Why Michelle Obama’s Vogue cover matters

by Carmen Van Kerckhove, originally published at CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 blog

A few days ago I found an email in my inbox from publisher Conde Nast, informing me that if I subscribed to Vogue now, I’d be guaranteed to receive the spring fashion issue, featuring Michelle Obama on the cover.

Magazine junkie that I am, I’ve received plenty of subscription solicitations in my day, but can’t remember ever receiving one tied to a promise of receiving a particular issue. It goes to show how big of a deal this cover is.

Copies are selling on eBay at three and a half times the cover price. There are reports of shortages, with people desperate to get their hands on a copy. The issue is even making headlines around the globe in India, England, South America, and Australia.

In case anyone is wondering what’s so utterly remarkable about having Michelle Obama model the cover of Vogue, consider the fashion magazine’s blighted past in matters of race.

Vogue has a history of publishing disquieting images of black people, so the March cover — showing Michelle Obama in a healthy, glowing, glamorous light — is a definite departure for the magazine.

Traditionally, Vogue has thrown a spotlight on very few faces of color. In the last decade, only five covers have featured blacks: Oprah in November 1998, Halle Berry in December 2002, Liya Kebede in May 2005, Jennifer Hudson in February 2007, and Lebron James in April 2008. And during the past 80 years, only 18 of Vogue’s covers – that’s less than 2% — have featured black women.

Even the few Vogue covers which have featured black celebrities have been heavily criticized by advocacy groups. Jennifer Hudson’s cover was decidedly unflattering, showing her mouth hanging open, while the Lebron James/Gisele Bündchen cover was widely derided as overtly racist, with its unmistakable allusion to a renowned World War I propaganda poster. Vogue could have picked a more elegant shot of the two, but instead chose to go with King Kong imagery, with James hunched in the great ape’s position, looking lethal.

If the above examples aren’t sufficient to prove my point, several times a year Vogue publishes a photo shoot that “contrasts” a white model against natives of color from another country, in an apparent attempt to spotlight the “primitive” or “uncivilized” nature of non-whites.

But Vogue isn’t the only fashion player with a race problem. Over the last few years, a heated debate has been brewing about the lack of diversity in the fashion industry. In late 2007, legendary model Iman and model agency owner Bethann Hardison hosted a series of town-hall style meetings at the New York Public Library to emphasize the discrimination faced by models of color. Robin Givhan, the respected fashion columnist at The Washington Post, has written a series of articles examining this very issue. And even Vogue itself ran an article in its July 2008 issue with the headline “Is Fashion Racist?”

So are we beginning to discern a glimmer of light at the end of a very long tunnel when it comes to race and fashion? The Michelle Obama Vogue cover is perhaps an early sign, as is the rise of up-and-coming models of color like Jourdan Dunn, Chanel Iman, and Arlenis Sosa. All are making inroads in a field which has been largely denied to people of color.

For better or worse, Vogue is viewed as a key arbiter of what’s considered beautiful in American society. Having the magazine shine a spotlight on First Lady Michelle Obama’s decidedly non-European brand of beauty — with her dark skin, full nose and lips, and athletic build — means a lot to millions of people of color.

It’s no wonder the issue is flying off the shelves.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. News for February 20 | Xenia Institute on 20 Feb 2009 at 12:41 pm

    [...] Why Michelle Obama’s Vogue Cover Matters  |  Racialicious For better or worse, Vogue is viewed as a key arbiter of what’s considered beautiful in American society. Having the magazine shine a spotlight on First Lady Michelle Obama’s decidedly non-European brand of beauty — with her dark skin, full nose and lips, and athletic build — means a lot to millions of people of color. [...]

Comments

  1. Monie wrote:

    I have totally lost interest in Vogue. There are far too many inclusive fashion mags around for me to waste time waiting for American Vogue to venture into the new century.

    Just because they’ve decided to cash in on the Obama popularity doesn’t mean they have decided to change their racist ways.

    The proof of any real change would be in the long run. How many POC’s will be featured on the cover this year beside Michelle? How many of the next few years? We shall see.

