New Hermes campaign shows desi model in her native (colonized) habitat
by Carmen Van Kerckhove
It was just Thursday when we wondered why fashion designers and editors don’t seem to be able to use models of color without exoticizing/exploiting their race or culture. And last summer, we discussed Vogue’s obsession with romanticizing colonized Africa and Asia.
Folks at Hermes must have been reading closely because they managed to squeeze both blunders into a single ad campaign.
Check out their new ads, featuring desi model Lakshmi Menon. And lo and behold, what else appears in the ads? Elephants! With colorful henna-esque tattoos! And jodhpurs! Lest we forget the glorious days of British colonial rule in India!
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
Imran wrote:
Am I missing something on the colonization front? Is it just the jodhpurs? Because they are an Indian invention named after an Indian city
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 11:24 am ¶
KXB wrote:
It has nothing to do with the British. Decorating elephants was common in India for centuries. What bothered me is that while the ad is set in India, the female model is Indian, but the male model is not. So, I guess the only Indian male you can pair off with an attractive Indian woman is an elephant.
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 11:39 am ¶
Dan wrote:
To me, there is seeing exploitation/racism and then there is looking for it.
Most times when you’re looking for it, more harm than good is accomplished.
Seeing ALL the ads in this campaign brings a brings a better perspective. The animals are clearly the intended focus (after the product). The human models are the secondary focus.
Also as wealth increases in many Asian countries, luxury European brands will court their money. These consumers are as equally diverse in tastes and value systems as the rest of the world. Should they really be shamed into wearing only sari’s because they weren’t colonized?
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 12:34 pm ¶
HighJive wrote:
Maybe it’s actually a campaign targeting plus-sized women, and the elephants are politely symbolizing the intended consumers. Or perhaps the painted elephants are analogous to Blackface entertainers. Then again, if you surveyed the advertising in fashion magazines, you’d realize that elephants are woefully underrepresented—so these Hermes ads are actually quite breakthrough and even uplifting to pachyderms everywhere.
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 2:50 pm ¶
Sewere wrote:
Highjive, I almost chocked on my food when I read that…. I think elephants are the coolest creatures and I’m excited to see them getting more representation in fashion magazines.
You make me proud that there are a few minorities focusing on the important things rather than spending all their time looking for racism in everything. Makes me feel there’s still hope for a world where the color of person’s skin (as well as the history and the experiences of people of color) is of no consequence whatsoever. All together now, “Khumbaya my lord…”
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 3:53 pm ¶
Bianca wrote:
Khumbaya, Sewere.
In one photo, she’s cuddling an elephant (which I am also happy to see) and wearing a sari-esque dress. And the response is: “Indian culture is being romanticized!”
In another photo, she’s in jodhpurs (Indian, in origin, I believe) with the pretty painted elephants. And the response is: “Colonial rule is being celebrated!”
A white male model is used in another photo. The response: “There’s no representation of models of color!”
So… my question is: What do you want to see?
Why is it WRONG to include henna, elephants or traditional Indian clothing in a fashion campaign inspired by India? If the model had been a non-white male, would folks be bothered?
Nobody’s being mocked here. The only creatures that may have been exploited were those elephants.
Can only Indian designers use India and Indians as the inspiration for their work? Can only African designers use Africa as a backdrop with African models?
I understand the problems with Vogue’s white model/native African backdrop. I understand that maybe some women may feel validated by seeing girls with their skin color in fashion magazines.
I think this post actually undermines the issue. I agree, for once, that some folks are searching in this ad, in every ad, that’s not there.
I wonder what some of you may have to say about Kali Arulpragasam and her jewelry. It’s supposed to be celebratory. Do the rules change for her, because of who she is?
This issue is frustrating me.
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 7:00 pm ¶
HighJive wrote:
Well, all kidding aside, it does go to the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” nature of this issue. Yes, one can view these ads and ask, “Why does the Indian model have to push all the Indian stereotypes?” The alternative solution often employed in these cases is equally offensive: depicting a White model sporting the Indian gear. We’ve all winced at seeing one too many fashion spreads with Kate Moss draped in Kente cloth and mingling with the dancing natives. Sadly, the reactions will continue until there is true diversity in imagery from the fashion industry. Of course, that would require redefining beauty standards. And that’s a whole other can of worms.
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 8:25 pm ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
So, as a concerned WOC and an aspiring fashionista, I’d like to see some images from the fashion industry that DO get the stamp of approval and are ideal, as far as minority representation goes. Is there anyone who’s getting this right with models? (as opposed to Kenneth Cole and other “real people” ad campaigns)
Posted 03 Mar 2008 at 11:54 pm ¶
sfsinger wrote:
Well Hermes is a company of such big tent racial harmony after all. Oh wait…didn’t they deny Oprah entry into the store in Paris?
Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 2:43 am ¶
tasha wrote:
“Maybe it’s actually a campaign targeting plus-sized women, and the elephants are politely symbolizing the intended consumers”
@High Jive
Ha, ha, ha. I sincerely doubt that this ad is intended to target plus sized women (obviously). Everyone knows that jodhpurs only add width to the hips.
Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 8:46 am ¶
NancyP wrote:
I don’t have a problem with the breeches (the riding pants worn under knee length boots - the model is NOT wearing jodhpurs, which are worn over ankle length boots).
But elephants are inappropriate. Polo ponies would be appropriate-ish, though the lady needs a regulation helmet on hand, and a pair of gloves and mallet.
PS no riding gear comes in white, except for the occasional Texas parade outfit.
Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 12:32 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
The alternative solution often employed in these cases is equally offensive: depicting a White model sporting the Indian gear.
Except that’s what they did. And they do do that a lot of the time.
(On a side note, are there _any_ male models of colour that are notable?)
Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 7:48 pm ¶
youngin` wrote:
@Jay . . I would have found that more offensive . Here not so much .
well look on the positive side the model is not very “white / fair ” for indians that`s a big step .
From personal experience (east indian / south african decent) I know how vital that is to the general indian ideal of beauty . SMH it disgusts me . I know people personally who have attempted to bleach their skin with bleach because ” dark skinned indian woman don`t get nice husbands” PURE BULLSHIT; & i`m only 15 .
Posted 05 Mar 2008 at 12:58 am ¶
S wrote:
South Asians had been fetishizing the elephant long before colonialism and will continue to do long afterwards. We love them. We decorate them. We think elephants are always appropriate.
And the model is not light-skinned, so you can’t complain about colorism here either.
As for the riding gear, that stuff is a sign of wealth and elitism. It’s reserved for white people. But the dark-skinned South Asian model is wearing it, so your logic about colonialism and exoticism doesn’t really hold on that point either.
And it’s not Madonna/Gwen Stefani cheesy either. It’s in pretty good taste, as far as aesthetics go.
I really don’t see anything wrong with this ad.
Posted 06 Mar 2008 at 1:47 am ¶