ZOMG!!!

[Number23]

"Back-to-Back Black Women on Cover of Vogue" :wow: :wow:

Perhaps it’s the economy. Or call it the Andre effect. But a thaw appears to be in process over at icy-cold Conde Nast.

It’s the second sistah in a row! Right after Michele Obama’s magical March cover. And only the sixth Black woman on a Vogue cover this decade.

So let's see, Vogue was founded in 1892. Okay, add five and carry the one... that means this magazine has been around for 117 years. I'm impressed! It only took 117 years and a black president for back to back black women to appear on the cover of Vogue! Wow, otherwise the trend of seeing a black woman every 37 years would have continued! Who says Obama is not ushering in an era of change??? :crazy:

And as someone who ordered the All Black Italian Vogue (the July 2008 issue) on e-bay (it was SO worth the $64 I had to pay) and was blown away with the beauty of that issue and was not surprised that it broke all selling records for Vogue, all I can say is what in HELL took so long?? Why did it take something so monumental (Obama in the White House) for there to be an increase in black models and black women on magazine covers and in the media in general?? What is wrong with the fashion industry and the American media???

Also, this is a very good link about Michelle Obama's influential and critical March cover. http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/18/why-michelle-obamas-vogue-cover-matters/

P.S. I fully understand that some of you may have already known about Beyonce on the cover by now, and the significance of back to back sisters on Vogue, but I'm in Australia and we are at LEAST two months behind everything so I'm actually doing pretty good...

[firedupdem]

1. Actually I didn't know! Thanks for posting this! n/t

[Raineyb]

3. I didn't know either.

I guess I should pay more attention to magazines that don't have PCs on the cover. LOL

Regards

[Number23]

2. I know it may seem like I'm constantly going on about the lack of black female representation

in the media. Or the lack of GENUINE representation and not stereotypical BS.

And that's because -- I am! :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8333957#8334374

[Number23]

4. NYTimes gets in the act!

Calvin Klein: showed 1 look with an ethnic model out of 35 he sent down his runway.

Donna Karan: showed 3 looks with ethnic models out of 45 she sent down her runway. . . .

Now they clamor for our African-American First Lady, who one month ago wouldn’t have seen anyone who remotely looked like her on their own runways, to wear their clothes because “the kind of worldwide attention Obama and her labels are getting can boost an entire corporate psyche from designer to ground floor. It can boost sales as well.” Well, hiring ethnic models could boost their professional psyches - and boost rent payments, as well.

But if you think the extraordinary attention paid to the looks, grace and style of our country’s first African-American First Lady truly will not have enormous societal and international repercussions, and for generations to come, you are incorrect.

It mattered to Oprah when the Supremes showed up on Ed Sullivan. It mattered to me when Beverly Johnson showed up on the cover of Vogue. It mattered to the girls in my teen programs when they saw my insanely airbrushed face on a city bus. And it matters to people all over the world - not just young Black girls, but everyone who ever will interact with a Black woman - that Mrs. Obama has become the leading icon of womanhood that our country now exports. It matters. And it may actually change these darn runways and magazines at last, after decades of resistance, so that all of our kids will see a more diverse image of beauty, not just for their own self-esteem, but in the face of a woman they may one day hire, work with, work for, befriend or love.

From "Michelle Ma Belle"

[Chovexani]

5. I bought a couple of copies of Italian Vogue on the newsstand.

Keep in mind, though, that black women are only ever allowed on the cover of American Vogue during the annual "fatty" issue (anyone who's ever seen Devil Wears Prada pretty much knows Anna Wintour's feelings on women above a size 2). Which is the one Beyonce was on. Because black women are "thick"--Chanel Iman, Alek Wek, etc are not black, apparently, just painted with body chocolate or something. Jezebel had a great blog on this when the issue came out but I'll be damned if I can find the link.

I am pretty sure ALT is the only reason Michelle got the cover. That and the fact that they simply CAN'T ignore her, as she's pretty much the biggest story in American fashion right now.

Vogue has been in trouble for a long time now, the fact is they don't even have models on the cover anymore, just the same four or five white actresses every ladyrag has on the cover these days (Keira Knightley, ScarJo, etc). Sadly, I don't think back-to-back sisters on the cover means any kind of progress, in this bad economy and atmosphere of media entities folding left and right (especially in creative/fashion media), I think it's a desperate grab for attention.

