vox--2020-07-22--Why masks are (still) politicized in America

More than five months into the Covid-19 pandemic , the evidence for masks keeps getting stronger .
One study in Germany found that mask mandates reduced the growth of infections by about 40 percent .
Another estimated that mask rules in 15 US states and Washington , DC , may have prevented as many as 230,000 to 450,000 cases .
Meanwhile , evidence suggests protests against police brutality and racism in many cities this summer did not lead to big spikes in case counts , which some attribute to the fact that the demonstrations were outdoors and many participants were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more , many public health experts have been encouraging Americans to wear masks .
When it comes to Covid-19 , “ the best treatment is prevention , and there are very good data to show how effective masks are , ” Murtaza Akhter , an ER doctor in Phoenix and professor at the University of Arizona College of Medicine , told Vox .
In response to scientific findings — and the continued deadly march of the virus around the country — leaders from California to Pennsylvania have issued or strengthened mask requirements in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the opposite direction .
Gov .
Brian Kemp of Georgia on Thursday sued Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms for issuing an order requiring masks in her city .
Gov .
Kim Reynolds of Iowa has also barred cities from introducing mask mandates , even as cases in her state spike .
Meanwhile , President Trump wore a mask at Walter Reed Medical Center in mid-July , after months of being photographed maskless — only to suggest that masks are only important in hospitals .
Trump has begun to change his tune on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Tuesday press conference that the face coverings “ have an impact.
” But this admission came only after more than 100,000 Americans had already died — and after Trump had sent the opposite message with his words and actions for months .
And despite the growing scientific consensus that masks have an important role to play in limiting the spread of the coronavirus , this seemingly small public health step remains intensely politicized .
The words of Trump and other public figures appear to be having an impact on the behavior of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down along party , racial , and gender lines .
The result is that one of the cheapest and simplest ways to curb the spread of Covid-19 has been turned into a political football — and it ’ s costing people their lives .
“ We just really need a cultural shift , ” Akhter said .
“ This isn ’ t even a debate in other places.
” Masks have been political in America from the beginning Mask-wearing had become politicized in the US even before much of the country went into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been common for years in East Asian countries , where they ’ re seen as a simple way to protect yourself ( and others ) from disease , as Refinery29 ’ s Connie Wang wrote in March .
Wuhan , China , where the coronavirus outbreak began , started requiring them in January .
But in the US , mask-wearing quickly became stigmatized .
Asian Americans wearing masks were targeted for racist attacks , as Wang notes , and their images became a go-to choice to illustrate American media stories about the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no means confined to Asian American communities .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) and many health experts initially also cautioned against mask-wearing , citing a lack of evidence for their use and seemingly fearing shortages of personal protective equipment .
Eventually , the CDC reversed its stance , but the change in messaging likely sowed distrust .
Rather than looking to Asian countries — which had already been through the SARS epidemic in 2003 — for guidance on masks , Trump relied on anti-Asian rhetoric in the early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and using a racist name for the virus .
“ The way in which the US administration has addressed the pandemic from the beginning was simply to relegate Asians , China in particular , as the source of the pandemic , ” Jasmin Zine , a sociology professor at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario , Canada , told Vox .
Even as the virus claimed more and more American lives throughout the spring , Trump , Vice President Mike Pence , and others in the administration routinely appeared in public without masks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wear a mask became part of a larger message that ignoring the risks of the coronavirus was the tough or strong thing to do .
For example , despite warnings from public health experts about the dangers of reopening the country too early , he said during a public appearance in May that “ the people of our country should think of themselves as warriors ” because “ our country has to open.
” He made that statement at a mask factory in Arizona — where he appeared without a mask .
Since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research to support the use of masks , as Vox ’ s German Lopez reports .
A June study found that regional mask mandates in Germany brought down the number of Covid-19 cases between 2.3 percent and 13 percent over a period of 10 days .
A study of mask requirements around the US , also published in June , found that the requirements were associated with drops in the growth rate of the virus and may have prevented hundreds of thousands of cases .
Incidents in recent months have appeared to reinforce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , two hairstylists in Missouri interacted with more than 100 customers while infected with Covid-19 but did not pass the virus on to anyone — perhaps because everyone wore masks .
And protests against police violence in American cities do not appear to have caused an uptick in cases , even though they were attended by thousands of people , perhaps in part because most protesters wore masks .
Public health experts are quick to point out that masks are not a panacea , nor a replacement for physical distancing , testing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Masks help , ” Lindsay Wiley , a law professor at American University who specializes in public health law , told Vox .
“ You should wear them , but they are not enough by themselves.
” Still , wearing a mask is a simple action that almost anyone ( excluding very small children and people with certain health conditions ) can take , and most experts agree it can help slow the spread of the virus .
Masks are a big reason why other countries , including those more densely populated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better job than America at controlling the virus , Akhter said .
The face coverings are both very effective and “ very cheap compared to the drugs that we ’ re trying to invent ” to treat the virus , he explained .
“ Masks clearly save lives.
” Even as the evidence has grown , Trump and others have continued to politicize masks Yet this simple activity remains heavily politicized .
Trump himself is still one of the biggest culprits .
In May , he was photographed touring a Ford plant in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told by state authorities he had a “ legal responsibility ” to wear one .
He later said that he had put on a mask behind the scenes but removed it because he “ didn ’ t want to give the press the pleasure of seeing it.
” Then in June , he told the Wall Street Journal that some people wear masks just to show that they don ’ t like him , and not because they actually care about fighting Covid-19 — thus sending a loud and clear message that masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health .
In July , he began to soften his stance on masks and was even photographed wearing one at Walter Reed .
Still , that day , he downplayed the importance of masks for the general public , saying that the face coverings “ have a time and a place , ” such as “ when you ’ re in a hospital.
” Trump ’ s cavalier stance on masks also ignores the fact that , unlike most Americans , he reportedly exists in something of a bubble , with people around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s not just Trump .
Republican governors around the country have hamstrung local officials ’ efforts to require masks .
Gov .
Reynolds of Iowa has refused to mandate masks statewide and has said that cities can not mandate them either — even though a leaked White House document shows that nearly half the state is in a “ red zone ” for dangerous viral transmission and recommended that face masks be required there .
Gov .
Kemp of Georgia last week took the step of suing Atlanta Mayor Bottoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city back to an earlier phase of reopening .
As of last week , cases of the virus in Georgia were surging , with an average of 3,100 cases a day , 1,100 of those in the Atlanta area , according to the New York Times .
Bottoms herself has tested positive for the virus .
But Kemp cast her restrictions as the real danger to Georgians , saying her “ disastrous policies threaten the lives and livelihood of our citizens.
” When it comes to mask-wearing , the words of leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody can pore through papers like I can as a physician and a researcher , ” Akhter said .
For many laypeople , “ they ’ re going to listen to what their president says , even if their own experts are saying otherwise.
” The history of other public health threats , like smoking , has shown that “ when you see someone you respect model a behavior , it influences your own views about that behavior , ” Wiley said .
And today , “ when people we admire and respect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behavior , it really has a big effect.
” By the same token , when people like Trump don ’ t wear masks and make wearing masks a political issue , their supporters are less likely to wear them .
When the president says people wear masks as a way of showing their disapproval of him , “ that ’ s a pretty clear signal , not just that he ’ s not modeling responsible behavior , but that he views it as a sign of disloyalty , ” Wiley said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wear a mask or not.
” The effects of this politicization can be seen in recent polling on mask use .
In a Pew poll conducted June 4 to 10 , 76 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters said they wear a mask in stores all or most of the time .
Just 53 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters said the same .
Men are also less likely to prioritize mask-wearing than women — in another Pew poll , conducted in mid-June , 42 percent of men said people in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while 53 percent of women said the same .
The disconnect could reflect the fact that more men identify as Republican , as well as the fact that Trump and others have implicitly or explicitly linked a refusal to wear a mask with toughness and masculinity .
White Americans are also less likely than other racial groups to routinely wear masks , according to the early June Pew data .
