Vogue India Shows Appreciation For Indian Beauty With Caucasian Model
Highlighted originally published by Seattle Slim at Happy Nappy Head
This is the cover of the inaugural issue of Vogue India. Unfortunately, I don’t see much of anything distinctly “Indian” about it. I see them highlighting Australian model Gemma Ward, flanked by two Indian women, who may as well wear signs saying “sidekick” around their necks. To add to the affront, the Indian models both have blue eyes.
I know that most will say that it may not be too much to worry about because most Indians have bigger fish to fry like poverty but Vogue had a greater responsibility to do right by India and it failed.
Sad to say, this isn’t the first time. Vogue pulled the same stunt, with the same model on the cover of Vogue China’s inaugural issue.
I’m sorry but when I look for a Vogue India, I want to see beautiful Indian models all over the magazine; I want accurate representation.
Gemma Ward pales in comparison to the lovely Aishwarya Rai, so why isn’t Miss Rai on the cover? What about Shilpa Shetty? Looking at the other models, they didn’t even need Ward on the cover. Their beauty speaks volumes.
Unfortunately, their beauty wasn’t allowed to grace the cover without Gemma in the middle. What does speak volumes is Vogue’s subliminal message that unless a Caucasian female is associated with it, it’s not beautiful. The use of models with blue eyes (or possibly color contacts?) further cements Vogue’s idea of what women of color should look like in order to be considered pretty enough to stand next to a white woman’s beauty.
If this the way Vogue is going to operate when launching magazines for perspective countries, I shudder to think what Vogue Kenya may be. I can just see it now.
This is why we should be extra vigilant to the messages that the media sends children of color and protect them from deception. I wouldn’t bring this magazine into my house to line a bird cage.
Vogue’s message is loud, clear and pathetic. If this is the best Vogue can do, they should be ashamed of themselves. Gemma isn’t the standard of beauty in this photo, in all reality, she barely makes the cut.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I (Dee) first read this article, I wasn't sure what to think...I mean really, is Vogue to blame for representing what the majority of South Asians believe is beautiful? This has been an ongoing issue in South Asian culture - why point fingers at a fashion magazine trying to sell copies? Why not point fingers at the millions of people who buy into this industry of lightening potions and lotions?
The author suggests putting Aishwarya Rai on the inaugural cover. Great. That's just what India needs. Yet another cover with fair-skinned, blue-eyed, lack of acting ability Aish propagating the same message as Gemma - and even worse since she's actually Indian. Atleast with Gemma you could say Vogue was trying to make a statement about society breaking down international barriers and globalization taking effect. Instead this author takes a stab at Gemma, saying she barely makes the cut in comparison to other Indian actresses. How ironic is that - complaining about standards of beauty in other countries while judging Gemma's beauty in the same breath - hah.
You know what does make me happy about this cover? That for once, they haven't snapped photos of bollywood actresses with beaming lights on their faces, making them look 10 shades fairer than they are. Sure, maybe they have on blue contacts (which I can hardly notice), but atleast the shadism argument is out of the picture.
To me, this isn't so much an issue of beauty as it is one of race. If you're making a statement about globalization, fine. But why put the one white lady in the middle - flanked by her two b-class, brown-skinned, Bollywood actresses? And honestly, who did the photography? Couldn't you have asked Gemma to turn down the "deer caught in the headlights" look just a smidge?
Meh.
3 comments:
Div,
I hear what you're saying about that author coming down so hard on Gemma Ward. A) it's not her fault that she is white and B) it's not her fault that she booked the job and coveted spot. The girl got a thick paycheck and now visibility to billions of people who probably had no idea who she was beforehand. Which is why I made a personal clarification on behalf of myself, because I don't share the author's view of dismissing her entirely because she's white. I think she's a great model, she just isn't stunning to me or anything.
You question whether Vogue is to blame or the South Asian community... I personally say both, and I'll tell you why. I get free monthly issues of American, Paris and Espana Vogue, I have a ridiculous collection of what I like to call "No they did NOT!": highly offensive and insensitive portrayls of ethnic groups and cultures. I have to say that I am always more impressed with the way Vogue Espana handles their layouts-- and they showcase SO many women of colour. I have every issue of Vogue that Ethiopian top model Liya Kebede (now the face of H&M-- love her) has graced the cover of, and they've mostly been Spanish issues. I can count them all on one hand, but still. In Europe, I find a lot of designers seem very liberal about using women of colour in their ads, especially very dark, sub-saharan African models, but in the U.S.edition you barely see it. A dark-skinned Indian woman (representing the overwhelming population of south asian women) would never grace the cover of Vogue India. I mentioned Ujjwala Raut, one of my favourite top models who's made a name for herself in the west... but she's of a darker hue. I'd love to see her on the cover of Vogue India one of these fine days, but I'm not holding my breath.