    In the meantime I’ll save my money; I won’t be buying this or any other American Vogue for a long while.

  2. Lola wrote:

    I agree with Monie, they are just cashing in on the Obama hype.

  3. Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:

    No thanks to VOGUE. I’m angry that VOGUE has turned Michelle Obama into a fashion icon, when in fact, she should be lauded for her BRAINS, not her beauty.

  4. Asada wrote:

    I have to agree with monie. I swore off magazines once I was old enough to buy them on my own and mature enough to realize ” I ” wasnt IN any of them. When I do buy mags ( which are pretty overpriced these days) I tend to go for ethnic magazines with GEORGEOUS models of color. Sometimes rock mags if my favorite band’s on the cover.

    Sigh, why can’t I make the right investment choices? Had I only known it was gonna be THIS big…..

  5. Stella wrote:

    Despite my politics, I am not as strong as you are, Monie… I bought the issue. I adore Michelle, I had to… but I otherwise hate what Vogue stands for.

  6. AintIAWoman wrote:

    I’m torn. I definitely agree with all the points Monie made (and others below her).
    But when Carmen wrote “For Better or for Worse, Vogue is viewed as a key arbiter of what’s considered beautiful in American society” — I think this is the key point (for better OR for worse) and its why its really important that she’s on the cover.
    I agree that we should be talking about her brains and her self and not her looks, but I’m still all for anything that shows the beauty of WOC — especially when it is shown to be so ‘mainstream’ as to be on the cover of Vogue.
    This is not to forgive Vogue all its sins– I dont think we ever can. But this cover and this issue are still something really positive and I hope this gives others access to the mainstream– and I just HOPE that less famous WOC who are removed from Obamamania are also soon to pop up on the cover.

  7. Paz wrote:

    I was put off that Michelle Obama posed for the cover of Vogue, considering she does much more thanwear clothes. But at the same time , I have to celebrate a woman of color, an accomplished and admirable one, on the cover of Vogue. (And the fact that they actually picked a GOOD photo.) And I am in awe of the global popularity. I might buy it just to send a message that hey, black women CAN be considered beautiful and CAN sell magazine covers.

    It reminds me of the all-black issue from Italian Vogue. Yes, it can be considered a stunt, where afterwards black women will fade into obscurity, but that issue was so insanely popular, that I think, well, again, at least it’s sending a message that black women are beautiful and marketable.

    BTW — no idea about Liya Kebede and Halle Berry being on the cover of Vogue. Wow. The magazine’s more progressive than I thought. I thought Chanel Iman was on the cover too, one issue when they had up and coming models on the cover…

    Also…has Andre Leon Talley ever spoken up about the lack of color in Vogue and runways in general? Just curious…

  8. Nelly wrote:

    “BTW — no idea about Liya Kebede and Halle Berry being on the cover of Vogue. Wow. The magazine’s more progressive than I thought. ”

    Paz, it’s not! Seriously, Kebede had a paltry one-page article (she was supposedly featured on the cover to talk about her charity work). And Berry was on the cover a gazillion years ago, even though she’s a megafamous actress. Sienna Miller, despite her tabloid-covered relationships, is probably a B-list actress even in her own country. Yet, she was on the cover of American Vogue twice within 2 years(including the big September issue). I understand the sentiment, though, because I expect so little from that magazine as well.

    I read fashion forums, and I’ve heard that the May issue will feature multiple models – including Kebede – on the cover. We’ll see if she’s pushed to the edges of the cover while Daria Werbowy or someone similar is at the center.

    No one has mentioned it here, but I’ve seen the Obama cover criticized (just like the Hudson one was) for being unflattering. People are saying Michelle Obama’s smile looks really awkward in the photo.