In that poll , 78 percent of white people said they wear masks in stores at least some of the time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 87 percent of Latinx respondents , and 89 percent of those of Asian descent .
While there are many possible reasons for the racial gaps , including party affiliation and the fact that many Black and Latinx communities have been especially hard hit by Covid-19 , racist rhetoric by Trump and others may play a role in convincing some white people not to wear masks .
Eschewing a mask has become associated in America with a particular brand of white manliness , Jonathan Metzl , a professor of sociology and psychiatry at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Whiteness : How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America ’ s Heartland , told Vox in May .
You can see it in the unmasked men who protested stay-at-home orders in Michigan earlier this year .
“ There ’ s an assumption of a kind of invincibility that is tied to this idea of white masculinity , ” Metzl said at the time .
But ending the politicization of masks could still save lives It ’ s not too late for things to change .
Republican governors in states like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in recent days as coronavirus cases surge around the country .
Even the president on Monday tweeted that “ many people say that it is Patriotic to wear a face mask when you can ’ t socially distance , ” alongside a photo of himself wearing a mask .
And during a Tuesday press conference , Trump told Americans , “ we ’ re asking everybody that when you are not able to socially distance , wear a mask .
Get a mask .
“ Whether you like the mask or not , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ added .
“ They ’ ll have an effect , and we need everything we can get.
” But he has continued to use a racist name for the virus that he ’ s been repeating for months .
And even if he and others are truly committed to undoing the politicization of masks , it will take time to get ordinary Americans on board .
Some people may oppose masks “ regardless of what the president says , because to them it ’ s become a political issue , ” Akhter said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be saved .
“ I do think it ’ s possible to turn things around , ” Wiley said , noting that more leaders are moving to depoliticize masking .
“ Almost every public health initiative to change people ’ s behavior has been very controversial at the start , ” she said .
And despite opposition to masks , “ from a public health perspective , I ’ m impressed by how rapidly people are getting on board.
” And while wearing masks won ’ t bring back the many thousands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it can help the many who are still at risk , Akhter said .
Americans ’ attitude toward masks “ played a big role in why the curves went the opposite direction of what we wanted , but it also can play a big role in stopping what may be coming , ” he said .
He urges Americans to wear masks , if nothing else , as a sign of support for one another .
“ It can save lives ; it does save lives , ” he said , “ and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , as a sign of solidarity , please wear a mask.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

More than five months into the Covid-19 pandemic, the evidence for masks keeps getting stronger.
One study in Germany found that mask mandates reduced the growth of infections by about 40 percent. Another estimated that mask rules in 15 US states and Washington, DC, may have prevented as many as 230,000 to 450,000 cases. Meanwhile, evidence suggests protests against police brutality and racism in many cities this summer did not lead to big spikes in case counts, which some attribute to the fact that the demonstrations were outdoors and many participants were masked.
For all these reasons and more, many public health experts have been encouraging Americans to wear masks. When it comes to Covid-19, “the best treatment is prevention, and there are very good data to show how effective masks are,” Murtaza Akhter, an ER doctor in Phoenix and professor at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, told Vox.
In response to scientific findings — and the continued deadly march of the virus around the country — leaders from California to Pennsylvania have issued or strengthened mask requirements in recent weeks. But others are going in the opposite direction.
Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia on Thursday sued Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms for issuing an order requiring masks in her city. Gov. Kim Reynolds of Iowa has also barred cities from introducing mask mandates, even as cases in her state spike. Meanwhile, President Trump wore a mask at Walter Reed Medical Center in mid-July, after months of being photographed maskless — only to suggest that masks are only important in hospitals.
Trump has begun to change his tune on masks in recent days, saying in a Tuesday press conference that the face coverings “have an impact.” But this admission came only after more than 100,000 Americans had already died — and after Trump had sent the opposite message with his words and actions for months. And despite the growing scientific consensus that masks have an important role to play in limiting the spread of the coronavirus, this seemingly small public health step remains intensely politicized.
The words of Trump and other public figures appear to be having an impact on the behavior of ordinary people, whose mask-wearing habits break down along party, racial, and gender lines. The result is that one of the cheapest and simplest ways to curb the spread of Covid-19 has been turned into a political football — and it’s costing people their lives. “We just really need a cultural shift,” Akhter said. “This isn’t even a debate in other places.”
Masks have been political in America from the beginning
Mask-wearing had become politicized in the US even before much of the country went into lockdown earlier this spring. Masks have been common for years in East Asian countries, where they’re seen as a simple way to protect yourself (and others) from disease, as Refinery29’s Connie Wang wrote in March. Wuhan, China, where the coronavirus outbreak began, started requiring them in January.
But in the US, mask-wearing quickly became stigmatized. Asian Americans wearing masks were targeted for racist attacks, as Wang notes, and their images became a go-to choice to illustrate American media stories about the coronavirus, even though the virus was by no means confined to Asian American communities.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and many health experts initially also cautioned against mask-wearing, citing a lack of evidence for their use and seemingly fearing shortages of personal protective equipment. Eventually, the CDC reversed its stance, but the change in messaging likely sowed distrust.
Rather than looking to Asian countries — which had already been through the SARS epidemic in 2003 — for guidance on masks, Trump relied on anti-Asian rhetoric in the early months of the pandemic, blaming China and using a racist name for the virus. “The way in which the US administration has addressed the pandemic from the beginning was simply to relegate Asians, China in particular, as the source of the pandemic,” Jasmin Zine, a sociology professor at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, Canada, told Vox.
Even as the virus claimed more and more American lives throughout the spring, Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and others in the administration routinely appeared in public without masks. For Trump in particular, refusing to wear a mask became part of a larger message that ignoring the risks of the coronavirus was the tough or strong thing to do.
For example, despite warnings from public health experts about the dangers of reopening the country too early, he said during a public appearance in May that “the people of our country should think of themselves as warriors” because “our country has to open.” He made that statement at a mask factory in Arizona — where he appeared without a mask.
Since then, there’s been more research to support the use of masks, as Vox’s German Lopez reports. A June study found that regional mask mandates in Germany brought down the number of Covid-19 cases between 2.3 percent and 13 percent over a period of 10 days. A study of mask requirements around the US, also published in June, found that the requirements were associated with drops in the growth rate of the virus and may have prevented hundreds of thousands of cases.
Incidents in recent months have appeared to reinforce the importance of masks. For example, two hairstylists in Missouri interacted with more than 100 customers while infected with Covid-19 but did not pass the virus on to anyone — perhaps because everyone wore masks. And protests against police violence in American cities do not appear to have caused an uptick in cases, even though they were attended by thousands of people, perhaps in part because most protesters wore masks.
Public health experts are quick to point out that masks are not a panacea, nor a replacement for physical distancing, testing, or other tools for Covid-19 containment. “Masks help,” Lindsay Wiley, a law professor at American University who specializes in public health law, told Vox. “You should wear them, but they are not enough by themselves.”
Still, wearing a mask is a simple action that almost anyone (excluding very small children and people with certain health conditions) can take, and most experts agree it can help slow the spread of the virus. Masks are a big reason why other countries, including those more densely populated than the US, have done a better job than America at controlling the virus, Akhter said. The face coverings are both very effective and “very cheap compared to the drugs that we’re trying to invent” to treat the virus, he explained. “Masks clearly save lives.”
Even as the evidence has grown, Trump and others have continued to politicize masks
Yet this simple activity remains heavily politicized. Trump himself is still one of the biggest culprits. In May, he was photographed touring a Ford plant in Michigan without a mask, despite being told by state authorities he had a “legal responsibility” to wear one. He later said that he had put on a mask behind the scenes but removed it because he “didn’t want to give the press the pleasure of seeing it.” Then in June, he told the Wall Street Journal that some people wear masks just to show that they don’t like him, and not because they actually care about fighting Covid-19 — thus sending a loud and clear message that masks are about partisan politics, not public health.
In July, he began to soften his stance on masks and was even photographed wearing one at Walter Reed. Still, that day, he downplayed the importance of masks for the general public, saying that the face coverings “have a time and a place,” such as “when you’re in a hospital.” Trump’s cavalier stance on masks also ignores the fact that, unlike most Americans, he reportedly exists in something of a bubble, with people around him constantly tested and monitored for symptoms.
