But it isn't surprising. Honestly, Annie Liebovitz has a penchant for unquestioningly recreating iconic images. What a bore. And this time it's an offensive bore. Do something original. And if you insist on merely reinventing old things, at least use your senses critically and give some damn thought to which images you want to recreate and why and what they might mean or reflect in today's discourses.

He's not clutching her, nor is she gasping in horror at him. Their bodies are being showcased in each of their arenas.

Similarities? Yes. Enough to ruffle feathers and get attention, whether intended or not. Is this not the ultimate goal of commercialism and advertising: to get into the heads of people and therefore proving to be a success?

I mean, I see where you're coming from, but I just don't see it as racist.  I don't see it displaying a woman as a victim either.  King Kong -- Sure, but this cover?  Nah.

_________

Controversial, yes.  Racist, I don't think so.  LeBron James could laugh all way to the bank if he wants too.  That man gets paid a whole heap of money.  He's good at what he does.  He's fierce.  And that's represented in the photos.  You don't see George Clooney up there with his mouth open and his muscles all flexed because that's not what he does.  George Clooney is good at (and known for) being charming, smiley and suave and that's how he's often portrayed and represented.  But fierce?  Only if you would count his dorky motorcycle get-up.  But in a basketball jersey and stance, George would look silly.  But LeBron doesn't.  He's got the muscles and the attitude.  So the photo could be vaguely hinting at a King Kong tribute.  So what?  King Kong was fierce.  If we have to make too much of the parallel with King Kong, then I'd say it's more fair to look at King Kong's fierceness, strength and power (because that's what he's known for) rather than the fact that he was a monkey (because so is curious George but the two aren't equivalent), if that's where the racist discomfort lies.

Now if it had been Colin Powell or Denzel Washington in a basketball outfit and a fierce, open-mouth stance, that would be off and worrisome.  But not for a basketball player, no matter what color he is. 

When I first saw the photo, I thought it was odd but couldn't put my finger on exactly why. His open mouth, the clutching of Gisele — it just seemed off. This is a fashion magazine, right? But once I saw the side-by-sides, it turned my stomach.

My reaction, exactly. I highly doubt that Annie did this on accident. She is too intelligent of a woman and too aware of the power of imagry to NOT have been aware of what she was doing at the time. Now, I can only wait for her response to all the talk to uncover her motivation.

http://legallyout.blogspot.com

I like this cover, and I guess if racism is what is in the observer's mind, then racism is what he or she will see.

I'm black and i don't at all find it rasist.

I think today in 2008 Black men and European women are given highest rankings in sport and in modeling and I Think its simple being celebrated Some black people and cultural aware people should see that ideology is what you make of it and where i come from and what i see is like the second or third sports man to grace the pages of vogue is a black man.

It's a new day

I am not an American, what little I know of American history I've gathered over the years from movies and TV, nor had I ever seen the King King posters until a few minutes ago. With that background, I fail to see it as either racist or sexist, although I agree that there are definitely similarities with the King Kong poster, now that I've had them pointed out to me.

I don't watch a lot of sport, but what little I watch tends to be track and field, and his expression doesn't differ much from what most of the athletes look like at times when they're competing, male and female of any ethnicity. And it's to illustrate an article on the bodies of models and athletes, of course he's gonna be displaying his muscles. And she doesn't look at all like a victim. Physically, she's of course tiny next to him, but her facial expression is not that of a victim, she seems happy and confident to me.

That said, I don't care much for the first two images, they're a bit boring. However, the last one, where they're both jumping (or appear to be jumping, I wish her feet were visible), I think that's gorgeous. The contrast of their different bodies, the sky, just beautiful.

Yes, maybe as some said, LBJ, and Gisele, got his pocket full out of this series of photo shots.

But I think what we need to think is not if LBJ is the victom of racism or/and if Gisele is a victom of sexism her. Rather, we should think about why we still read black bodies this way, connecting to animal, hypermasculine (and thus herteosexual), and why these images sell.

I mean, do we really think there is no more racism, sexism or ethnocentric, if members of minority are able to make living, good ones, by selling the images we've all immersed in forever?

Also, in a somehow different direction, this might be interesting to some as well.

Honestly, when I look at the cover, all I see is a really bad shot of Gisele.

I am noticing lately, however, that people are looking for controversy, even when there may not be any. Everyone loves a good fight, eh?

Annie Leibowitz is an artist.  Photography is one of the more scrutinized forms of art because it involves people, and people are insecure.  So when insecure people see a cover like this one they get all socially aware and mount a crusade to save the ideas that they hold most dear, however what they fail to understand is that the image that they are pitchforking for the burning of is NOT REAL!  It is the vision of the artist who rendered the image.  So before we start shouting racism and sexual inequality we have to stop and think about whether or not we really want to kill art.  Afterall, every complaint and pc crusade kills a little piece of our freedom of expression which as we all know is very limited as it is.