  9. politicallyincorrect wrote:

    Michelles Vogue cover is unflattering. Average dress and unflattering facial expression. Essence did a better job. I didn’t know it was such a hot commodity, I just saw some in my local drug store

  10. F. wrote:

    I think Michelle looks lovely on the cover, though others on other blogs have said she looks “awkward” or “tense” or whatever. Also, the dress the First Lady is wearing is by Jason Wu, a Taiwanese-American designer who also did her inaugural ball outfit. Apparently Andre Leon Talley was the one who introduced Michelle to the designer, so there’s another Vogue-connection.

  11. Stella wrote:

    Liya Kebede has been featured on the covers of Paris and Spanish Vogue, I have those issues. The entire issue of the former was dedicated to her… thought that was pretty awesome.

    But yeah, that Vogue Italia issue was overall, underwhelming.

  12. Orville wrote:

    I agree with Monie it is obvious Vogue just wants to make money. Vogue is a racist magazine and they just want to cash in on the popularity of Michelle Obama. Michelle Obama being on the cover of Vogue doesn’t change Vogue’s racist history.

    And why is Vogue a big deal anyway? There are so many magazines out there for women of colour.

  13. Orville wrote:

    But why is Carmen saying Vogue is more important then Essence? I would think for black women Essence is a more important publications? Essence is a huge magazine their circulation is over 1 million I believe. Essence makes a lot of money.

  14. Paz wrote:

    @Nelly – sorry, I meant to add to my Vogue being progressive comment. I agree with your comments, although I think the Michelle Obama cover is beautiful. She doesn’t have a beauty paegant, model, or Hollywood smile, but I think there’s a quiet grace that she has in that picture.

  15. Paz wrote:

    Ok, this is not showing up. I meant to add – end sarcasm. to my comment.

  16. JC wrote:

    I don’t believe for a moment that Vogue will stop being racist. They merely elevated Michelle Obama to the status of honorary whites or at least
    “black people we love”. The rest of the fashion industry and future issues will continue to snob PoC or treat them as background decorations. The American fashion and entertainment industries will have to do a lot more before they shed their white supremacist image.

  17. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Orville –

    Because Vogue is considered more influential than Essence, despite having about the same circulation.

    Essence – 1.05 Million
    Elle – 1 Million
    Vogue – 1.2 Million

    However, Essence is seen as a niche mag. Vogue and Elle are seen as mainstream.

    You can see this gap specifically in the advertisements each magazine is able to book. Vogue and Elle are full of major designers and upscale brands. Essence has hair relaxers, McDonalds, and mid-market brands. While some variations could be described to the fact that Essence has a mixed demographic, age wise, while Elle and Vogue are more targeted, my research seems to indicate that quite a bit of racism is at play, something even Essence’s popularity can’t compensate for.

  18. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ Paz–here’s a little something I dug up from a lazy Google search re: Andre Leon Talley and the (lack of) diversity in the modeling world:

    “There has been a definite surge, to use the military term, of much diversity, particularly more black girls,” said Andre Leon Talley, editor-at-large at Vogue. “There’s been a series of conversations. It’s a fresh moment.”

    He’s quoted in this article :

    Talley, who has been working on the Obama campaign, paraphrased the dynamic orator by saying, “Change we can believe in has to happen. This struggle is so important to all of us. They will say this is not an issue but it is.”

    Make of it what you will. IMO, I get the distinct impression of his not wanting to bite the hand that feeds him.

    @Everyone–I saw a copy of the publication at a Brooklyn (NY) magazine shop a couple of blocks from where I work. I looked specifically for the article and the photo spread–buried under pages and pages of overwhelming white models and actresses and socialites–and thought, “Meh.” First Lady Obama was seer-e-us–seriously on the phone, seriously writing something–and the rest of the photos were stocks from other publies. Like I said, “Meh.” And the cowlick happening on the side of her head makes me want to roll over to Conde Nast, up to the Vogue editorial floor, and do a verbal smackdown on whomever styled her at that shoot and who decided *that* photo was the best one for the cover. For the love of all…

    Another thing is the First Lady is not a model, so her alleged “tenseness” may come from not having developed that sense of being in front of a camera. One could argue that she’s been photographed a thousand times and she “should” be used to it, but there’s a difference in being snapped by a photojournalist in the middle of a moment and sitting in a staged setting, which models are used to. So the “she looks tense and awkward” argument that F. found on other blogs doesn’t quite work for me.