It’s not just Trump. Republican governors around the country have hamstrung local officials’ efforts to require masks. Gov. Reynolds of Iowa has refused to mandate masks statewide and has said that cities cannot mandate them either — even though a leaked White House document shows that nearly half the state is in a “red zone” for dangerous viral transmission and recommended that face masks be required there.
Gov. Kemp of Georgia last week took the step of suing Atlanta Mayor Bottoms for requiring masks and trying to move the city back to an earlier phase of reopening. As of last week, cases of the virus in Georgia were surging, with an average of 3,100 cases a day, 1,100 of those in the Atlanta area, according to the New York Times. Bottoms herself has tested positive for the virus. But Kemp cast her restrictions as the real danger to Georgians, saying her “disastrous policies threaten the lives and livelihood of our citizens.”
The actions of politicians influence ordinary people’s mask-wearing habits
When it comes to mask-wearing, the words of leaders matter, experts say. “Not everybody can pore through papers like I can as a physician and a researcher,” Akhter said. For many laypeople, “they’re going to listen to what their president says, even if their own experts are saying otherwise.”
The history of other public health threats, like smoking, has shown that “when you see someone you respect model a behavior, it influences your own views about that behavior,” Wiley said. And today, “when people we admire and respect and trust wear masks and model responsible behavior, it really has a big effect.”
By the same token, when people like Trump don’t wear masks and make wearing masks a political issue, their supporters are less likely to wear them. When the president says people wear masks as a way of showing their disapproval of him, “that’s a pretty clear signal, not just that he’s not modeling responsible behavior, but that he views it as a sign of disloyalty,” Wiley said. “That does definitely further politicize the decision to wear a mask or not.”
The effects of this politicization can be seen in recent polling on mask use. In a Pew poll conducted June 4 to 10, 76 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters said they wear a mask in stores all or most of the time. Just 53 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters said the same. Men are also less likely to prioritize mask-wearing than women — in another Pew poll, conducted in mid-June, 42 percent of men said people in their community should wear masks in public places, while 53 percent of women said the same. The disconnect could reflect the fact that more men identify as Republican, as well as the fact that Trump and others have implicitly or explicitly linked a refusal to wear a mask with toughness and masculinity.
White Americans are also less likely than other racial groups to routinely wear masks, according to the early June Pew data. In that poll, 78 percent of white people said they wear masks in stores at least some of the time, compared with 86 percent of Black respondents, 87 percent of Latinx respondents, and 89 percent of those of Asian descent. While there are many possible reasons for the racial gaps, including party affiliation and the fact that many Black and Latinx communities have been especially hard hit by Covid-19, racist rhetoric by Trump and others may play a role in convincing some white people not to wear masks.
Eschewing a mask has become associated in America with a particular brand of white manliness, Jonathan Metzl, a professor of sociology and psychiatry at Vanderbilt University and the author of Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America’s Heartland, told Vox in May. You can see it in the unmasked men who protested stay-at-home orders in Michigan earlier this year. “There’s an assumption of a kind of invincibility that is tied to this idea of white masculinity,” Metzl said at the time.
But ending the politicization of masks could still save lives
It’s not too late for things to change. Republican governors in states like Alabama and Arkansas have issued mask orders in recent days as coronavirus cases surge around the country. Even the president on Monday tweeted that “many people say that it is Patriotic to wear a face mask when you can’t socially distance,” alongside a photo of himself wearing a mask.
And during a Tuesday press conference, Trump told Americans, “we’re asking everybody that when you are not able to socially distance, wear a mask. Get a mask.
“Whether you like the mask or not, they have an impact,” he added. “They’ll have an effect, and we need everything we can get.”
But he has continued to use a racist name for the virus that he’s been repeating for months. And even if he and others are truly committed to undoing the politicization of masks, it will take time to get ordinary Americans on board. Some people may oppose masks “regardless of what the president says, because to them it’s become a political issue,” Akhter said.
Still, experts say lives can be saved. “I do think it’s possible to turn things around,” Wiley said, noting that more leaders are moving to depoliticize masking. “Almost every public health initiative to change people’s behavior has been very controversial at the start,” she said. And despite opposition to masks, “from a public health perspective, I’m impressed by how rapidly people are getting on board.”
And while wearing masks won’t bring back the many thousands of lives that have already been lost, it can help the many who are still at risk, Akhter said. Americans’ attitude toward masks “played a big role in why the curves went the opposite direction of what we wanted, but it also can play a big role in stopping what may be coming,” he said.
He urges Americans to wear masks, if nothing else, as a sign of support for one another. “It can save lives; it does save lives,” he said, “and even if you don’t believe that, as a sign of solidarity, please wear a mask.”


vox--2020-07-23--Representation is deeper than putting Black icons on magazine covers

Last week , Vanity Fair unveiled the cover of its July/August 2020 issue , which features a striking portrait of Oscar-winning actress Viola Davis .
Adorned in a midnight blue coat dress , Davis sits with her back — most of it exposed — to the camera as she fixes her gaze to the left .
The colors of the portrait create a regal mood , one that suggests classic Hollywood , with Davis ’ s tightly coiled Afro sitting high and obscuring much of the magazine ’ s name .
Praise for the image came swiftly as people admired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was captured by Dario Calmese , who was the first Black artist to shoot the cover of the 106-year-old Conde Nast publication — a feat both newsworthy and shocking for such an overdue “ first.
” But then more details came to light about what influenced the portrait .
The New York Times revealed that Calmese positioned Davis to recreate the well-known image “ The Scourged Back ” — a harrowing 1863 photo that shows Gordon , a formerly enslaved man , sitting shirtless and slightly hunched over to display his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is a brutal image , easily evoking both revulsion and deep sorrow .
While not much is known about Gordon himself , abolitionists circulated the photo widely , using it as propaganda to change the hearts of Americans at a time when the Civil War was being waged to determine the fate of slavery in America .
The image ’ s gravity and reach are so potent that generations have come to see the weight of slavery through the permanent grooves and engravings on Gordon ’ s back .
Calmese , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this story , told the Times that his intention was to rewrite narratives not “ only around slavery , but also the white gaze on Black bodies , and transmuting that into something of elegance and beauty and power.
” He added , “ It ’ s about replacing the images that have been washing over all of us for centuries , telling us who we are and our position in the world and our value.
” On the surface , this seems reasonable — swapping out Black pain for Black beauty .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially one as appalling , intense , and elusive as Gordon ’ s , requires greater care — the kind of care that would help us engage more deeply with the vast amounts and kinds of violence that enslaved people endured .
Calmese ’ s use of “ The Scourged Back ” as his reference adds shock value at a time when America is already inundated with imagery of Black pain and death .
“ The image of Gordon ’ s back was always meant to be a meta-language of a larger violence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson told Vox .
The photo was created to embody the violence of bondage , of breaking up families , of intimate violence , of labor violence , of incest , and of the inability to claim your own time , selfhood , and space , Johnson said .
“ That ’ s a lot for Gordon to have carried , and that weight seemed to be transferred over to Viola ” in a way that missed the depth and complexity of the violence , she said .
By choosing this reference , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viewers the experiences of Black women , critics say .
Slavery ’ s visual archive has an abundance of images that show what women experienced , including sexual violence , something that Gordon ’ s photo doesn ’ t exactly capture .
Many also questioned whether a light-skinned Black actress would have been asked to bear this burden ; dark-skinned Black women have long been stereotyped as strong “ mules ” who can endure inordinate amounts of pain .
“ If the reference point for Calmese was an enslaved black man ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he saw in Davis ?
Or refused to see ?
” said Mount Holyoke English and history professor Kimberly Juanita Brown .
“ Reclaiming ” a narrative is about more than supplanting old images , even if the resulting image is “ beautiful , ” critics say .
A true reclamation would require that the artist and publication take the time to reckon with the original image , to help their viewers understand and unpack the original story , and to draw the connection to its current subject .