I didn't think, and still don't think it's racist or sexist. Deliberately controversial, perhaps yes. And maybe it's because I'm not really familiar with King Kong (gigantic gorillas? bah) or American culture, but as a racial minority and as a woman, I don't see it as degrading or insulting or horrific. Gisele's not being mauled or victimised by the evil black LeBron, and I don't think it's promoting female idiocy and gullibility by suggesting that white women believe that all black men are good despite their evil exteriors.

As a mixed race person, I just kind of like it that there's a white woman and a black man on the cover of Vogue, and that both of them look like they're enjoying themselves. I do consider myself a feminist, but that doesn't mean that if a man has his hand around a woman's waist he's evil, possessive and wants to claim all women as his property. And as I said, maybe it's because I'm not American, that I don't see LeBron James' expression as beastly or scary or frightening or apelike or negative - he has the same expression I probably would have if I had my arm wrapped around Gisele's waist. of course, I'd probably come up to her armpit and that wouldn't make for a good picture. But hey, it's just my opinion.

here's an interesting link to an interesting opinion about it:
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/apr/01/na-no-need-to-read-racism-into-vogue-cover/

what I do think is interesting is that both african-american AND caucasian men AND women have very opposing views on this - some caucasian men think it's all right, some african-american men think it's all right. Thank goodness the response to it isn't categorised by race, I think it would mean American society is regressing more than anything.

Honestly, I have trouble seeing the Kong imagery based on LeBron James with a fierce kind of expression.  I find it coincidental and the similarities are not convincing, both when it comes to Giselle and LeBron.  Giselle looks happy, they have their arms around each other: it is not LeBron possessively holding Giselle.  Their body positions show both to be powerful, in control, in stylized positions based on their careers - Giselle looks like more of a commercial model, LeBron looks like he's crouched over while dribbling the basketball.  Also, none of the other images in the series (I flipped through all of them) reflect the Kong theme, and Annie Leibovitz is BIG on themes.

I see more of a racist implication in white people reading this cover as if it is "animalistic", and then finding a historical image that matches their interpretation.  Whether or not that was Leibovitz's goal is debateable.

I think they posed them to highlight what Vogue thinks makes them the "best bodies."  Lebron is athletic, Giselle is model-y.  (and are any of the other athletes highlighted in that article women?  I be suprised to find they are...but that's another fish to fry.)

It seems pretty clear that they aren't posing them this way to imply that black men are more animalistic or prey on white women.  It is also clear, though, that no one on the Vogue staff noticed the King Kong similarities, or worse--didn't think those similarities would be a problem.  That's just disgustingly insensitive and unaware.

The question for me is, how many people of color are on the editorial board at Vogue?  From the little I've looked up, not much and no African Americans.  This is what people talk about when they say diversity is an asset.  If the Vogue staff (especially the senior staff) was more diverse, would this have gotten through?  Would they have been as insensitive and unaware?

Ok now I'm from Barbados, in the West Indies (no we are not in Jamaica nor the virgin islands nor part of the Bahamas, google it). I find that the US, for a country that is always saying they are the land of the free and the most democratic and blah blah blah that you guys are obsessed with race. When I saw the cover, I didn't even see King Kong nor the defenseless white woman being clutched by a brutal screaming black man theory. First thing she looks like she's hugging him with one arm and as we say in Barbados, she skinning she teeth like if she eat roast dog (translation: she has a pretty wide smile on her face and looks quite happy) The picture looks like any other magazine shot - unforgettable after two weeks because you move on to something else unless its on your coffee table in full view.

Don't shoot me now, when I studied the similarities I can see the writer's point on the King Kong analogy. However, if it was a racist inspired concept or if it would have been viewed as racist, don't you think LeBron would have the common sense to tell Liebowitz to "haul her ass?" He's not taking such a pic? I find people in the world always make a mountain out of a mole hill and things that they should be yacking about (e.g. rap videos that feature fair skin or latino women as the ideal girls while the only glimpse of a dark skin black woman is shaking her 'ass'ets cause she's a big booty ho') seems to be everyday, no worries. There will always be racist,racists notions whether intended or not and plain small minded jackasses running around the place. I'm predominately black mixed with Amerindian and a bit of Dutch and when I come across a racist person, thats my time to have fun with him or her because they are so stupid or as the Trinis (Trinidadians) say dotish and stupidy.

Life is too short!

I think what everyone is failing to realize here, is that LeBron James is a basketball player, and a bombastic one at that.  His race has nothing to do with the way he's posed in this picture.  Gisele Bundchen is a dainty model, obviously, this is not the first time she has been posed this way.  If he was pictured this way in an ad for Under Armor or Gatorade, or her in an ad for cosmetics,  this would be a non-issue.  The picture is also on the cover of the shape issue.  LeBron is portraying the strong man and Bundchen is the petite, sexy lady.  The similarities to the King Kong poster are there, yes, but that does not make the photo racist.  Liebowitz understands more than many photographers what prejudice is and would probably never do something that she thought was racist.  Perhaps she chose to utilize the King Kong imagery due to LeBron towering over Gisele at 6'8".  Should tall people, therefore be offended?  James is one of the most popular athletes of the day, perhaps of all time.  If Mark McGuire or one of the Mannings were the man in this photo, would anyone have a problem with the photo?

