I am young and black. I wasn't really aware of what blackface was until I looked it up and read all of the comments. I was brought to this article though looking at the controversies over the ANTM article. I have to say that these pictures are ugly. Blackface in general is just degrading. But i honestly wouldn't have or felt hurt if this magazines point in the beginning wasn't to celebrate black beauty. And i DONT see that in these photos.

Without wanting to "excuse" this in any way: One has to take into the account that this is the French Vogue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the historical phenomenon of Blackface, and especially its offensive nature nowadays, is in my opinion much stronger in the United States than elsewhere in the world. Of course this does not make the images any "better" or less offensive. I just wanted to note that the insensivity of this stylist/photographer might stem from the fact that they come from a different cultural background and are publishing the images in a different cultural context than that of the United States.

"As a better example, what if every time lets say ... the Devil (ie. abject Evil) was depicted, he was depicted as being European American, would that offend your sense and sensibilities then?"

Isn't usually a Brit, like Chrstopher Lee, that gets to depict his nibs on the silver screen? Mind you , Jack Nicholsan, De Niro and Al Pacino have all played the part of old Scratch at one time or another...

The shoot doesn't appear to be related to race in any way, especially not discriminative. People need to stop looking for reasons to accuse people of being 'politically incorrect'. When white people wear fake tan, are they discriminating against a more tanned race? I have seen images of black people painted white for fashion, i am Caucasian and i do not find that offensive.

Two words: SO WHAT? Actually, four words: SO THE F**K WHAT??? Gosh, people y'all need to get over it and grow up.

The fact this argument keeps going back and forth just shows how racist EVERYONE is. No one thinks they are racist because prejudice is so embedded into society and culture.
It is less about fighting and arguing points and more about respecting the plight of others. Some people will find this offensive as it may help them think about painful historical events. Just because you may find it irrelevant, you still need to respect that. Just because you think it is no big deal, you still have to respect that others may feel differently.
The media presents images of groups that can be offensive to everyone, Whites, Blacks, Asians, Europeans, teens, adults, etc. and this is just one example. Also keep in mind, that the issue of race, especially regarding Black people (especially in America) is not one entirely of the past as strong feelings regarding the history of people with darker skin has yet to be resolved as they still considered inferior to all no matter what country on the planet you go to, including Africa.

Your translation was incorrect, and that is the problem.

The shoot said it was to show that we are all the same inside. Changing color doesn't change us. All women are beautiful, no matter what color.

We may not have the same skin color, but that is the only difference. And it ONLY means different, not LESS.

The act itself does not seem so offensive. I think that too much thought is going into this. I don't consider the history of blackface irrelevant, the cultural history plays a large part and explains the emotions that could be brought about by this, but racial emulation does not always need to be derogatory or offensive. For example, the ganguro movement in Japan, where they dyed their hair blonde and wore a ridiculous amount of bronzer to emulate white Americans. Context is a large factor here. The tone of the shoot is more or less what makes it intentionally offensive or not. Her makeup alone is not done in an offensive manner, none of her features are being exaggerated like actual blackface. From what I can see, she is not presenting the skin tone in a satirical or defamatory manner. It appears to be a high fashion photo spread. If you're of an open mind, this could even be a celebration of the two races, in showing that they're not so different. The only thing changed is her skin color. This demonstrates how easily that can be altered and that it's not such a severe change. I'm for breaking barriers. Let's have a Black woman be dressed up as an Asian man next time.

I feel that they should have used an African Model in the shoot. It is very insensitive to use Lara Stone who is a Dutch Model. Right now in South Africa, the Dutch rule eventhough they have African Presidents. The stealing of the natural resources without pay has caused a very poor society among most Africans. While the Dutch, Indians and Asians live in excellent housing; the African Townships are are less than desirable. With all of the natural resources coming from the Earth. The insensitive Dutch have not help the infrastucture here in this country. Now they feel justified because Shaka Zulu told them that they can have the ports. The Dutch could not just share the land. They had to lie, steal and scheme their way to take over the whole land. Instead of sharing the land and the diamonds, gold, colbalt and many resources too vast to name. They just took over. I think Alec Wek (please forgive if I have spelled her name wrong) or Kristen from "America's Next Top Model" could have been excellent choices. Vogue Magazine; if you need to use models and can't accept people of color from around the world, then use your own people in their natural color. Controversy is a two way street: it may cause more sales of your magazine or people may decline to purchase it. Thank you