When Vanity Fair released @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one was talking about who Gordon was or why his photo was even taken , Johnson said .
Editor-in-chief Radhika Jones didn ’ t reference it in her accompanying editor ’ s note where she celebrated Davis , either ; in fact , she said the cover shot was inspired by a different set of portraits — the mid-19th-century slave daguerreotypes of Louis Agassiz , the famous Harvard University biologist who was determined to prove , through science and photography , his racist theories about the superiority of the white race .
Ultimately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hired to photograph a Black woman , the work does not end .
Representation extends to the publication itself , to who is advising and signing off on visual and editorial decisions .
“ We have to look at who ’ s in the position to hire people in the first place .
If the whole team — the creative director , art director , photo editor , photo producer , editor-in-chief , stylist — is homogenous and if there ’ s no Black person to say , ‘ Hey , can we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what we are trying to say with this image ?
’ you ’ re going to get this kind of result , ” photo editor Danielle Scruggs told Vox .
Scruggs also noted that there ’ s room to offer opportunities to Black women and nonbinary photographers as well : “ That would have produced different results.
” Vanity Fair did not respond to Vox ’ s request for comment about representation in the newsroom or on the page , but in the nearly two and a half years since becoming editor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversity on the magazine ’ s covers .
Since April 2018 , the magazine has featured 10 Black cover stars including singer and actress Janelle Monáe and screenwriter and producer Lena Waithe ; between 1983 and 2017 , Vanity Fair had only featured 17 Black people on its cover , according to Jones ’ s editor ’ s letter .
“ It was something I had noticed about Vanity Fair myself , from the outside , that lack of representation , ” Jones wrote .
Yet whether the magazine has made any changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unclear .
In an Instagram post celebrating the cover , Calmese tagged a number of Vanity Fair staffers who were involved , including the creative director and visuals director , many of them white .
The Vanity Fair cover was released amid a related controversy — just five days earlier , Vogue dropped its August 2020 cover featuring Olympic champion gymnast Simone Biles .
While readers were excited that Biles was the summer cover star , many expressed frustration at the poor lighting and styling in the photos , which left Biles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ washed out , and muted .
Renowned photographer Annie Leibovitz , who has a decades-long career of countless celebrity portraits , shot the image , leading people to scold Vogue for not hiring a Black photographer .
“ I usually love her but hire Black photographers that know how to photograph Black people , ” one Twitter user wrote .
( Vogue has not responded to Vox ’ s request for comment about the Biles photography . )
Both covers arrived as Black Lives Matter protests are forcing institutions to confront how whiteness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fashion and tech to boardrooms and writers ’ rooms in the media industry .
But the pushback aimed at the Davis and Biles images shows that representation for representation ’ s sake is insufficient ; institutions and artists must take greater care to examine the layered narratives that exist beneath their decisions , especially when they relate to hyper-marginalized groups like Black women .
The image of Gordon , simply put , is difficult to look at .
It was taken amid the Civil War at a time when abolitionists , Black and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and formerly enslaved people to prove the humanity of Black people ; the photographs were then used as propaganda in publications that circulated to thousands of readers .
Abolitionists and Black activists like Sojourner Truth and Frederick Douglass sat for the more distinguished versions of these photographs , hoping they would help white people see that Black people weren ’ t the feeble-minded cartoonish figures they were portrayed to be .
Truth , a feminist activist and orator , used her carte-de-visite ( postcard-like images that could be cheaply and easily produced and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though white onlookers in the 1860s would write that she was “ quaint in language , grotesque in appearance and homely in illustration.
” Other images used for anti-slavery propaganda during this time were less interested in humanizing enslaved people ’ s experience and were instead distributed for their shock value .
Johnson , who studies women and slavery and is the author of the forthcoming book Wicked Flesh : Black Women , Intimacy , and Freedom in the Atlantic World , points out that some iconic photographs from Louisiana during this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were phenotypically white but had captions reading “ Rebecca , the slave girl ” or “ Rebecca , a slave girl from New Orleans.
” “ You would not look at that photo and imagine they were anything but white children .
The idea was , ‘ Look !
Anybody can be enslaved .
The threat of slavery is everywhere , ’ ” Johnson told Vox .
Gordon ’ s photo entered this visual culture when it was printed alongside the article “ A Typical Negro ” in Harper ’ s Weekly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Scourged Back , ” taken during a medical examination , was just one of three photos of Gordon that were included .
The photo to the left of it featured him in the torn and muddied clothing he wore on his 10-day journey to reach freedom at a Union encampment in Baton Rouge .
The final photo shows Gordon in his uniform as a US soldier .
Together , the triptych begged of readers : Whose side are you on , the Union or the Confederacy ?
But , as University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ A Typical Negro ’ : Gordon , Peter , Vincent Coyler , and the Story Behind Slavery ’ s Most Famous Photograph , ” while the photo was used to highlight slavery ’ s brutality and rally people around the Union cause , it simultaneously “ dismissed the individual experience of the man in the image.
” According to Silkenat , very little is known about Gordon himself ( for example , it is unclear whether he ever had a career as a Union soldier ) , and evidence suggests that much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fabricated .
In fact , historical accounts support the argument that the image and the accompanying Harper ’ s narrative served the interests of abolitionists and publishers who wanted to win over public opinion in the North .
Some evidence even suggests that it is another man pictured in the first and third photo of the triptych .
“ In the process of creating a sympathetic and politically powerful image , abolitionists and newspaper publishers , even the most well-intentioned , were willing to homogenize African Americans and their individual experiences in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justified the enlisting of Black soldiers in the Union army , Silkenat wrote .
Back then , the photo did little to delve into Gordon ’ s personal and individual experience .
Instead , it was mass-produced as one of the country ’ s original viral photos .
Photography studios in Philadelphia , New York , Boston , and London reprinted the image , and other publications like Henry Ward Beecher ’ s Independent and William Lloyd Garrison ’ s Liberator either published or mentioned how to buy copies of the photograph , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the circulation of Harper ’ s often exceeded 100,000 per issue .
In the nearly 160 years since it was created , “ The Scourged Back ” has been reprinted and used in textbooks and classroom lectures , in museums and galleries , and in films as a tool to remind people about the evils of slavery .
Today , the image continues to inform anti-slavery visual culture .
Artists have used images of the scarred backs of modern-day trafficked women in recent years as stand-ins for the person ’ s whole experiences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ body was offered up for viewer consumption , wrote modern slavery scholar Zoe Trodd in “ Am I still Not a Man and a Brother ?
Protest Memory in Contemporary Antislavery Visual Culture.
” Historian Louis P. Masur argued in the article “ ‘ Pictures Have Now Become a Necessity ’ : The Use of Images in American History Textbooks ” that “ The Scourged Back ” has been reprinted in textbooks over the years , but this practice carries limitations if students just take the image at face value .
Masur wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure the photo in a textbook is accompanied by context to get students asking questions like : Who was Gordon ?
Why was his picture taken ?
What purpose did this photo serve ?
“ This is the approach that we must pursue if we are to understand the past and make it relevant , ” he wrote .
Why critics say the recreation of the image misses the mark While he recognized “ The Scourged Back ” as “ gruesome and harsh , Calmese told the Times he chose it as inspiration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Davis could recreate to subvert what ’ s expected for magazine covers .
He said he specifically wanted to draw on how Gordon “ pushes back more toward the camera ” with his hands at his waist , creating a line from his profile down to his arm .
“ For me , this cover is my protest , ” he said in the interview .
“ But not a protest in ‘ Look at how bad you ’ ve been to me , and I ’ m angry , and I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ I ’ m going to rewrite this narrative .
I ’ m just going to take ownership of it.
’ ” He told the Times that to execute his vision , he didn ’ t want a glamour moment for Davis but wanted the photo to feel “ underexposed and somber , ” with Davis sporting natural hair and “ undramatic ” makeup .
Calmese said he didn ’ t expect Jones to select it as the cover photo of a summer issue .
Many viewers , Black women included , saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , noting that it is practically impossible to miss Davis ’ s beauty in any portrait of her .