Vogue is just trying to sell copies, so from a business perspective, that's smart. But they have a long legacy of overt racism in their "artistic" projection, something that I know is well thought-out and planned. They can't be innocent misses ALL the time, know what I mean?
About Aishwarya Rai. Oh lawd girl, you hit the nail right on the head. I am just not a fan, and you're absolutely right about the author double-speaking in that sense. Yes, she is one the whitest Indian women that everyone's been trying to use as the face of India: like *this* is what Indian women should look like. She makes white people comfortable in the sense that she isn't SO much of an *other*-- "see? She has brown hair, and pale skin, and green eyes... she looks kind of like us." Anyway, point is, the girl can't act and she is waaaaay overhyped (especially over someone as talented and stunning as Nandita Das. She's incredible). If Vogue India had put her in the middle of those two other women, I'd still be sounding off. Fair skin, light hair, light (oftentimes fake) eyes. Please. Next.
So the paper that I wrote back in my pop culture class was about the perception of women of colour in the media, with a strong focus on multiracial women. Being "Blasian" (mom's of South Asian descent, dad's of African descent), I see a trend, that for instance, on African American shows, they 98% of the time use a biracial woman with "softer" features and real long hair to pass as black, whereas the man is never changed, as black seemed more aligned with masculinity. Aunt Viv on The Fresh Prince of Bel Air is one of the very, very, exhaustingly few examples of a strong, dark-skinned African American (non-biracial) female lead... but then who did they end up replacing her with?
Things that make you go 'hmmm.'
So yeah, let me know if you need any articles or resources-- I'm sitting on them.
Best,
Stella :)
It really is an interesting case study to dive into. Firstly, we're all human. That energy is what connects us all. It transcends all of race, religion, culture, and the other societal constructs that dominate the modern world. So why was this image so controversial then, if we're all just "human"? [insert semiotics methodologies here]. Unfortunately, there's still a large number of people who still see colour, etc. and Vogue has a history of playing up on old generalizations to spark public interest. The cover alone, uses the rule of thirds in layout perfectly. With Gemma centered it connotes something ENTIRELY different than it would had she been on the left or the right. Had she been on either side, it would've promoted diversity more accurately. But because creative direction landed her in the middle, the viewer is left to speculate about the obvious fact that she is the idealized figure, with her trusty sidekick's by her side. It's somewhat sad really, because the women on the sides are actually FAR more aesthetically pleasing than Gemma. In fact, Gemma doesn't even photograph that well in the studio, whereas the other women do. Would anyone really rate Gemma's beauty above the two other women in this picture? We really need to stop trying to change people. Love and accept yourself! :)
So yes, Vogue is very business-savvy, and what they did was brilliant for exposure during their launch. But at some point, you'd hope they'd reflect on the messages they're feeding people, and redirect their focus more accurately so as to not be exclusionary, and even become more globalized with the people represented on their covers... But don't forget, there will always be companies making money on the solutions they provide for the very problems they create.
Interesting...I'm finally catching up on your blog Div.
Did some research and it seems Vogue has showcased "white" female models on many international Vogue magazine covers including Japan, China and Brazil.
Here's my two cents. If you're going to bring a "western/european" magazine to India or any foreign country you'll probably want to show how global you are...and what better way than to put three beautiful women on the cover that represent "west meets east."
Not sure if the intention is to suggest that fair is better, but rather beauty comes in all colours. Vogue India shouldn't just be about Indian models and bollywood stars but show how fashion and beauty transcends geographic location.
This is the message I get from the cover. It is a collaboration of cultures, races and fashion, not a representation of 'ideal white beauty.' And the reason I have not taken offence, is because the editor could have, and I'm sure considered putting Aish's baby blues on the cover but did not. Instead there are two darker, more unusual and less famous actresses. Just having Bipasha on the cover is enough to convince me that the editor (who by the way is an Indian woman) is attempting to specifically avoid the fair-skinned, fair-eyed belles that India equates with ideal beauty.
Bear in mind, we can judge this cover all we want. However, the only judges that matter are those of the target audience--the Indian readers. It would be interesting to see how India responds to this launch.
P.S. Regarding Gemma in the middle. I see it as a "coming to India" look. Pasty white model (representing traditional Vogue image)...meets hot Indian babes. Look at their body language-the Desis are totally overpowering Gemma. They're smiling pleasantly, and look strong and assertive. Bips with her hand on Gemma gives a sense of control. It's as if they're saying, "It's ok Gemma, we'll take it from here." No wonder Gemma is sporting the "deer in headlights" look!
So proud of my Indian women!
Ok time to read the next blog...i'm soooo behind
Kisses!
AM
Post a Comment