[Number23]

6. Thank GOD!

I am so glad somebody wants to talk about this! lolol As you can see, I've been trying to keep this alive but it hasn't really grabbed on with folks here. Lord knows, I can be as news-y as the next person but sometimes FLUFF is what I want! :)

Completely agree with your post. Every last word. Vogue does appear to be absolutely TERRIFIED of the female body, particularly the black, female body. The idea that women may actually have breasts and hips (and like them!!!) is just too much for them, I guess. I couldn't even begin to count the number of letters I've sent to Vogue, W and a few others where I've been absolutely mystified at their magazine covers. W even published one of my diatribes against one of Kate Hudson's covers a few years ago. Kate Hudson, the chick who can't PAY people to go see her movies (and whose movies are not that good) is still getting magazine covers. Your points about Keira and Scarlet are true but at least those two girls are genuinely gorgeous and people actually go see their movies. Whenever I see Kate, Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth, or that Miller girl (the Brit) on the covers, I just shake my head and keep stepping. When Vogue put that girl from "Gossip Girl" on the cover last year I wanted to pull out a lighter and burn down the Borders display where I saw it.

When the Jurnee Smollets, Jennifer Hudsons, Zoe Saldanas, Nia Longs, Sanaa Lathans, hell and the Zyi Zhangs, Gong Lis and Aishwarya (I KNOW I'm spelling her name wrong but you know who I'm talking about) Rais of the world can get the covers that the blonde nothings get, then things will be alot better. And I completely understand your skepticism. Back to back sisters on Vogue does very much appear like "a desperate grab for attention." But call me a foolish optimist, but I can't help but think that amidst their cynical attempt to cash in on the Obamas, is the beginning of a more well-rounded appreciation for the beauty of all women.

[Chovexani]

7. Fashion has sort of become a guilty pleasure of mine

Call it escapism. :) I used to somewhat hypocritically think I was above that sort of thing (I say hypocritically because, well, I'm a goth and have been known to drop $200+ on boots when I could not really afford to), but reading a lot of really intelligent writing on the subject changed my outlook. I really dig the idea of fashion as artform. Ultimately I'm a sucker for good photography, especially fashion photography, which is the real reason I started reading the higher end mags. I tend to buy the Euro and Asian fashion mags though just because their shoots seem to be 100% more interesting and well done.

American Vogue in particular is stodgy and set in its ways and that will ultimately lead to its downfall, imo. I really hope things are changing for the better, and that the horrible state of the industry as a whole right now will force some acknowledgement of reality in the ivory towers. Trotting out the same tired shit just is not working, women of all colors are wising up to the game and something needs to happen to shake it up. Michelle Obama is doing wonders for this. While, as a feminist, I'm deeply disturbed by the fact that this strong, intelligent, educated and accomplished woman is being almost entirely defined by what she wears, as a mild fashionista I'm tremendously thrilled that a sister is now the number one fashion icon in the country. And a sister who is not the faintest European-looking, at that. I like the fact that she's bringing attention and accolades to young designers who otherwise would never get that kind of exposure (particularly designers of color like Jason Wu).

Fashion really needs to evolve or die at this point, and I hope it does the former. Maybe this is a good sign of things to come. But I'm an eternal cynic. :)

[Number23]

8. It's a guilty pleasure for me too

I love the entire "escapist" feel of fashion magazines, but generally think that the fashion industry itself is incredibly stupid and pointless. The very idea of paying $200 for an Hermes scarf, $2K for a Dior bag or $22K for a Vera Wang couture bridal gown makes me almost want to puke. My husband goes further than me -- he thinks that people who make or even worse BUY clothes that cost that much should be executed. He's hard core, that one. :)

There's a brief bit in the article I linked to about how sh*tty American Vogue is, particularly with its use of black and brown models. They always seem to be riding some damn buffalo or wearing cheetah prints, as if anyone has worn cheetah prints since 1976. Or, even worse, the Amer Vogue has those hideous, nauseating "Out of Africa" location shoots showing bare-breasted natives staring in wonder and fascination at the underfed Teutonic chick in their midst. If those don't make you want to facepalm and never buy Vogue again, nothing will.

While, as a feminist, I'm deeply disturbed by the fact that this strong, intelligent, educated and accomplished woman is being almost entirely defined by what she wears, as a mild fashionista I'm tremendously thrilled that a sister is now the number one fashion icon in the country.

I feel the EXACT same way. Do I like the fact that they have taken this incredibly educated and accomplished woman (who was once her husband's BOSS) and have tried to turn her into a coathanger?? Nope. But do I love the fact that Michelle Obama is blanketing magazines and media coverage right now. Shoot, if it wasn't for her and Oprah, we could go YEARS without seeing a beautiful, brown woman on a mag cover. And just as you said, this is not some yella gal with green eyes that we're talking about. This is a NOTICEABLY black woman -- chocolate skinned, regular (if relaxed) hair and a regular (if very toned) black woman's frame. She makes me so proud and it makes me happy that my baby, who's 2 now, will have just that one EXTRA black female role model to look up to as she grows up.

Fashion really needs to evolve or die at this point, and I hope it does the former.