People read the pose as dynamic and assertive , especially since it was paired with a cover line of Davis ’ s words from the feature story : “ My entire life has been a protest.
” But many people did not question or even know the historical reference , which raises concerns about how to portray the complexity of violence — whether the image of Gordon ’ s back was too heavy to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the magazine ’ s duty to provide that context , and whether it is troubling to place that burden on Davis ’ s back .
To some , “ reclaiming ” images that show Black suffering feeds not only the cycle of violence but also the appetite of a white readership that ’ s casually curious about but ultimately detached from experiencing such violence .
To others , artists have a right to engage such images , but urge artists to engage them carefully and thoughtfully .
“ What we need to challenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of history and expand our imagination around how we depict Black people , and particularly dark-skinned Black women , which is something else that the industry tiptoes around , ” Scruggs told Vox .
Brown , who is the author of The Repeating Body : Slavery ’ s Visual Resonance in the Contemporary , told Vox the back of a light-skinned actress would not tell the same story or cause the same apprehension .
“ This notion of reimagining a history of Black suffering would have been a difficult visual endeavor with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The weight of this history has yet to be reconciled , she explained , yet it is constantly repeated , with dark-skinned Black women continually “ offered up as overly burdened corporeal texts , somehow always signifying slavery.
” Overall , Calmese ’ s decision to have Davis recreate Gordon ’ s pose doesn ’ t help us understand the unique experiences of Black women and the violence they ’ ve historically faced America , critics say .
Enslaved women who were seen as “ sexually attractive , available , and vulnerable ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexual opportunism at the hands of supervisors , historian Kirsten E. Wood explained in the article “ Gender and Slavery.
” The threat of interracial rape and exploitation was often present , with white men using sexual violence to assert their dominance .
White men also did little to improve fertility for enslaved women and prevent infant mortality .
“ It was , quite simply , cheaper and easier to buy new slaves and work them quite literally to death than to rely on childbirth to increase and reproduce the labor force , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slavery that the harmful stereotypes of “ nurturing Mammy , aggressive Sapphire , and lustful Jezebel ” were born ; these racist tropes still hinder Black women today , preventing society from fully viewing them as “ mothers , lovers , and workers , ” according to Wood .
In Johnson ’ s view , Calmese missed an opportunity to explore the vastness of the visual archive of slavery .
“ There ’ s a particular kind of gendered violence that gets enacted on female slaves or those who present themselves as feminine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
The reality of Black womanhood during slavery was that the body could be violated at any moment ; the inability to cover oneself was violence .
“ You don ’ t need stripes to show the abject experience of slavery for the black feminine form .
The exposed back , the exposed shoulder , and a lot of the archive of slavery will also expose the breasts — all of that was used to signal a kind of availability that was both hypersexualized and hyperviolent.
” Johnson points to images like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ( “ Milkmaid and Negro Women Carrying Milk ” ) , “ Branding Slaves , ” and “ Marks of Punishment Inflicted Upon a Colored Servant in Richmond , Virginia ” as examples that speak to the specific hardships Black women faced and as samples of the iconography the photo shoot could have engaged .
For example , in “ Marks of Punishment , ” a young woman is posed with her back to the camera to display burn marks that her mistress inflicted on her , a specific dynamic that women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these images , it would have been different because it would ’ ve been based on the image of another woman .
It would have also referenced a different part of history to show that it ’ s not just Black men who were subject to violence , ” Scruggs said .
“ It ’ s funny how we have these same conversations today when it comes to violence from the state .
There seems to be a disconnect when it comes to the experiences of Black women .
People just tend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Black men.
” For some Black women who know the history behind “ The Scourged Back , ” when they look at this photo of Davis , they see the violence and pain that ’ s been passed down through generations ; the photo gives them pause because it is burdened by the reference to Gordon , especially since America has yet to address this violence .
“ I think the violence that Black women experience has no imagistic vanishing point .
Violence is not always ugly ; it doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told Vox .
“ Rather , there is often an aesthetic orientation to the power that images invoke , allowing viewers to believe that violence ( literal , figurative ) isn ’ t taking place .
I am not saying that the image is violent , but it is heavily burdened , which makes it hard to enjoy.
” When asked by the Guardian on July 18 what he thought about the growing criticism around the cover , Calmese said , “ Oh , I think it ’ s absolutely wonderful !
Look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I ’ m very aware that [ the photo ] is a very charged image .
As a creative , I ’ m not here to please people.
” He also said that by revealing the reference , he was offering a “ deeper reading ” for people viewing the cover , and that many photographers don ’ t share their creative influences .
“ So in me offering this reference , it was an offer to debate .
Because I could have just shot the image and not said anything about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
In his interview with the New York Times , Calmese also said the photo shoot was a moment to be “ extra Black ” at a time when people are calling for justice for Black lives .
But to critics , “ extra Black ” would have meant Calmese and Vanity Fair taking the time and care to add context to tell the full story about Black historical figures when America is reckoning with its racist past and inundated with imagery of Black death .
Though Calmese claims the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meant to spark debate , critics say there is nothing transgressive or original about superimposing Gordon ’ s image onto the back of a dark-skinned Black female icon beyond the shock value it elicits .
As Johnson points out , “ We can have a different kind of care when we ’ re trying to draw on historical subjects from the past.
” Vogue ’ s photos of Simone Biles also prove that magazines have so much further to go with representation Not unrelated to the Davis cover image , Vogue ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been criticized for their lack of care for dark skin .
Onlookers were pleased that Biles appeared on the cover but argued that Leibovitz ’ s lighting and photo style choice did a disservice to the decorated Olympic gymnast .
New York Times national picture editor Morrigan McCarthy tweeted , “ I adore Simone Biles and am thrilled she ’ s on this cover ... but I hate these photos .
I hate the toning , I hate how predictable they are , I hate the social crop here ( wtf ? )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be bothered to hire a Black photographer.
” In the cover image , Biles , dressed in a tomato-red bodysuit , stands with her back to the camera and her hands positioned on her waist .
She stares forward , away from the camera .
The lighting , critics say , is dull and leaves her skin washed out and gray .
Though the style is customary for Leibovitz , it shows that her go-to technique doesn ’ t work for all .
In a subsequent photo inside the feature story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dress , her skin appears flat and lifeless as she looks down with her eyes nearly shut .
And again , her arms are deliberately positioned on her hips , suggesting defiance .
For Biles , one of history ’ s most accomplished athletes , the photos emit a gloomy vibe that counters her influence and achievements .
Many argued that a Black photographer would have produced a better result .
Photographer Dana Scruggs , who has photographed the likes of Stacey Abrams and Michaela Coel , says she thinks conceptually when photographing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliberately try to push back against stereotypes of Black women but presents the women in a way that ’ s pleasing to her and hopes the decision-makers at magazines agree with her viewpoint .
“ There ’ s a narrative that has been perpetuated throughout the history of photography , or at least within editorial publications , that dark skin is difficult to light .
In fashion , you would see a Black model but she would not look her skin tone .
Or maybe she was being shot with white people so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not considering that they have a Black person ” in the shoot as well , Scruggs told Vox .
“ This has created the false idea that Black people are hard to light , and there are even Black photographers who say the same thing .
They have so much internalized racism and anti-blackness that they believe this.
” In 2018 , Scruggs became the first Black woman to photograph an athlete for ESPN ’ s “ The Body Issue.
” Later that year , she became the first Black person to shoot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scruggs notes that she shot nine covers in 2019 , many of which she believes she was likely the first Black person or Black woman to shoot .
“ I stopped asking after the Rolling Stone cover , ” Scruggs told Vox .
“ You stop asking after a certain point because I don ’ t want that to be the narrative around my work .
I know the work I ’ ve done has contributed a lot to help Black photographers move forward within the industry , especially being so vocal about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black photographers when your publication has historically not supported them .
It ’ s like , why am I the first after so many years ?
” Scruggs points to photo editors and creative directors who she says don ’ t seek out Black talent and are complicit in hiring practices that exclude Black artists .
