The April cover of Vogue magazine featuring NBA superstar LeBron James and supermodel Gisele Bundchen is under fire. Heavily touting that LeBron James is the first black man to grace the cover, Vogue's public relations team revved up the band and rolled out the cover, generating publicity and expecting praise. What they got was something a little different. While having black men on the cover of Vogue is new, the image of the black brute is old hat, which is really what the flap is about. Yes, LeBron is a "beast" on the court, but does this have to translate onto film? Should the one time that you "allow" a black man to grace the cover of your magazine continue in the tradition of problematic images of black men in art, photography, film and television? Vogue claims that it is "art," but the photo lacks any "artistic" value in my mind, much like the images that came before them.
Showing 1-1 of 1