    With that reality in mind, I find it really interesting to see the contrast between how Ms. Obama is photographed–from the styling to the pictures themselves–on magazines catering to Blacks and whites. Honestly, Ebony and Essence made her look spectacular–literally, not a hair out of place. Vogue…well, the photo’s pretty bland (and cowlicked!!). How did Ebony and Essence get such amazing pictures of this woman who isn’t a model and Vogue didn’t quite get it? (My question is rhetorical.) Perhaps Vogue should have looked at Essence and Ebony and taken some notes on how to photograph the First Lady.

  19. Nelly wrote:

    Paz, I totally got the sarcasm in your first post, and I’d thought/hoped that had come across in mine (the Internet makes it hard to discern or display a certain tone sometimes). I actually had the same reaction as you just a few days ago (I’d long forgotten about the Halle cover and had seen it mentioned somewhere). I think we’re coming from the exact same place.

    I just wanted to add the parts about Liya and Halle, because I like to get on my soapbox about those awful Sienna Miller covers! If I’m not mistaken, Chanel Iman was on the cover of Teen Vogue.

    When I was looking for pictures of Liya, I came across an interesting conversation. The person attributed her cover partly to the fact that she’d just been signed by Estee Lauder, a Vogue favorite (their CEO is always on Vogue’s party pages). Kebede also happened to be wearing Chanel (which also happened to be having a big retrospective at the Met).

    So, the Black women who’ve recently graced the cover are:

    Oprah – no explanation needed

    Halle Berry – promoting a big Bond film a few months after her historic Oscar win

    Liya Kebede – associated with a museum/companies that have strong ties to Vogue

    Jennifer Hudson – frontrunner for the Oscar

    Michelle Obama – no explanation needed

    I know progress is sometimes incremental, but I’m not expecting a shift from Vogue. Their Black cover models have been positively exceptional. Meanwhile, Blake Lively – whom I don’t dislike – can get a Vogue cover to promote a barely-watched show like “Gossip Girl.” But women of color have to be Oprah or Michelle Obama to even get a shot. So, all in all, I’m pretty skeptical that change is nigh. But that doesn’t mean I won’t be happy if it comes.

  20. JC wrote:

    I love how some of these liberal racists who work in the fashion and entertainment industries openly support Obama yet continue to treat PoC like dirt in their professional world. How do they sleep at night? Would it take an Obama youtube video on the issue to really wake them up? They don’t see that they are contributing to the racism in popular culture? No, giving money and time to the Obama campaign doesn’t really atone for their “sin” of treating black models as less beautiful than paper-thin whites.

  21. gatamala wrote:

    TCS~ I will give ALT some credit for fighting for WOC. I saw him “instruct” a designer to hire a black model because her skin would show off the metallic dress (damn right :) )

    JC~~ amen

  22. kerrita k wrote:

    *there was an article about chick flicks in the most recent entertainment weekly. i bring this up here – because unspoken by the article but clear in the images of the heroines – that chick flick was synonymous with white chick flick.
    *what disturbs me about the vogue issue (and the ew article) is that she has become an object that represents a greater, unspoken, unexamined whole. black women are like onions to quote shrek…
    *i choose to reject the oprah-fication of michelle obama. putting her on the cover of vogue (altho i did buy it – what a lonely sucker black woman am i?) strikes me as one of the things white liberals do: the “see we did it!” ** can we have a medal now?** deal that i abhor.
    * then, of course, i feel like a cranky bitch for even complaining about it – her story is closer to my story than either oprah’s or iman’s…
    -k

  23. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @gatamala–if only he’d turn around and “instruct” his boss, Anna Wintour, on getting more Black models–and models of color in general, and not in some crazy-ass exotic-erotic, let’s-perpetuate-the-stereotypes photo shoot–onto the cover and in the pages of Vogue. Dang, he probably sees her more than the designers. But, again, I don’t think he wants to bite the hand that feeds him.:D

