Vogue India decorated poor women dressed in worn clothing with luxury status items. In one editorial photo spread a baby dons a Fendi bib, and in another a toothless woman holds a Burberry umbrella. Considering that 456 million live on $1.25 a day in India, there aren't too many families that can dress their babies in $100 bibs.
Critics say the spread makes light of nightmarish poverty in India— for example, thousands of Indian farmers have killed themselves over the last decade because of debt. But the editor of Vogue India told the New York Times that critics need to "lighten up," and that the editorial expressed the fact that:
[F]ashion is no longer a rich man's privilege. Anyone can carry it off and make it look beautiful. You have to remember with fashion, you can’t take it that seriously. We weren’t trying to make a political statement or save the world.
While some may say the photo shoot brings fashion to the people, I can see how others could argue that it glamorizes serious human suffering.
Full Circle
*who cares, its Vogue India, untill today i wasnt even aware it existed.
1After reading that Dalits, the lowest of the low in the Indian caste system, are even the low priority when it comes to receiving aid due to their low status, I find comfort that Vogue India can make like because although clean water and food are kept at bay, there is a bevy of boisen...I mean burberry umbrellas to choose from.
2i can't say that it's in the best form to do this but you also have to remember that this is vogue and not Time or Newsweek. this is a book that discusses fashion and tries to make it somewhat attainable by different people. i don't think that it's trying to make light of the poverty in the area - i just think that they are showing that fashion crosses boarders and that what we have here in the US or in Italy or France is something that they could have on some level in India.
3You can tell how quickly we're digressing as a species when a joke from a Ben Stiller movie becomes reality in less than 10 years.
4Fashion is no longer a rich man's privilege? Bull crap. That statement just makes no sense to me... sure anyone can pull it off but only if they can afford it.
I personally think the spread tasteless... however, if the people got to keep the items that would be nice - and I'm sure they don't even care that they are designer items... personally I love their native, non-designer duds much better anyway.
5Tasteless and typical. Treating people as accessories to hold, uh, $10k accessories, is just bad form.
6Vogue: It costs about a million dollars to have zero class.
7this is so callous.
8tasteless. Im all for viewing fashion as an art form but this is far from that.I wonder if the 'models' got paid for this? I hope they at least did
9I am wondering if Vogue India paid these people what they would have paid a "regular" model to take these photos?
10So true, rac! It's Derelicte!
11Last time I checked only rich men could afford to buy $100 bibs. Vogue, wacky, tacky and true, skinny b*tches who live in ther own hungry little world. Ugh.
12I'm all for a global economy, but I think they seemed to have missed the bigger picture here.
13So very...very bad. I love fashion, I really do, in an artistic sense, a creative sense.
But to sit there and waffle on about how "anyone can afford it" makes me wonder if the Vogue Editor has a flippin clue about elementary math. People who are committing suicide because their lives and livelihoods are being destroyed ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT FENDI ANYTHING. They are thinking if they will live to see another day, if there will be food, if there will be safe water, if they will be warm in winter, safe from disease...
The guy is insane. He's a flippin nutball.
"Can't take it that seriously", eh? So what happened to those people when the shoot was over? Were they even compensated?
Does a woman who can barely feed her family give a rat's arse about a free bib? All I can imagine is the look on her face as she stares at something worth months of her salary that cannot contribute to the essence of her survival in any way.
Fashion is disposable.
The lives of those people were not, except in the eyes of Vogue.
14I think India (and many, many other countries, for that matter) have MUCH bigger problems to address than what is in fashion for the season.
15Vogue is completely exploiting these people for advertising and I find it extremely irreverent and it shows a complete ignorance and a callousness to their plight. Its kind of like photographers trying to make artwork out of the beat-up faces of abused women to display on their homes.
I hope in exchange they at least let them keep the clothes and jewelry and teach them how to sell them on e-bay for food, which could give them some temporary relief so their providers won't be killing themselves in frustration for at least one year.
16Sort of understandable I guess....but very weak premise. Maybe if they donated the costs of the items or did something nice for their photographed subjects...
17Who was the target audience for this layout? Rich people looking for gift ideas for the help? Poor people who wonder how they'd look if they had one outrageous accessory?
18And the quote just makes no sense at all, on any level.
They say they "weren’t trying to make a political statement or save the world." True, but imagine what would happen if everyone did just a little. Vogue could have featured fair trade items instead of stuff made for pennies and resold for hundreds of dollars. That way they could still sell the stuff, but a small community of people would make enough money to actually survive and have enough to eat. Putting a $100 bib on a baby who probably didn't have enough to eat that day is just crass.
19These vogue people are sick.
On another note...$100 for a bib that a baby will barf all over and ruin...yeah that's a great idea.
20Oh, c'mon MM....you know that you have a whole drawer full of those cute $100 bibs and I am sure cute little Milo's closet is full of $200 jeans, too!
21That sad little girl looks pretty impressed to be wearing a DESIGNER sweater!!
..but I
think she'd be happier with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
Actually, I guess the whole ensemble could feed the whole village for several years, but then ~ why host an auction in order to donate to hunger and humanity when people might get the wrong impression, better to dress them up and try to increase profits.
[sarcasm]
22I thought this photo shoot was in bad taste but what bothered me the most is that it seemed to indicate that the more affluent in India are not sensitive to the poverty that exists there anymore. I know that's not true, by any means, but it is what is being portrayed here.
I also read on Sepia Mutiny that they didn't even credit the models for this shoot in the captions.
23Beautiful
I viewed it as awareness.. and how materialistic things had no value to people in certain situations...
It's their country's magazine.. so i see where they're coming from.
24You saw more in it than the Vogue spokesperson did.
25Tasteless! It's disturbing to peddle status while the majority struggles for survival.
26yep and $500 shoes too Martini...lol
27
MM!!!
28Extremely tasteless
29there is nothing "beautiful" or "tasteful" for that matter in romanticizing poverty..
poverty hinders people to use their fullest potential as HUMANS and having the poor on a large fashion magazine as cover isn't going to help them
Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.