I saw a white shirt the other day that cost $400. It was exactly as I described it -- a white, button down shirt. The kind you could get at the Gap for $40 or at K-Mart for $20. But because it was made by Carolina Herrera, it was four HUNDRED dollars. I kept looking at this shirt expecting it to do...SOMETHING. So yes, if by evolve you mean that clothing designers need to take a look at how idiotically priced some of their "creations" are (the global recession may literally force them to do so) as well as redefine their very narrow and sad definitions of beauty, I'm completely with you on that.

[HamdenRice]

11. Anna Wintour is like the poster child for white privilege

I knew about her in a vague way, but only after seeing Devil Wears Prada and reading the article on her in Wiki did I realize just what a repulsive person she is. It's astonishing to me that someone like that basically dictates to the entire fashion industry.

Wintour dropped out of high school and yet managed within a few years to become an editor. Of course, the fact that her father was an editor at the Evening Standard had nothing to do with her meteoric rise, nor I suppose did the fact that she serially slept with every prominent cultural figure she get her mits on.

I'm not much of a fashion person, but Devil was a pretty good movie and was as much about business as about fashion. (I never read the book, but writers I know who've read it, say it's laughably badly written, down to the level of grammatical errors, but the gossip was good.)

Basically Devil shows that lots of businesses are little more than cults. Dysfunctional people can rise to the top and become immoveably entrenched and that's pretty much Wintour/Priestly's situation. Even the owner can't dislodge her. And I've seen that enough in the real world to know it's true.

What's remarkable to me is the way the masters of the universe often get suckered into promoting some fool as the arbiter of their status. There was a fantastic documentary on tv a few weeks ago called something like A Table in Heaven. It was about the family that owns one of the most prestigious restaurants in Manhattan, Le Cirque.

The bizarre irony is that its food is clearly not the best. It is not a celebrity chef restaurant, like those owned by Ducasse, Batali, and the like.

The point of Le Cirque is to go there and be greeted by its owner, Sirio Maccioni. Well, the first point is, can you get in and get a reservation. If you can, then the second question is whether Sirio greets you or not. The third point is where you are seated.

According to this documentary, much of Manhattan high society -- the billionaires, celebrities, etc -- rate their social standing depending on how Sirio treats you.

Now here's the thing. They show Sirio's background and rather than being some European aristocrat, he grew up as a hungry peasant who waited tables on the Riviera. He migrated to America and became maitre d at iirc the Four Seasons, where his "reign" began.

So an evil spirited, ignorant high school drop out rules the fashion world and what the rich wear, while a former peasant waiter tells them exactly where they stand in the social hierarchy based on where they are seated to eat his uninspired conventional Italian food.

One thing about body image/type promoted by fashion. It was once explained to me by a fashionista that designers want rail thin models because what they really are looking for is coat hangers, not women's bodies. While I don't mean to suggest that women dress primarily to impress men, it is surprising how different the ideal image of women is in women's magazines compared to the equally unreal ideal image of women promoted in "lads'" magazines.

[NorthernSpy]

12. Can you believe she spent a weekend with Bob Marley?

What was he thinking?


Speaking of that "le Cirque" place, get a load of this silly review from the NYT:

What sort of entree was apt after an appetizer like that? Chilean sea bass. Le Cirque served it without apparent shame but with considerable ostentation: a sauce of Champagne, butter, cream and hon shimeji mushrooms; a darkly glittering crown of black caviar. It was wanton, craven and totally delicious.

Craven? Your dinner was craven? Meaning, it was an utterly cowardly piece of fish?


Well yeah, I guess that after getting larded down w/ butter and cream and bubbly and fancy mushrooms and CAVIAR, not to mention having been KILLED and frozen and cooked, that fish was probably no longer in a fightin mood.

The reviewer goes on to applaud le Cirque as a "haute hoot". Dumb.

[HamdenRice]

13. Yeah, but I can't believe Bob Marley spent a weekend with her!

:rofl:

That's about the only positive thing I can think of re Wintour.

Btw, at the end of the movie about Le Cirque, they get a review from the NY Times. In fact, much of the latter half of the movie is about their building anxiety about getting reviewed by the Times.

At that point it gets incredibly creepy. The publisher of the Times, "Punch" Schulzberger, comes to their restaurant the day the review is coming out. He tells them the review will be good.

Then later that night after Punch has left, the review is posted on line at the Times and it's devastating. It's a head-spinning moment because it reveals Schulzberger to be a creepy liar.

But the review itself, incorporated into the film, is exactly, devastatingly accurate and on point, saying that it's mostly about the bizarre, elitist ritual of Sirio deciding who to talk to and where to sit you. It's one of the great restaurant reviews of all time, a sort of anthropological dissection of Le Cirque as an institution. The film is also a family drama because the adult children (with much genuine emotional anguish) are trying to get the patriarch Sirio to be more democratic and serve better food, and he's basically saying his job is to serve uber rich people the peasant food they've come to expect. The review overthrows the patriarchy.

