On Racism, Vogue and now Spike Lee

This is really interesting. My yoga teacher (a Korean-American woman who grew up in Hawaii and New York) and I (a Black American) were talking about this last Saturday. We both agreed that the Vogue cover was queasy-making. Shame on you, Annie Leibovitz! Like you're not an intelligent woman! You should know better than to create such ridiculous images.

I haven't looked super-closely analyzed what Jeremiah Wright has said, but I don't find what he's said, according to the reports of them online, off-base or outrageous. I'm 32. My yoga teacher was like, What he's saying is oh! so true. She's 44.

What are we going to do? How are we going to talk about something real, race-wise, and substantive instead of not hearing each other?

People are scared, I think, and don't want to say they're sorry. Or admit that they're at fault or that the advantageous lives they're living today were made possible by slavery and the legal code in the U.S.

Maybe we should all look in our hearts and ask ourselves, Who have I wronged? Who have I oppressed? I'd like to believe I'm blameless--but it's just a fact that I have oppressed somebody. How can I be sorry about that? How can I make the world a more equitable place and stop clogging the planet with my denial and claims of perfection?

Who wants to join me??

Posted at 1:43 p.m. ET on Apr 09, 2008 by Courtney

Actually most of the people I know who are most sensitive about racism and most likely to say something about things that cross the line are white
I'm sort of a "minority" but not in the same way (jewish), and when I hear things that are borderline or definitely offensive I'm generally too tired of it to point it out or make a big deal of it

Posted at 11:15 p.m. ET on Apr 09, 2008 by Anouk

Racial difference between two people inevitably, and necessarily, makes race, or racism, a potential factor in any interaction between two people of different races. Sometimes, in fact, racism is perceived, rightly or wrongly, and sometimes it's not there, or at least, I hope.

If you (either as a minority or not) give primacy to race and racial difference when evaluating interactions, or miscommunications, between people, then you're likely often going to label certain remarks or interactions as racist, when, at least on the part of of the "offending" party, they weren't intended that way.

Obviously embedded and unrecognized racism are not unusual in remarks by or interactions with people who don't think they're being racist but yet are belied in what they say or do and can be perceived more accurately by a minority, or even a more racially sensitive member of the majority, and that's where much of the criticism of continuing racism in America comes from.

I think the Liebowitz cover is a prime example of this. When put side by side with the original posters utilizing the King Kong image, the similarity becomes undeniable. So, was it intentional or not? I don't think the staffers at Vogue realized it; the fault has to lie primarily with Liebowitz. Was she trying to be sly (and racist?) and provocative, and thought no one would realize it and "call her out" on it? Or is she a victim of embedded racism she was unable to perceive and unconsciously recreated the image? We'll never know until she chooses to speak openly and honestly about the image.

The problem, I think, many (presumably white) observers of this episode have with the criticisms of the cover is that it shouldn't be taken as a signifier of Racism in America. By the situation (I believe) I described, it's only a commentary on the (possible) racism of, really, one individual, Annie Liebowitz, a 58 year old, single, lesbian, white woman celebrity photographer. Unless it can be proved otherwise, the staffers at Vogue were probably guilty, primarily, in not recognizing the (intentional or not) reference in the photograph; Liebowitz is a vaunted, "legendary" modern photographer whose opinions and editorial approval are not challenged much by mere editorial or creative staffers, even if they had an inkling of something not seeming right. Bluntly, the cult of celebrity and the intimidation they can exert extends to photographers nowadays too, and keeps, too often, people from giving them (needed) honest criticism. The "fatigue" non-minorities feel comes from instances such as this, when the greater society didn't have a hand in the incident, nor did they ask for it or abet it, the broadening of the criticism from its actual target, the photographer and her team, seems unfair. Vogue has been criticized by so many people for so many years about not representing "real" women and "real" values that its imperviousness to popular opinion, that its position as an isolated and not relevant signifier of popular opinion, and certainly in this instance, has already been well-established.

Personally, I think the real, more concrete racism that can be leveled at Vogue along with Liebowitz is the simple styling and dress of Mr. James. It's a fashion magazine, right? Why is he on its cover wearing athletic shorts and a black, sleveless tee shirt? Can they not conceive of a black basketball player being attired in anything but? If, in fact, they were wanting to highlight the "fitness" aspect of the issue, then why was Gisele in a long, satin evening dress? If that had been addressed, early on, during the styling, perhaps the greater disaster of Ms. Liebowitz's (accidental or not) posing of Mr. James would not have been possible; certainly his being in a well tailored suit or other outfit would have directed his demeanor in another direction.