She also said that the achievements of Black women in the industry are often overshadowed : “ Just look at the momentum that has always driven society around race and Black oppression .
Black women have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narratives aren ’ t enough to galvanize people.
” Danielle Scruggs agrees .
“ I really want to see Black women get opportunities to portray other Black women , ” she said .
“ When people talk about women in photography , they ’ re not talking about Black women .
When people talk about Black people in photography , they ’ re not talking about Black women , or Black femmes either.
” Ultimately , the media , and America at large , is only beginning to scratch the surface of what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Davis portrait claimed there should be no critique of it since the images are beautiful .
Some supporters of Leibovitz ’ s Biles photos said the public should be satisfied that Biles was on the cover and being rendered in Leibovitz ’ s vision .
Both comments failed to recognize the complexity of representation .
Representation must constantly be questioned .
“ I am all for people finding enjoyment and beauty wherever and whenever they can .
And I don ’ t think this needs to be a shaken awareness type of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s an opportunity to sync with these images and the photographers and with other women pictured in the archive , ” Johnson said .
“ We can do all of these things at once .
We contain so many multitudes .
We can hold the pandemic and the protests and the beauty of Viola Davis and her magnificent back — her stunning image — and hold that constant with what is meant to have been inspired by , and what is in the archive that also adds to that and complicates it.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Last week, Vanity Fair unveiled the cover of its July/August 2020 issue, which features a striking portrait of Oscar-winning actress Viola Davis. Adorned in a midnight blue coat dress, Davis sits with her back — most of it exposed — to the camera as she fixes her gaze to the left. The colors of the portrait create a regal mood, one that suggests classic Hollywood, with Davis’s tightly coiled Afro sitting high and obscuring much of the magazine’s name.
Praise for the image came swiftly as people admired the power the photo exudes. Plus, it was captured by Dario Calmese, who was the first Black artist to photograph the cover of the 106-year-old Conde Nast publication — a feat both newsworthy and shocking for such an overdue “first.”
Presenting our July/August cover star: @ViolaDavis. The Oscar winner—who’s set to star as Michelle Obama and blues legend Ma Rainey—talks to @SoniaSaraiya about her journey out of poverty and into the deeply troubling Hollywood system. https://t.co/NKm0nGeSbP pic.twitter.com/8QlGbh3OTS — VANITY FAIR (@VanityFair) July 14, 2020
But then more details came to light about what influenced the portrait. The New York Times revealed that Calmese positioned Davis to recreate the well-known image “The Scourged Back” — a harrowing 1863 photo that shows Gordon, a formerly enslaved man, sitting shirtless and slightly hunched over to display his back that is deeply furrowed from whiplashes. It is a brutal image, easily evoking both revulsion and deep sorrow.
While not much is known about Gordon himself, abolitionists circulated the photo widely, using it as propaganda to change the hearts of Americans at a time when the Civil War was being waged to determine the fate of slavery in America. The image’s gravity and reach are so potent that generations have come to see the weight of slavery through the permanent grooves and engravings on Gordon’s back.
Calmese, who couldn’t be reached for this story, told the Times that his intention was to rewrite narratives not “only around slavery, but also the white gaze on Black bodies, and transmuting that into something of elegance and beauty and power.” He added, “It’s about replacing the images that have been washing over all of us for centuries, telling us who we are and our position in the world and our value.”
On the surface, this seems reasonable — swapping out Black pain for Black beauty. But to critics, rewriting narratives, especially one as appalling, intense, and elusive as Gordon’s, requires greater care — the kind of care that would help us engage more deeply with the vast amounts and kinds of violence that enslaved people endured. Calmese’s use of “The Scourged Back” as his reference adds shock value at a time when America is already inundated with imagery of Black pain and death.
“The image of Gordon’s back was always meant to be a meta-language of a larger violence,” Johns Hopkins historian Jessica Marie Johnson told Vox. The photo was created to embody the violence of bondage, of breaking up families, of intimate violence, of labor violence, of incest, and of the inability to claim your own time, selfhood, and space, Johnson said. “That’s a lot for Gordon to have carried, and that weight seemed to be transferred over to Viola” in a way that missed the depth and complexity of the violence, she said.
By choosing this reference, Calmese also squandered an opportunity to show viewers the experiences of Black women, critics say. Slavery’s visual archive has an abundance of images that show what women experienced, including sexual violence, something that Gordon’s photo doesn’t exactly capture. Many also questioned whether a light-skinned Black actress would have been asked to bear this burden; dark-skinned Black women have long been stereotyped as strong “mules” who can endure inordinate amounts of pain.
“If the reference point for Calmese was an enslaved black man’s whipped back, what can we imagine he saw in Davis? Or refused to see?” said Mount Holyoke English and history professor Kimberly Juanita Brown.
Be clear: I LOVE these pictures and I LOVE the hell out of Viola. But this photographer NEVER would have reimagined “The Scourged Back” with Halle, Thandie or Zendaya. This fascination Black men (straight and gay) have w/ linking darkskin women to slavery and trauma is jarring. https://t.co/VuOvdtSFGn — Kellee Nicole Terrell (@kelleent) July 14, 2020
“Reclaiming” a narrative is about more than supplanting old images, even if the resulting image is “beautiful,” critics say. A true reclamation would require that the artist and publication take the time to reckon with the original image, to help their viewers understand and unpack the original story, and to draw the connection to its current subject. When Vanity Fair released the cover image last week, no one was talking about who Gordon was or why his photo was even taken, Johnson said. Editor-in-chief Radhika Jones didn’t reference it in her accompanying editor’s note where she celebrated Davis, either; in fact, she said the cover shot was inspired by a different set of portraits — the mid-19th-century slave daguerreotypes of Louis Agassiz, the famous Harvard University biologist who was determined to prove, through science and photography, his racist theories about the superiority of the white race.
Ultimately, just because a Black photographer is hired to photograph a Black woman, the work does not end. Representation extends to the publication itself, to who is advising and signing off on visual and editorial decisions. “We have to look at who’s in the position to hire people in the first place. If the whole team — the creative director, art director, photo editor, photo producer, editor-in-chief, stylist — is homogenous and if there’s no Black person to say, ‘Hey, can we talk about this a little more and what we are trying to say with this image?’ you’re going to get this kind of result,” said photo editor Danielle Scruggs, who has worked for Vox and the New York Times, among other outlets. Scruggs also noted that there’s room to offer opportunities to Black women and nonbinary photographers as well: “That would have produced different results.”
Vanity Fair did not respond to Vox’s request for comment about representation in the newsroom or on the page, but in the nearly two and a half years since becoming editor, Jones has made an effort to increase diversity on the magazine’s covers. Since April 2018, the magazine has featured 10 Black cover stars including singer and actress Janelle Monáe and screenwriter and producer Lena Waithe; between 1983 and 2017, Vanity Fair had only featured 17 Black people on its cover, according to Jones’s editor’s letter. “It was something I had noticed about Vanity Fair myself, from the outside, that lack of representation,” Jones wrote.
Yet whether the magazine has made any changes in terms of diversity, internally, is unclear. In an Instagram post celebrating the cover, Calmese tagged a number of Vanity Fair staffers who were involved, including the creative director and visuals director, many of them white.
The Vanity Fair cover was released amid a related controversy — just five days earlier, Vogue dropped its August 2020 cover featuring Olympic champion gymnast Simone Biles. While readers were excited that Biles was the summer cover star, many expressed frustration at the poor lighting and styling in the photos, which left Biles’s dark skin looking flat, washed out, and muted. Renowned photographer Annie Leibovitz, who has a decades-long career of countless celebrity portraits, shot the image, leading people to scold Vogue for not hiring a Black photographer. “I usually love her but hire Black photographers that know how to photograph Black people,” one Twitter user wrote. (Vogue has not responded to Vox’s request for comment about the Biles photography.)
