Superstar basketball player LeBron James became the first black man to cover Vogue in its 115-year history. Famed photographer Annie Leibovitz captured the image of James and supermodel Gisele Bundchen. James is photographed with "his mouth wide open and teeth exposed holding a trophy, so to speak. Critics have compared the cover to the iconic image of King Kong and actress Fay Wray.
ESPN columnist Jemelle Hill also notes the similarity:"LeBron has Gisele in one hand and a basketball in the other. LeBron is dressed in basketball gear, with his muscles flexing, tattoos showing and bared teeth. Gisele, on the other hand, is wearing a gorgeous slim-fitting dress, and smiling.
"She looks like she's on her way to something fashionable and exciting. He looks like he's on his way to a pickup game for serial killers.
"Now, maybe the point was to show the contrast between brawn and beauty, masculinity versus femininity, strength versus grace. But Vogue's quest to highlight the differences between superstar athletes and supermodels only successfully reinforces the animalistic stereotypes frequently associated with black athletes."
Given his stardom, the baller could have insisted on a more flattering image. Then again, this is the same LeBron James that was the only member of the Cleveland Cavaliers to refuse to publicly condemn the Chinese government for its role in the ongoing genocide in Darfur. LeBron James has become the caricature of a ridiculously wealthy entertainer with no social conscience.
While I agree that the Vogue cover is quite disturbing, I don't know if James or the model have much to say about what photo appears on the cover. The subjects view the photos--all of them--and there are many. In the end, however, the decision to put a specific photo on the cover is let up to the publication's managing editors. Of course, the very offensive photo and the clamor it has caused/causes would not be a firestorm that the editor would even care about. As you know, they would readily defend their work, excusing away any and all controversy by claiming "artistic expression." But it is a very offensive cover, to me. LeBron James has no sense of history and even fewer clues.
ReplyDeletecorrection on abovepost:
ReplyDelete"...left up to...", not "...let up to."
I really don't expect much from LeBron anyway. A socially aware brother would have allowed a photo like this to be taken.
ReplyDeleteI do not understand why it is offensive. Someone please explain - if you can do so without hurling insults and telling me how stupid I am.
ReplyDeleteIs it as bad as this post about Ron Joe?
ReplyDeleteTuesday, January 29, 2008
http://rattlernation.blogspot.com/2008/01/ron-joe-dismissed.html#links
I was disappointed with LeBron James when he was totally unaware of the misery and suffering of the people of Darfur! He said he had not knowledge of that crisis! How far removed can one be, and to make that statement to the news media? Duh! All brawn and no brains!
ReplyDeleteCorrection...had "no" knowledge fo the crisis!
ReplyDeletecorrection again "of" not "fo" the crisis. Fast fingers!
ReplyDelete