So, in the case of the Vogue cover, evaluating it through the prism of race, and racism, is helpful, but the blame should not be spread to the unwitting viewing audience of the magazine, who do not, and have never, determined what appears in or on it.

The downside of using racism consistently, or principally, as prism to interpret interactions between people of different races is, too often, it misinterprets things that aren't, actually, primarily racist, or even racial at all. I say "primarily racist" because, definitely, racial difference affects any and all interactions where it's present, even in the most benign ways, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

As a (gay) white man, there have been one or two (only, thank God) times in my life I've been accused of racist attitudes or actions, and it abosolutely wasn't the case. If I'm rolling my eyes or scowling at something, looking disdainful, it's never about race for me, but something else, whether it be taste, style, etc. I'll admit I'm a snob, something of an elitist, and although someone could level the charge of racism at someone, such as me, disparaging "urban" culture, etc., as racist, I heartily disagree, primarily because I don't dislike it all, and because I know I dislike, in equal measure, what I observe in white culture as well, across a spectrum of classes or strata.

Too often interpreting things by race blinds the observer, or participant, to other factors, epecially class. There have been plenty of white people who've been (unintentionally, b/c I don't like to be observed doing it, but I'm not dicreet enough sometimes) "victim" to the same eye rolls or scowls or mock revulsion non-whites have, but they can't immediately ascribe it to racism, and so it gets, more accurately, attributed to classism or elitism (perhaps not defensible either, but not the same thing as racism). I'm not saying, either, that this is something all minorities do, b/c that would certainly be racist; I am only saying it's something generally only they can do (except in instances of unusual population demographics), and which I have observed from time to time.

Basically, an old addage I've heard several times over the years sums up what I've been trying to say: You'll always find what you're looking for. If you're determined to find racism in our society, in the hearts of every man, you'll find it, b/c it's there, intentionally or not, to some small degree, in everyone, minority or not. As a gay man, I realize I too often, and sometimes wrongly, interpret the actions of others through the prism of homophobia, and although I believe I'm often right, I have, on several occasions, been proved wrong. The responsibility of the accuser, though, is to mete out accusations fairly and justly, and to understand it's not always intended, or even realized, by the perpetrator, and sometimes, in fact, it's a misinterpretation.

Posted at 12:00 p.m. ET on Apr 10, 2008 by Rob

The problem with political correctness is that it does more to separate, than to unify the fact that we are basically all humanoids on a ball floating in space.I myself am a minority, in that I am a white heterosexual male,meaning my opinion should mean nothing, since I have it a lot easier than other people;or so I hear.I realize that I never went through the trauma that racism may inflict,so I cannot really relate, but I do know that this is not 1920s Americana any more,and that there is no distinction between what a black man or a white man can be anymore.I think Rebecca Carroll needs to realize that,and that the only endorsement of stereotypes that VOGUE cover had were the ones pulled out of her own head.It seems she wants to see racism in everything,or cannot witness the stereotypes which black entertainers fully endorse,much like how rap and gangster rappers use the pimp character as a trademark.Or maybe thats ok because its black on black stereotyping,but since VOGUE, or New Yorker are likely predominantly W.A.S.P periodicals it is racist.You would think that LeBron James has an above average IQ, and that if he thought the photograph he were in was displaying any type of stereotype or racist message, he would not have done it.Here is my opinion,(ready)have Rebecca Carrol interview LeBron,you guys are in New York,your in the magazine business,go get the story and blog about it.I want to hear him say he was portraying a racist stereotype,or better yet go talk to VOGUE.The same goes for any other racist or misogynist thing that comes out in the media.Im tired of opinion only on this site,get me a fact.Get me the person who said it or did it,cause otherwise its a waist of cyberspace.I consider my self pretty liberal, and color blind,but I am tired of my white mans burden.the only way a society can progress is to let go of the past.I think black people ,or African Americans if some prefer; need to unshackle the chains.

Posted at 2:22 a.m. ET on Apr 11, 2008 by randy focazio

This is so ridiculous. Anyone who see's the LeBron Gisele cover and chooses to see a racist reference (King Kong) is looking for one.

I was excited to see an African American athlete celebrated on the cover of GQ with the beautiful Gisele. If it were Tom Brady we'd be hearing complaints about how they didn't choose a black man.

You just can't please everyone all the time and your damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Posted at 1:43 p.m. ET on Apr 11, 2008 by jesse