9 responses so far ↓

• 1 GirlGriot // Mar 28, 2008 at 10:00 pm

  This cover amazed me. I don’t so much love the ‘tame’ version, either, but it’s far less objectionable. I can’t think of anything I don’t find offensive about this image.

• 2 Razzbuffnik // Mar 29, 2008 at 8:53 pm

  As soon as I saw the photo I thought of
  King Kong.

  Then I thought about how Fay Ray didn’t look so pleased in the original movie.

  Sure is a strange image. Scary guy with blissed out nymphette (I don’t even know who they are). Besides the B+W stereotype issue, it just doesn’t make sense to me as a piece of visual communication.

  As my old photography teacher at art college used to ask when he was appraising student’s work “what are you trying to say with this image?”

• 3 wendell // Mar 30, 2008 at 7:09 pm

  I am not seeing racism here. Most of the population, I think I could safely assume, does not know of the 1st King Kong movie to make the visual comparison to the poster. Let’s not close our minds to all the people who would have to come together in purpose or ignorance to produce a mag cover of ill intent. Why not just call Mr. James a slow witted pawn of this plan to insult a full segment of the population. Call me slow as well. As I looked at the poster for the first time today at the request of my girlfriend (dues to her listening to Michael Basden), I could not honestly say that I could see the King Kong inference without suggestion. Even then, I could not admit to seeing it without prodding.

• 4 Cat // Apr 3, 2008 at 12:52 pm

  When I first saw this cover I was disturbed but didn’t quite no why until i read this post. I can’t believe the editors didn’t feel unsettled when they saw it.

• 5 Anti-Obama // Apr 10, 2008 at 12:35 am

  LOOK! Another way the “cracker” is keeping the poor, poor black man down. Cry me a freaking river I bet is was Lebron’s idea. Look here, http://www.magsdirect.com/blackenterprise.html I am so appalled that they are trying to portray an African-American as a Caucasian. What is he doing in a suit? Absolutely disgusting!!!

  Where is my white american golfers digest?
  http://www.magsdirect.com/africanamericangolfersdigest.html
  Sure as I have ten toes I would be sued for having such a vile magazine. Give me a break, go to work.

• 6 DivaD // May 8, 2008 at 6:36 am

  Does Anti-Obama=Anti-Black? (i’m playing)

  And ya know, this WOULDNT be a big deal if the association… ya kno, the DEHUMANIZING association between African Americans (our men especially) and apes/monkeys… didn’t exist.

  Sadly enough- IT DOES. Stanford psychologist Jennifer Eberhardt has dedicated her life’s work to it (that, and the reasons why so many are murdered by law enforcement) … and ya know what ya’ll? Its not just white folk. We ALL hold these assumptions that keep us from realizing our own humanity- the underlying goal (and accomplishment) of racism if you ask me…

• 7 Anna // May 15, 2008 at 8:57 am

  This is quite curious. I am a white (if that should matter) woman in my 20’s, and have not seen this issue cover until now. I know Gisele, but I don’t know the man. Might be that he is a US celebrity, and I am European.

  The first thing I saw was a black man, apparently an athlete as he is bouncing a basket ball. I assumed he is portrayed doing sports and perhaps shouting like many athletes do during sports, especially when scoring. So, he’d be aiming for a score.

  Gisele seems to be doing what she does… posing in a weird position and situation like models do. Nothing new there, and nothing exciting, either.

  Then I saw the header… “Kong”. And I had to think for a while where there is a Kong. I had to read the article to get the image of King Kong in my head.

  So, it was not the image but only the interpretation of the image given to me that made me see the suggested things in it.

  This makes me wonder how many there are like me, who did not see anything Kong-y until pressed to see such. And it makes me wonder who was the first who brought the issue up and for what purpose.

  Because it seems (based on mine and a previous commentator’s reaction), that the ill-intent may not be in the picture and not even in the eye of the beholder, but in the way we’ve been made to see other things that we actually saw there.

• 8 windex // Jul 16, 2008 at 3:43 pm

  i did not notice that at all… perhaps the blogosphere overreacted. really… i didn’t even find it odd that lebron was on a magazne cover… good for him for breaking a barrier i guess…but…yeah

• 9 imhotep // Jul 23, 2008 at 8:03 pm

  As a art director it amazes me when people don’t get the gist of the message, especially when it is as obvious as this, so I will break it down for the less sensitive:

  Notice how she is not touching him, he has her around the waist. In the picture they did not use their seems to be mutual affection, possibly sexual. The best bodies subject matter, what do you need a good body for? Better sex. In the actual cover, she seems to be over-powered, subconsciously “taken” against her will although the smile diffuses some of that.
  NOT promoting black male verility but why white should be afraid very afraid. The cover they didn’t use puts his head too close to the golden vagina. If both were same race the pics would probably be even more sexual. Whenever possible the media does not like to play up the BM/WW, that’s STILL avery touchy subject. Why so touchy? Because if the taboo of black men and white women was not constantly squashed, white people over time would no longer exist. (Fransis Cress Welsing)

Leave a Comment