I think the review you are referring to was after they revamped the menu and got re-reviewed positively.

Amazing film.

[Number23]

15. Mmmm... craven sea bass....

:rofl:

And last I checked, wasn't "ostentation" a BAD thing??? :shrug:

[Number23]

14. Damn, Hamden! Great post!

Who the hell knew you were such a fashionista in training?? :)

I remember reading "The Devil wears Prada" when I was taking a course on social and economic issues in Argentina a few years ago. That book was so sh*tty I kept putting it down every few days to read Condoleeza Rice's autobiography. (Yeah, it was THAT bad.) The movie was much, much better but still not good. The only saving grace was Meryl Streep who was simply fantastic. And the man that also worked at the magazine who took Andie under his wing was very good too. (Tucci??)

What's remarkable to me is the way the masters of the universe often get suckered into promoting some fool as the arbiter of their status.

But that's the thing -- for these people to become the "arbiters" and status symbols of the rich and powerful, they are probably anything BUT fools. They probably have studied meticulously and know exactly which buttons to push to make the rich and foolish grovel at their feet.

Anna Wintour does scream pompous stupidity, but so does everything about fashion to me. The idea that you can take an absolutely hideous shirt and because of the lack of confidence and sense of worth that plagues so many people, slap a Versace label and a $500 price tag and it will fly off of the shelves is simply astounding. And I won't even touch on the social aspects of that type of ridiculous spending on clothing when people are starving throughout all four corners of the world.

But even saying all of that, I am absolutely floored with what you've said about ol' Anna. I simply had no idea her rise through the ranks was so skanky and scandalous. But I bet when she's home alone and no one is around, she is laughing her overly cropped bob @SS off at all of the people who wouldn't give her the time of day when she was pre-Vogue Anna (is Anna Wintour her real name??) who'd pee their pants to be in her "honored presence" now.

I've been reading Vogue, W and the other... ahem "high society" :eyes: magazines since I was a teenager. My first magazine subscription was to Elle when I was 15 so I've heard all about these high falootin' restaurants, though I've never been to any. That documentary on Le Cirqu sounds pitiful and absolutely hilarious at the same time. Apparently, the best way to get in with the rich and shameless is to treat them like dirt. I could do that. :)

[bliss_eternal]

9. Ok, I need to say something....

...though first of all, you need to know it is difficult for me to say what I'm going to...about the Vogue cover. The reason being, the older I get, the more aware I am of the myriad of ways women are taken apart, used for the profit of large corporations, etc. As such, much of what is the magazine industry (and what it represents) really pisses me off. Seriously.

BUT having said that....(and here's what's hard for me to admit)

I grew up in a time when it was rare to see women that looked like myself (or women I'm related to) on the covers of magazines.
As such, I guess a part of me responded to that, because I had a strong (rather unexpected) reaction to Michelle Obama on Vogue. I knew she was featured on the cover, but was surprised by how I reacted to seeing it, on the shelf--in a store.

I literally found myself staring, grinning (like an idiot) and I had to fight back the tears forming in my eyes. As much as I dislike what it represents, I'm incredibly proud and thrilled to see Mrs. Michelle Obama--an intelligent, educated black woman, proud of who she is, a good mother, a caring woman....(who is NOT a skinny, emaciated, super model) on the cover of Vogue. Thrilled.

;) :hi:

[Number23]

10. Awww, Bliss!

I literally found myself staring, grinning (like an idiot) and I had to fight back the tears forming in my eyes.

You're making me cry too! Stop it!!

:hug: :) :hug:

[Number23]

16. See this is the kind of stuff that screams Vogue Cluelessness

Look at these magazine covers:

Premier issue of Vogue China -
Once the cover is "folded" correctly, there are only 3 women and the blonde is right in the middle.

Premier issue of Vogue India -

Why these people at Vogue feel that they just absolutely HAVE to put a blonde white Australian woman in between the images of these STUNNING women representing their own countries is the type of stuff that makes women all over the world lose their minds.

Look at the Vogue India cover. Those Indian women put that blonde woman to SHAME. She looks like she should be bringing them bagels and taking their coffee order! And yet, there she is, front and damn center on the cover of Vogue INDIA between Indian women who were probably more beautiful than her when they were still fetuses.

And these are not images taken during the 1950's or anything. Vogue China launched in 2005 and Vogue India launched in 2007. This is why the Vogue covers of Michelle and Beyonce back to back is so interesting. Yes, I know that Vogue is full of opportunists taking advantage of the current climate, but anything that gets these people to LEARN and ACCEPT that beauty, taste and style does not automatically = blonde and underfed is imho a very, damn good thing.