  24. timarasa wrote:

    As we all know, American Vogue (and other mainstream magazines of the like) have a readership that is diverse, but unfortunately is not reflected in the models they choose for editorials and the covers. But you know what’s even more diverse contrary to what the magazines would have you believe? The consumer base that buys up the products pedaled in the 100+ pages of ads in any of these magazines (go to any makeup/clothing/beauty blog, they’re all jonesing after the same products no matter what type of woman the blog is geared towards…MAC is sacred, no matter who you’re talking to! :o )

    Vogue is just being really, really, lazy (as well as insensitive)! They just don’t want to take the plunge and rock the boat of their current but extremely myopic business model. And they come up with circular arguments and specious demographic surveys and background research (or none!) to corroborate their paradigm. If they featured models that actually reflected not just the readership but the product consumer base itself, who knows how many more new subscribers they’d get. Honestly, would they lose so many subscribers if they, as an example, put a black model and an Asian model on respective covers each year? And if they lose some, who cares? If they keep doing it, numbers will normalize and readers will be [gasp] *used* to it. Imagine that…

    Regarding the Michelle Obama cover, I’m a bit disappointed with how it came out. This woman in addition to being extremely intelligent, incredibly gracious, successfully enterprising among many things, is also gorgeous! The cover didn’t do her justice. But I am glad she IS on it, whether Vogue always does a 1st Lady spread/cover or not.

  25. Orville wrote:

    I think Essence is an amazing magazine and and I read Essence. No Essence isn’t perfect but the numbers don’t lie. Essence is making incredible money over 1 million circulation they are competing with Vogue.

    I just have a problem with the attitude that since Vogue is the white American mainstream fashion “bible” that Michelle Obama being on the cover is progressive when it is not.

    When are people of colour going to change our thinking that we don’t need white validation? Michelle Obama gracing the cover of Vogue isn’t progress it is just good business. Right now the Obamas are hot and white magazines want to cash in on the Obamas popularity.

    Vogue puts some pretty crappy stars on their cover. And it’s true yet a black woman has to be A list to grace the covers of Vogue.

  26. Safiya Outlines wrote:

    I find it interesting that Essence sells more then Elle and it pretty much on a par with Vogue. I would never have guessed that.

    It shows how often POC interests and POC media are played down as only pertaining to a small number of people and how all-pervading that thinking is.

  27. Starlet Harlot wrote:

    Oh Michelle, what a woman… I adore her.

    Reading through the comments I find myself agreeing with different people for different reasons:
    - Her appearance on the cover IS important as Vogue is a signifcant voice of fashion for the contemporary world
    - I really doubt this will prompt Vogue to change their racist ways
    - They’re definitely cashing in on Obama hype
    - Nonetheless, what a wonderful woman to have on the cover – media ploy or not, she’s still a remarkable and admirable woman and the magazine has a widespread audience.

    On the picture itself, my first reaction was OMGGUSHSHELOOKSGORGEOUS! Closer exaination and consideration:
    - Shows off her gorgeously toned arms!
    - The dress is sedate but very classic glam and stunning, I think. LOVE the colour but my favourite colour is pink so that figures.
    - Hair – what were they thinking? Fail.
    - Pose: very passive. Not bad, exactly, but – softened and passive. I would’ve preferred to have her more directly front-on to the camera, engaging with the viewer in a more active way.
    - She does look a little uncomfortable – I can’t imagine that post itself would be the most natural to hold just so for a photo and the makeup is very soft. I still think she looks beautiful, but again I get the feeling they wanted a passive Michelle in this photo, which is an issue in itself.

    I personally do not like the beige, creamy, slightly generic surroundings either.

    On the whole – it’s not the best image they could’ve chosen of her, but I love that she’s on Vogue and I love that the world’s paying attention…

  28. texascowgirl wrote:

    She’ll be the last black woman on the cover until Malia Obama is old enough to be on the cover. Nothing has changed in the fashion industry. Nothing.