.@Simone_Biles stars on the cover of our August issue! With the 2020 Olympics postponed and a shadow hung over American gymnastics, Biles–who is widely regarded as the greatest gymnast of all time—has had to be resilient as never before. (1/5) https://t.co/fPoNKoDNwD pic.twitter.com/6y4RxtMYAf — Vogue Magazine (@voguemagazine) July 9, 2020
Both covers arrived as Black Lives Matter protests are forcing institutions to confront how whiteness excludes Blackness in everything from CEOs in fashion and tech to boardrooms and writers’ rooms in the media industry. But the pushback aimed at the Davis and Biles images shows that representation for representation’s sake is insufficient; institutions and artists must take greater care to examine the layered narratives that exist beneath their decisions, especially when they relate to hyper-marginalized groups like Black women.
The history of “The Scourged Back”
The image of Gordon, simply put, is difficult to look at. It was taken amid the Civil War at a time when abolitionists, Black and white, used portrait photography of enslaved and formerly enslaved people to prove the humanity of Black people; the photographs were then used as propaganda in publications that circulated to thousands of readers.
Abolitionists and Black activists like Sojourner Truth and Frederick Douglass sat for the more distinguished versions of these photographs, hoping they would help white people see that Black people weren’t the feeble-minded cartoonish figures they were portrayed to be. Truth, a feminist activist and orator, used her carte-de-visite (postcard-like images that could be cheaply and easily produced and distributed) as a tool for self-actualization, though white onlookers in the 1860s would write that she was “quaint in language, grotesque in appearance and homely in illustration.”
Other images used for anti-slavery propaganda during this time were less interested in humanizing enslaved people’s experience and were instead distributed for their shock value. Johnson, who studies women and slavery and is the author of the forthcoming book Wicked Flesh: Black Women, Intimacy, and Freedom in the Atlantic World, points out that some iconic photographs from Louisiana during this time, for example, featured children who were phenotypically white but had captions reading “Rebecca, the slave girl” or “Rebecca, a slave girl from New Orleans.”
“You would not look at that photo and imagine they were anything but white children. The idea was, ‘Look! Anybody can be enslaved. The threat of slavery is everywhere,’” Johnson told Vox.
Gordon’s photo entered this visual culture when it was printed alongside the article “A Typical Negro” in Harper’s Weekly on July 4, 1863; “The Scourged Back,” taken during a medical examination, was just one of three photos of Gordon that were included. The photo to the left of it featured him in the torn and muddied clothing he wore on his 10-day journey to reach freedom at a Union encampment in Baton Rouge. The final photo shows Gordon in his uniform as a US soldier. Together, the triptych begged of readers: Whose side are you on, the Union or the Confederacy?
But, as University of Edinburgh historian David Silkenat notes in “‘A Typical Negro’: Gordon, Peter, Vincent Coyler, and the Story Behind Slavery’s Most Famous Photograph,” while the photo was used to highlight slavery’s brutality and rally people around the Union cause, it simultaneously “dismissed the individual experience of the man in the image.”
According to Silkenat, very little is known about Gordon himself (for example, it is unclear whether he ever had a career as a Union soldier), and evidence suggests that much of Gordon’s story was likely fabricated. In fact, historical accounts support the argument that the image and the accompanying Harper’s narrative served the interests of abolitionists and publishers who wanted to win over public opinion in the North. Some evidence even suggests that it is another man pictured in the first and third photo of the triptych.
“In the process of creating a sympathetic and politically powerful image, abolitionists and newspaper publishers, even the most well-intentioned, were willing to homogenize African Americans and their individual experiences in the service of the redemptive narrative” that justified the enlisting of Black soldiers in the Union army, Silkenat wrote.
Back then, the photo did little to delve into Gordon’s personal and individual experience. Instead, it was mass-produced as one of the country’s original viral photos. Photography studios in Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and London reprinted the image, and other publications like Henry Ward Beecher’s Independent and William Lloyd Garrison’s Liberator either published or mentioned how to buy copies of the photograph, according to Silkenat, who noted that the circulation of Harper’s often exceeded 100,000 per issue.
In the nearly 160 years since it was created, “The Scourged Back” has been reprinted and used in textbooks and classroom lectures, in museums and galleries, and in films as a tool to remind people about the evils of slavery. Today, the image continues to inform anti-slavery visual culture. Artists have used images of the scarred backs of modern-day trafficked women in recent years as stand-ins for the person’s whole experiences in the same way Gordon’s body was offered up for viewer consumption, wrote modern slavery scholar Zoe Trodd in “Am I still not a man and a brother? Protest memory in contemporary antislavery visual culture.”
Historian Louis P. Masur argued in the article “‘Pictures Have Now Become a Necessity’: The Use of Images in American History Textbooks” that “The Scourged Back” has been reprinted in textbooks over the years, but this practice carries limitations if students just take the image at face value. Masur wrote that it’s important to make sure the photo in a textbook is accompanied by context to get students asking questions like: Who was Gordon? Why was his picture taken? What purpose did this photo serve? “This is the approach that we must pursue if we are to understand the past and make it relevant,” he wrote.
Why critics say the recreation of the image misses the mark
While he recognized “The Scourged Back” as “gruesome and harsh,” Calmese told the Times he chose it as inspiration because he saw parts of it that Davis could recreate to subvert what’s expected for magazine covers. He said he specifically wanted to draw on how Gordon “pushes back more toward the camera” with his hands at his waist, creating a line from his profile down to his arm.
“For me, this cover is my protest,” he said in the interview. “But not a protest in ‘Look at how bad you’ve been to me, and I’m angry, and I’m upset,’ but, ‘I’m going to rewrite this narrative. I’m just going to take ownership of it.’”
He told the Times that to execute his vision, he didn’t want a glamour moment for Davis but wanted the photo to feel “underexposed and somber,” with Davis sporting natural hair and “undramatic” makeup. Calmese said he didn’t expect Jones to select it as the cover photo of a summer issue.
Many viewers, Black women included, saw the photo as powerful and unmistakably stunning, noting that it is practically impossible to miss Davis’s beauty in any portrait of her. People read the pose as dynamic and assertive, especially since it was paired with a cover line of Davis’s words from the feature story: “My entire life has been a protest.”
But many people did not question or even know the historical reference, which raises concerns about how to portray the complexity of violence — whether the image of Gordon’s back was too heavy to recreate sans context, whether it was the magazine’s duty to provide that context, and whether it is troubling to place that burden on Davis’s back.
To some, “reclaiming” images that show Black suffering feeds not only the cycle of violence but also the appetite of a white readership that’s casually curious about but ultimately detached from experiencing such violence.
y’all work is not doing what you think it’s doing. the discourse™ you’re trying to have is crushed under the weight of the same libidinal economy your projects are parasitic on, the very cannibalistic appetite of the white public (you say) it’s (not) for. — jatella (@jatella) July 14, 2020
To others, artists have a right to engage such images, but urge artists to engage them carefully and thoughtfully.
“What we need to challenge ourselves to do is expand our understanding of history and expand our imagination around how we depict Black people, and particularly dark-skinned Black women, which is something else that the industry tiptoes around,” Scruggs told Vox.
Brown, who is the author of The Repeating Body: Slavery’s Visual Resonance in the Contemporary, told Vox the back of a light-skinned actress would not tell the same story or cause the same apprehension. “This notion of reimagining a history of Black suffering would have been a difficult visual endeavor with a light-skinned actress,” Brown said. The weight of this history has yet to be reconciled, she explained, yet it is constantly repeated, with dark-skinned Black women continually “offered up as overly burdened corporeal texts, somehow always signifying slavery.”
Overall, Calmese’s decision to have Davis recreate Gordon’s pose doesn’t help us understand the unique experiences of Black women and the violence they’ve historically faced in America, critics say.
Enslaved women who were seen as “sexually attractive, available, and vulnerable” were the “overwhelming” targets of sexual opportunism at the hands of supervisors, historian Kirsten E. Wood explained in the article “Gender and Slavery.” The threat of interracial rape and exploitation was often present, with white men using sexual violence to assert their dominance. White men also did little to improve fertility for enslaved women and prevent infant mortality. “It was, quite simply, cheaper and easier to buy new slaves and work them quite literally to death than to rely on childbirth to increase and reproduce the labor force,” Wood wrote. It was during slavery that the harmful stereotypes of “nurturing Mammy, aggressive Sapphire, and lustful Jezebel” were born; these racist tropes still hinder Black women today, preventing society from fully viewing them as “mothers, lovers, and workers,” according to Wood.