What I think is the more pressing issue here is the fact that so many people view this as racist.  Yes, our country does have a sad history of racism, but the only way to move beyond it is to learn from it.  We, especially as lesbian and bisexual women, must work towards equality.  By searching for racism where it does not overtly exist, we are only further dividing this country. 

People need to educate themselves on other people and their cultures. They need to understand certain things about different groups. A comment made by Hannah on the fact that no one was aware of the similarities between King Kong was insensative and unaware I can agree with her point of view really, owing to the fact that the potrayal may imply certain images to society as it stands today. Then again there are not much people of colour and no African Americans as researched on the vogue board. But questions folk, do you think if there were some people of colour on the board that the cover would not have gone through?

Secondly the comment from imsuchanerd is on point - society too hypersensitive and yes, its just a photo showcasing great bodies from two different genres - sports and modelling.

Don't think i'm attacking americans for their oversensitivity on race, but here in Barbados, Barbadians are just as hypersensitive and very two faced. I bet the PanAfrican movement here is going to be raising hell and high water over that magazine cover in 3...2...1...

Life is too short!

Also, it bothers me that some people would say people are being too sensitive about this cover. Have we all forgotten that racism still exists? If you don't agree that the images is racist , that's your opinion and that's fine. No one sees the same image the same way. Maybe we should be happy that now more people are being more sensitive towards how black people are portrayed in the media.

"I believe all Americans who believe in freedom, tolerance and human rights have a responsibility to oppose bigotry and prejudice based on sexual orientation. "-Coretta Scott King

I am a proud, black woman and I honestly didn't see the Kong similarities until they  were pointed out.  There's really nothing I can add that hasn't already been said here  so 'Ditto' to all the responses stating 'No- I don't think so' and 'It's just a photo-and not a great one at that.'

like most discussions on issues surrounding racism/sexism/homophobia/anti-Semitism/(insert your own category here), it's greatly heightened by the immediacy of a recent past - in the case of the USA, the shameful and painful period of slavery and segregation. 

as a (white) European living on the other side of the Atlantic, i have the benefit of distance and so can look at the image and not immediately be reviled by it - but it's not for me to decide if it's offensive or not.  what does LeBron think?  or Gisele?  i'm sure that neither of them are dummies, and if they were happy to go with the pose requested for the picture, then that speaks for itself.  but it is a hugely charged issue for Americans, particularly now with the Democratic Presidential nominees seemingly intent on raking up racism and sexism charges against each other and looking to hand yet another White House to the Republicans.  sigh....

First of all, if you look at the 1933 shot of King Kong you'd see that woman has a look of terror on her face as she's being swept up into King Kong's arms. And in this photo, Gisele has the biggest sh*t-eating grin on her face that I've ever seen. Like over the top smiling. If she looked like she was somehow uncomfortable or struggling that would be one thing, but she's cheesing it up for the camera BIG TIME. And you know what, that context matters...like A LOT.

There is part of me that wonders if people aren't just uncomfortable with seeing bi-racial images between a large black man and a petite white woman who obviously seems to be giving off an heir of happiness, despite his over-the-top masculine prowess portrayal. If Gisele had been pictured with a white man of LeBron's stature would there still be such hoopla? And I know, I'm begging the question here, but I think it's more that people are uncomfortable to see her so happy right next to this imposing manly man, and liking it.

Let's face it...LeBron is hot by a lot of people's standards. He may not be my cup of tea, but I bet a lot of women would be more than happy to be standing in Gisele's shoes, unafraid, uninhibited, unphased by what is supposed to be intimidating or imposing. A lot of women like manly men. And c'mon, I hardly think dribbling a basketball has quite the connotation of violent mysogyny. Besides, if LeBron had felt even remotely uncomfortable or believed there to be any shady context of race betrayal during the photo shoot, he could have said something to Ms. Leibovitz, but he obviously did not. So I dunno...I think people need to lighten up.

The only reason that I'm bringing up the bi-racial issue is that I've been in bi-racial relationships with both men and women. On many occasions I have had the experience of walking down the street holding my lovers' hand (yes, even in the 21st century) and seeing how disgusted and uncomfortable people can get.  I know that this photo does in no way depict romantic involvment, but I was just trying to create a context to discuss the bi-racial issue which is what I think is making (certain) people uncomfortable.  

... and I don't see where I should be offended in the least. 

Neither do I get offended by the usage of words like "lynch" or anything else that supposedly conjurs racist imagery.

The past is just that.  PAST.  While we should definitely be mindful of it, we shouldn't spend all of our time looking so deeply into something that people are eventually AFRAID to speak.  There is nothing worse than having a white person look at me in fear and trembling because they are so worried about not offending me that they are ultimately uncomfortable even being around me. 

I'm still surprised that this is an issue... I mean, really.  Can't we just keep moving forward without being dragged back?

We're here, we're half queer, get used to it!