  29. Westerly wrote:

    Glad I’m not the only one who is not overly enamoured by the cover (Styling, hair, pose, and LIGHTING which, as the Cruel Secretary pointed out, Essence seems to know how to do much better than Vogue.)

    ——————————————————
    So, the Black women who’ve recently graced the cover are:

    Oprah – no explanation needed

    Halle Berry – promoting a big Bond film a few months after her historic Oscar win

    Liya Kebede – associated with a museum/companies that have strong ties to Vogue

    Jennifer Hudson – frontrunner for the Oscar

    Michelle Obama – no explanation needed
    —————————————————–

    And to me, that’s exatly the problem. While on the one hand it’s almost admirable that all of the black women who have graced the cover are successful high achievers or downright extraordinary, it is also depressing and actually discriminatory.

    Because in the end, Vogue is a fashion magazine – that’s all it is, yet the requirements don’t seem to be nearly as sky-high for white models and celebrities (i.e. the b-list Sienna “It-girl” Miller) to get on the cover. You don’t have to be particularly accomplished or even particularly attractive for that matter.

    Doesn’t seem as if you can ‘merely’ be a pretty girl/woman of colour who would look good on a fahsion magazine or in clothes. Instead, you have to do something stupendous before you’re allowed to brush shoulders with the mediocre types who are so often on the cover of Vogue.

  30. A. wrote:

    Vogue can go straight to hell.

    They’re doing things just to cash in on the Obama popularity. When Michelle was on the South Side speaking at my high school, who really cared?

    All the influential and beautiful WoC, and they generally are more fond of getting overused white celebrities on the cover. Would it kill them to put Gina Torres on the cover? Anika Noni Rose?

    Vogue is a joke. But White = mainstream while black = niche. I hope Essence surpasses them.

  31. jaye wrote:

    THIS would have been a cover worthy of Michelle Obama:

    http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/the_isis_factor.php

  32. Ric Caric wrote:

    The Michelle Obama covers of Vogue, People, Good Housekeeping, RedBook, and other magazines are all important because they represent her as the female embodiment of America’s ideal of itself–the living equivalent of the Statue of Liberty. It’s been a long time since a First Lady occupied this position and it’s an important cultural event that Michelle Obama occupies this position as a woman of color.

  33. Alston Adams wrote:

    @ Orville #25; Co-sign. It is NOT progress in our own mindset. It really does say that we need white validation.

    If anyone is looking for copies of this issue, ask a friend in Canada. I’ve seen plenty of them.

  34. aimerrouge wrote:

    Looking at the comments, it would appear that Michelle and Vogue can’t win for losing. Michelle is too important to be on Vogue? Maybe she is, but she didn’t turn them down. Vogue is irrelevant? Maybe it is, but it hasn’t gone out of business. I’m certain there would be outcry if Michelle wasn’t on the cover of Vogue (and other white magazines) because then they’d be ignoring this very important WOC.

  35. caroaber wrote:

    I welcome the Vogue cover of our First Lady, just as I did the Jennifer Hudson magazine cover.
    The coveted spot has seldom gone to a Black woman, and even J.Lo was initially dismissed as unworthy (though the British editrix Anna Wintour did finally relent).
    I never did get my hands on the sensational Italian Vogue issue that flew off the stands and was devoted to Black models.
    I welcome these signs of openness. Let’s see if Vanity Fair follows suit regarding Black and ethnic celebrities.

  36. DivergentDana wrote:

    “There are far too many inclusive fashion mags around for me to waste time waiting for American Vogue to venture into the new century.”

    Could you name them, because I’m having trouble finding some — although there’s a fantastic cover shot of Sessilee Lopez on this March’s issue of Latina magazine.

    “I would think for black women Essence is a more important publications? Essence is a huge magazine their circulation is over 1 million I believe. Essence makes a lot of money.”

    Essence, for me, seems to be more of a magazine for generations past. The shots and the clothes in it aren’t really cutting edge (imo, and not that American Vogue hasn’t fallen off in that regard as well), and they never had the half-an-issue of high fashion advertisements that Vogue has — even in these horrible, horrible times for magazines in general. There’s a niche and therefore an opportunity for something that’s a midpoint between the two.

