivating press conference admitting to an affair with his Argentinean sweetheart. She's broken her silence by giving an interview to Vogue, of all places. Sanford gets the standard Vogue treatment: an off-hand reference to her association with the Kennedys, the implication that she's so down-to-earth, despite the million-dollar view from her island abode. But what's really notable about the article are the retrograde notions Sanford has about her husband's dalliance ... (Read more in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
Jezebel has a delightful layout from French Vogue's April issue in which motherhood gets a grand sendup. Ah, ze French. So naughty. Lovely lithe, model-of-the-moment Lily Donaldson stomps about smoking cigarettes and ostensibly caring for her "baby." Clad in pink hot pants and skyscraper heels, the model tosses the tot into the air without a care, blows toxic smoke into its cherubic face, and tests the bottle milk on her arm with a stance that suggests she's fondly reminiscing upon her pre-baby heroin addiction. Not to mention, she's got another bun in her designer-dud-clad oven. Shot by Patrick Demarchelier but born from the dangerous mind of French Vogue editor-in-chief Carine Roitfeld, the pictures are a hilarious poke at one of the world's last sacred cows—motherhood. Perhaps if American magazines weren't so whimpy about getting provocative, they wouldn't be dying in droves.
-
sponsorship
Julia, I too found some of the renderings of Michelle Obama questionable and also troubling because of their subtle use of stereotypical imagery. Christian Lacroix's Michelle is a sneering, mean-looking lady, much like the "angry black woman" the Obama haters accused Michellle Obama of being. Why is she frowning in every sketch? Doesn't she have every reason to be happy? After all, her husband is the soon-to-be leader of the free world. You'd think the new first lady is smile-challenged. Same goes for Zak Posen's scowling, slouching Michelle, an obviously sullen black woman. They might as well have thrown in the controversial New Yorker cover sketch of Michelle as black militant for good measure. Betsy Johnson's sketch was a bit too graffiti-artisty for my taste. Maybe Johnson was going for whimsical, but it seemed to me that she was trying for an urban (read: black, or inner-city) look. Her Michelle looks out of sorts with the crazy big hair and all those distracting handwritten notes surrounding her; they might as well be graffiti tags spray-painted on a wall. While some of the designs were indeed gorgeous, some of the drawings of Michelle's facial feautures were so suspect that they drew attention away from the dresses.
And by the way, the other black female nonmodels to grace the cover of Vogue were Marion Jones (2001), Jennifer Hudson (2007), and Oprah Winfrey (2007).* Vogue Editor Anna Wintour only let Oprah appear on the cover after she agreed to lose weight first. I can't believe Oprah, media powerhouse Oprah, even agreed to such nonsense.
You're also right, Julia, about the fashion world being inhospitable to black women. That's why my radar always goes up when I see questionable pictures or drawings of black women. If Michelle does land on the cover of Vogue, I hope they won't try, and I bet she won't allow them, to depict her in the same way they did Jennifer Hudson: slightly bent over with her mouth open wide, hair flying, and ample cleavage on view. Think loud, fat, black woman. Annie Leibovitz and Vogue were rightly criticized for the photos.
I've seen this sort of thing too many times for it to be a concidience. Just take a look at any of those obnoxious bridal magazines and notice how the women of color—the few token black and Lationo models even in the mags—are photographed. They are often wearing the more revealing dresses, their mouths are usually open or pursed in suggestive fashion, their makeup is heavier, and their hair is sometimes styled to suggest wild-haired raven. The subtle suggestion is that they are looser, or whore-light, and the imagery is stark when compared with the prim and proper, virginal-looking white models photographed with their hair done up in sophisticated buns.
You asked if it was hard to draw a woman with black skin, and I think the answer is no, at least not for those artists/designers who don't reflexively see, and thus imagine, black women in a stereotypical light.
Correction, Dec. 12, 2008: The original sentence included only Hudson and Winfrey.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?