In Johnson’s view, Calmese missed an opportunity to explore the vastness of the visual archive of slavery. “There’s a particular kind of gendered violence that gets enacted on female slaves or those who present themselves as feminine in the slaveholding society,” Johnson said. The reality of Black womanhood during slavery was that the body could be violated at any moment; the inability to cover oneself was violence. “You don’t need stripes to show the abject experience of slavery for the black feminine form. The exposed back, the exposed shoulder, and a lot of the archive of slavery will also expose the breasts — all of that was used to signal a kind of availability that was both hypersexualized and hyperviolent.”
Johnson points to images like “Laitière et Négresses Portant du Lait” (“Milkmaid and Negro Women Carrying Milk”), “Branding Slaves,” and “Marks of Punishment Inflicted Upon a Colored Servant in Richmond, Virginia” as examples that speak to the specific hardships Black women faced and as samples of the iconography the photo shoot could have engaged. For example, in “Marks of Punishment,” a young woman is posed with her back to the camera to display burn marks that her mistress inflicted on her, a specific dynamic that women experienced.
“If he referenced one of these images, it would have been different because it would’ve been based on the image of another woman. It would have also referenced a different part of history to show that it’s not just Black men who were subject to violence,” Scruggs said. “It’s funny how we have these same conversations today when it comes to violence from the state. There seems to be a disconnect when it comes to the experiences of Black women. People just tend to shoehorn Black women into the experiences of Black men.”
For some Black women who know the history behind “The Scourged Back,” when they look at this photo of Davis, they see the violence and pain that’s been passed down through generations; the photo gives them pause because it is burdened by the reference to Gordon, especially since America has yet to address this violence.
“I think the violence that Black women experience has no imagistic vanishing point. Violence is not always ugly; it doesn’t always offend the senses,” Brown told Vox. “Rather, there is often an aesthetic orientation to the power that images invoke, allowing viewers to believe that violence (literal, figurative) isn’t taking place. I am not saying that the image is violent, but it is heavily burdened, which makes it hard to enjoy.”
When asked by the Guardian on July 18 what he thought about the growing criticism around the cover, Calmese said, “Oh, I think it’s absolutely wonderful! Look, I’m not a kid. I’m very aware that [the photo] is a very charged image. As a creative, I’m not here to please people.”
He also said that by revealing the reference, he was offering a “deeper reading” for people viewing the cover, and that many photographers don’t share their creative influences. “So in me offering this reference, it was an offer to debate. Because I could have just shot the image and not said anything about what I was referring to,” he said.
In his interview with the New York Times, Calmese also said the photo shoot was a moment to be “extra Black” at a time when people are calling for justice for Black lives. But to critics, “extra Black” would have meant Calmese and Vanity Fair taking the time and care to add context to tell the full story about Black historical figures when America is reckoning with its racist past and inundated with imagery of Black death. Though Calmese claims the use of “The Scourged Back” is meant to spark debate, critics say there is nothing transgressive or original about superimposing Gordon’s image onto the back of a dark-skinned Black female icon beyond the shock value it elicits.
As Johnson points out, “We can have a different kind of care when we’re trying to draw on historical subjects from the past.”
Vogue’s photos of Simone Biles also prove that magazines have so much further to go with representation
Not unrelated to the Davis cover image, Vogue’s recent images of Simone Biles have also been criticized for their lack of care for dark skin. Onlookers were pleased that Biles appeared on the cover but argued that Leibovitz’s lighting and photo style choice did a disservice to the decorated Olympic gymnast.
New York Times national picture editor Morrigan McCarthy tweeted, “I adore Simone Biles and am thrilled she’s on this cover ... but I hate these photos. I hate the toning, I hate how predictable they are, I hate the social crop here (wtf?) and I super hate that Vogue couldn’t be bothered to hire a Black photographer.”
In the cover image, Biles, dressed in a tomato-red bodysuit, stands with her back to the camera and her hands positioned on her waist. She stares forward, away from the camera. The lighting, critics say, is dull and leaves her skin washed out and gray. Though the style is customary for Leibovitz, it shows that her go-to technique doesn’t work for all. In a subsequent photo inside the feature story in which Biles wears a jewel-encrusted cutout dress, her skin appears flat and lifeless as she looks down with her eyes nearly shut. And again, her arms are deliberately positioned on her hips, suggesting defiance.
For Biles, one of history’s most accomplished athletes, the photos emit a gloomy vibe that counters her influence and achievements. Many argued that a Black photographer would have produced a better result.
Simone Biles deserved better than Annie Leibovitz bad lighting. pic.twitter.com/I7SvmCmKJP — Britni Danielle (@BritniDWrites) July 10, 2020
Photographer Dana Scruggs, who has photographed the likes of Stacey Abrams and Michaela Coel, says she thinks conceptually when photographing Black women. She doesn’t deliberately try to push back against stereotypes of Black women but presents the women in a way that’s pleasing to her and hopes the decision-makers at magazines agree with her viewpoint.
“There’s a narrative that has been perpetuated throughout the history of photography, or at least within editorial publications, that dark skin is difficult to light. In fashion, you would see a Black model but she would not look her skin tone. Or maybe she was being shot with white people so they were lighting for white people and not considering that they have a Black person” in the shoot as well, Scruggs told Vox. “This has created the false idea that Black people are hard to light, and there are even Black photographers who say the same thing. They have so much internalized racism and anti-blackness that they believe this.”
In 2018, Scruggs became the first Black woman to photograph an athlete for ESPN’s “The Body Issue.” Later that year, she became the first Black person to shoot the cover of Rolling Stone magazine. Scruggs notes that she shot nine covers in 2019, many of which she believes she was likely the first Black person or Black woman to shoot. “I stopped asking after the Rolling Stone cover,” Scruggs told Vox. “You stop asking after a certain point because I don’t want that to be the narrative around my work. I know the work I’ve done has contributed a lot to help Black photographers move forward within the industry, especially being so vocal about why it’s important to hire Black photographers when your publication has historically not supported them. It’s like, why am I the first after so many years?”
I’m honored to have photographed @staceyabrams for @RollingStone. She inspired so many people across the country with her fearlessness and strength in the face of blatant racism and voter suppression. Thx @AolainNi for the assignment #AbramsAddress #StaceyAbrams #DanaScruggs pic.twitter.com/OGkTJLX5Ah — Dana Scruggs (@DanaScruggs1) February 6, 2019
Scruggs points to photo editors and creative directors who she says don’t seek out Black talent and are complicit in hiring practices that exclude Black artists. She also said that the achievements of Black women in the industry are often overshadowed: “Just look at the momentum that has always driven society around race and Black oppression. Black women have been out there dying too, but our narratives aren’t enough to galvanize people.”
Danielle Scruggs agrees. “I really want to see Black women get opportunities to portray other Black women,” she said. “When people talk about women in photography, they’re not talking about Black women. When people talk about Black people in photography, they’re not talking about Black women, or Black femmes either.”
Ultimately, the media, and America at large, is only beginning to scratch the surface of what representation means: Viewers who wholly supported the Davis portrait claimed there should be no critique of it since the images are beautiful. Some supporters of Leibovitz’s Biles photos said the public should be satisfied that Biles was on the cover and being rendered in Leibovitz’s vision. Both comments failed to recognize the complexity of representation. Representation must constantly be questioned.
“I am all for people finding enjoyment and beauty wherever and whenever they can. And I don’t think this needs to be a shaken awareness type of moment. But I do think there’s an opportunity to sync with these images and the photographers and with other women pictured in the archive,” Johnson said. “We can do all of these things at once. We contain so many multitudes. We can hold the pandemic and the protests and the beauty of Viola Davis and her magnificent back — her stunning image — and hold that constant with what is meant to have been inspired by, and what is in the archive that also adds to that and complicates it.”