  37. Michelle wrote:

    Co-sign #34.

    You know why it is important, because as long as Black women are marginalized in this country (and world) then the policy that shapes our lives and institutions will reflect that.

    Why is this important? Because right now, Black people still depend on policy and laws to shape our communities and our access to social programs. Whether we want it to be true or not, social programs are the bedrock of many Black women’s health care, child care, etc. Let’s look at the HIV crisis in the Black community. If we weren’t such an after thought, then this crisis would be dealt with head on. Let’s look at the obesity epidemic for young Black girls (a problem for all children in America, I know!). Same thing. Fibroids, the higher breast cancer mortality rates. The more we are invisible to White America, or only visible as stereotypes and clowns, then the policy will reflect that and we will continue to be at the effect of the issues that affect our communities.

    And I can’t believe what I am hearing/reading. That picture was soft and charming. Not sexy, but beautiful. I thought it was perfect. I appreciated the fact that it wasn’t high fashion, and more about class and sophistication. AND SHE DOESN’T HAVE A COWLICK. She apparently has some hair in the front that got teased and the way the lighting is, you can see that the stylist didn’t blend the teased hair in with the rest. A mistake, sure! But when is the last time ANYONE of us picked up a cover of Vogue with such a critical eye. I think that Blake Lively’s cover ain’t all that. But, no we all want to jump on Michelle Obama’s smile, her hair, he clothes, the background. My god! She is getting put through the ringer by the very women who should be the most proud of her and her accomplishments.

    And as long as little Black girls are still choosing to play with the White dolls because they are prettier, then you damn skippy that Michelle being on the cover of Vogue is important!

  38. coco wrote:

    did anyone have as much trouble as i am having trying to find the article with ms. obama on the inside? every page i turn to is another ad!

  39. Orville wrote:

    I disagree I don’ t see Michelle Obama on the cover of Vogue as something important. I just see American Vogue cashing in on Michelle Obama’s popularity. It is not progress when people of colour are despserate for white validation from a white fashion magazine. I just think there are more constructive things POC can be doing such as supporting magazines of colour.

    Although I am a man I can say I read Essence and I like the issues they discuss. Essence talks about feminism, about education, about family, about lesbians, about money issues, health, child care and many other issues.
    Essence also gives black female celebrities a platform they NORMALLY would not get unless they are Halle Berry or Queen Latifiah. For instance, Sanaa Lathan and Gabrielle Union, Kerry Washington and Nia Long have all been on the cover of Essence. Essence gives black women the platform the mainstream tends to ignore them.

    Essence also reaches out to black men because Essence realizes there are good black men out there.

    Now I understand Essence isn’t for everyone but Essence is doing something right given the fact their circulation numbers are very high over 1 million and that’s incredible.

  40. c.n. edaw wrote:

    Funny, I have never thought of Essence as a fashion magazine, but more of a black women’s lifestyle magazine. I once boycotted Essence for years because I got tired of all the “woe is me I’m single” articles. I think the clothing it features fit a certain niche ( thirtysomething black women who are above a size 6) as does its articles. Vogue has too many ads (yeah I know that’s the point) of clothing I can’t afford to buy or copy even when I can fit in them. Frankly, I didn’t think the Hudson photo was that bad. At least her make up and hair was done correctly.

    I personally don’t think Michelle Obama is the most naturally photogenic woman, but I find it hard to believe Vogue could not have chosen a more flattering photo.

    However, I say this wondering if what MOST of us into make up and fashion would think is more flattering is just not her personal style.

    She was done up on Essence’s cover and I thought she looked great. Best hair I ever saw her rock. The make up and lighting was flawless and she had a winning smile. There’s another photo spread I saw in a magaizine I can’t recall where she has a great updo, beautiful gown, and flawless makeup–the look I THOUGHT she would sport for the balls.

    However, in most photos and even for the Inauguration I noticed she often sports this “nude” make up look. And the hair is always uncomplicated. Frankly, if I’m on the cover of Vogue I want to be done up to the max and then I want the absolutely best shot chosen.

    But M.O. often looks very understated and a lot of people ( I am not one of them) are heralding that particular look. Since she’s apparently comfortable with it and people are complimentary for the most part, she may be instructing photographers/make up artists not to tinker with her image too much. Just a thought

  41. Monie wrote:

    @DivergentDana

    “…Could you name them, because I’m having trouble finding some …”

    Yes I can!

    V
    WAD
    POP
    (Non-American) Vogue
    Paper
    Numero
    French revue de modes
    I-D
    clam
    Trace

    Inclusive fashion mags are out there. I’m a mag collector and I don’t have any problem finding them.

  42. MelMel wrote:

    @Jaye: Wow. Almost too hot for Vogue. I set that as my desktop ;)

  43. Tiffany wrote:

    @ Orville
    “When are people of colour going to change our thinking that we don’t need white validation? ”

    Thank you we don’t need their validation so much time is wasted on wanting whites to accept us and do fur us, when we need to do for ourselves, people just don’t understand that concept.

    I also agree on your points about essence.

  44. Tiffany wrote:

    @ coco
    yes this issue with Michelle had WAY more ads then articles.

  45. Chen wrote:

    i had a deja-vu feeling looking at the lebron cover. You found the right pic I was thinking about.

    I wonder why they would run that pic of them. It makes white men uneasy.

  46. jaye wrote:

    melmel: i know! it was set as my desktop for weeks.

  47. LaurynX wrote:

    @Monie

    I agree that there are more inclusive mags out there, however are they as easy to get a hold of as Vogue? That may be the question. I have yet to see any of these mags in person, even in Barnes and Noble.
    On the other hand anybody can go to Walmart and get Vogue and Essence.

  48. LaurynX wrote:

    Also I don’t like Essence much. While it’s target is upwardly mobile black women, it doesn’t speak to me at all. Nothing about the mag appeals to me as a young 20-something. It’s stale.
    Essence had a fashion mag, Suede, that could have rivaled Vogue, but it got cut after a year with no explanation as to why.

  49. Monie wrote:

    L,

    I suppose the ease at which one can find these mags depends on the city in which you live. But even if it’s a bit more difficult to find them it’s worth the extra work to support magazines that support women of color.

  50. DivergentDana wrote:

    Well, many hard-to-find mags tend to end up at Half-Price book stores, and due to those usually-annoying subscription cards, one copy can sometimes be all you need. The international Vogues (well, the major Euro ones and Vogue Nippon) can often be found at bookstores in high-end areas, but they’re usually limited supply and very expensive.

  51. Free wrote:

    co-sign Orville #25: seeking validation equals giving up your power.

    Before commending Vogue or even giving them the benefit of the doubt, we should wait to see what comes next. Why praise them for doing what was expected? First Lady Michelle Obama, of Princeton and Harvard Law School, is recognized by the ruling class to which Vogue belongs. Vogue took great care with Michelle because unflattering images would have generated negative publicity and possible revenue loss. Michelle is too popular and her husband is too powerful to mess with. Recognition should be reserved and only given when Vogue establishes a consistent history of not publishing racists images.

    But that doesn’t mean that this cover isn’t important – it most certainly is, especially for young black girls. But that is not Vogue’s doing: Michelle deserves all the credit.

    When Annie Leibovitz received this assignment she knew exactly what was up. She wouldn’t dare do to Michelle Obama what she did to Jennifer Hudson, (it seems that she forgot the lessons of Bea Feitler). Perhaps Ms. Leibovitz would have related better if Jennifer Hudson resembled Nicole Kidman. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/features/over-exposed-is-annie-leibovitz-worthy-of-a-retrospective-at-the-national-portrait-gallery-849918.html

  52. Anonymous wrote:

    Just saw this article about race and Michelle’s representation in the media – it mentions this article and Carmen, I think you might like it!

    http://www.wiretapmag.org/blogs/44068