Anna Wintour – the American Vogue Editor-in-Chief whose empire has marched countless fashion minions into the formation of her choosing. A woman named so aptly, given her famously frosty demeanor, that she has become a caricature of herself. Wintour’s power lies in her ability to walk a fine line between the avant-garde and the widely palatable, the accessible and exclusive, the enviable and the relatable. A blunt, banged bob. Enormous sunglasses. A sheath dress. A thumbs-up or thumbs-down which nearly unilaterally determines the fate of innumerable careers in fashion.
Yes, that Anna Wintour (as if it could be any other), has been dragged into the public square in the past month. She’s under scrutiny for cultivating an office culture of exclusion and hostility against minority employees and turning a blind eye to insensitive – or frankly racist – content (the infamous Lebron James and Giselle Bundchen cover, for one; or Grace Coddington’s photo with her “mammy jars,” for example).
Anna Wintour and Condé Nast
Condé Nast, the media conglomerate which owns The New Yorker, Bon Appétit, Vanity Fair, and Vogue among others, is currently under fire for its lack of diversity and inclusion, especially among editorial positions. Adam Rapoport resigned his post as Editor-in-Chief of Bon Appétit mid-June, following an Instagram post of him in brownface at a Halloween party.
As whistleblowers alerted the public of the toxic work culture throughout Condé Nast, calls for Anna Wintour’s resignation mounted. You see, not only is Anna the Vogue Editor-in-Chief of three decades, she’s also the artistic director and global brand consultant for Condé Nast as a whole. She may have roots in fashion, but her claws reach farther.
Readers will no longer tolerate leadership that is, at best, apathetic towards racial equality and, at worst, actively dangling the glass ceiling over the heads of designers and magazine employees alike. Either way, the result is that Wintour is perpetuating, sometimes magnifying, the old order, that elitism which over generations has produced and benefited from systemic oppression of people of color, especially Black people.
The Apology
Wintour did apologize via a company-wide email in June, as reported by Complex:
“I want to say plainly that I know Vogue has not found enough ways to elevate and give space to Black editors, writers, photographers, designers and other creators. We have made mistakes too, publishing images or stories that have been hurtful or intolerant. I take full responsibility for those mistakes.”
She continues, “It can’t be easy to be a Black employee at Vogue, and there are too few of you. I know that it is not enough to say we will do better, but we will — and please know that I value your voices and responses as we move forward. I am listening and would like to hear your feedback and your advice if you would like to share either.”
And finally, “I am proud of the content we have published on our site over these past few days but I also know that there is much more work to do. Please don’t hesitate to be in touch with me directly. I am arranging ways we can discuss these issues together candidly, but in the meantime, I welcome your thoughts or reactions.”
Condé Nast has also stated that Wintour will remain at her post with the company, despite public outcry and the myriad headlines predicting her demise.
The Reaction
This statement has reportedly been met with derision by Black employees at Condé Nast – and understandably so. After all, Wintour’s career has grown of her ability to read the national mood and give readers just enough of what they want – but never enough to satiate.
In other words, Wintour’s apology gives the impression that it was born more of timing, of feeling the public pressure mount in the wake of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor’s deaths, than out of genuine introspection. Of course, it is possible that she’s had a “come-to-Jesus” moment, brought on by the labors of the anti-racism movement; however, if past behavior is any indication of present state, her apology is more of a survival technique than anything else.
That’s a bitter pill, and not one that Black employees and talent should have to swallow.
I’m haunted by a statement that André Leon Talley gave in response. Talley’s the famous former Editor-at-Large at the magazine, and notably, a Black man and longtime colleague of Wintour’s. After her statement, he said on a radio interview, “I want to say one thing, Dame Anna Wintour is a colonial broad, she’s a colonial dame, she comes from British, she’s part of an environment of colonialism. She is entitled and I do not think she will ever let anything get in the way of her white privilege.”
Moral Pressure
She did, in fact promise to do better – and, as with any brand crying “mea culpa,” only time will tell. We can’t deny, though, that Wintour has dug herself into quite a problem. She’s built a brand based on narrow European standards of beauty, generational wealth, and a network of connections strengthened by the same institutions that have, in many cases, supported structural racism. A cursory look at the credentials of her assistants, as The New York Times pointed out, is an excellent example of this, as is her continued support of high-status contributors to the magazine.
The latter, it seems, she achieves with stiff, potent doses of willful ignorance of the damage inflicted by these contributors’ gaffes (Coddington and her hateful jar collection being one of many examples). I wonder, though, if Wintour really sees these tiny acts of racism as just tiny faux-pas; misteps, like using the wrong salad fork.
Is is possible that she has any cognition of the deeply-steeped cultural bias and historically-embedded structures that conspired to birth these “mistakes”? Or does she acknowledge that they are maybe not so much “mistakes” as they are announcements of identity – privileged benefactors of a society rigged towards the white elite, blind to the racial reality around them? And that, if true (it is), the problem is far more grave, far more damaging to Black lives – who, incidentally, also contribute immeasurably to the Arts she profits from – and demands much, much more than an apology?
Again, time will tell. The good new is, whether or not Wintour’s repentant tone is one of expedience or of true reflection, the public pressure WORKED. Or, at least, so far – if the discussion of racism in Vogue begins and ends with an apology, then we’re in big trouble. If it is used as a catalyst to hire a representative pool of Black talent throughout the organization and create a corporate culture of inclusion, then we’re on the right track.
We’ll see.
Anna Wintour: One Last (Big) Thing
I’ve read Vogue for a long time. We always had a copy on the coffee table growing up – and I don’t want to undermine the importance of the publication, its influence on fashion and creativity around the world, and delivering it in a way that many people can enjoy. It’s a beautiful thing, and far be it from me to put that down. I use it as a resource often, here on the blog, and I’m grateful for that. There are incredible, hard-working people at the magazine who produce amazing work.
However: It has always seemed to me that Vogue carefully cultivated an identity of being on the cultural forefront. The best, the brightest, the newest, the most innovative – that was supposed to be Vogue. But even as a child, I felt that the magazine fell far short from it’s supposed high-ground. I would wonder why such an influential publication would fall into the predictable pitfalls of covering the same kinds of beauty, the same kinds of fashion, the same world views ad nauseam. It was too busy basking in its own ego to appreciate its potential.
The Thing About Fashion
Some days, I feel down about fashion. Just – the whole thing. The snobbery, the frivolity, the dos-and-don’ts, the silly manipulation of bodies and smiles to get something out of someone else, an opinion, attention, a promotion, a date – whatever it may be.
Reading about Anna, and how she’s composed herself and her career, made me realize that she holds those moments for me. She has spent over 30 years cultivating all of those things that make me, and so many others, feel that fashion is inherently unaccessible. Be it because we don’t look the right way, or make the right amount of money, or know the right people, the messaging is always the same: you’re in, or you’re out, and you’re definitely not in.
It Doesn’t Have to Be This Way
But guys, if you’re here, and you’ve read this far, I want you to know that that is not fashion. Fashion is way, way bigger than Vogue. It is more heartfelt, more complicated, more human, more political, more progressive, more spiritual, more … just MORE than Wintour’s mindset would have you believe.
Vogue under Anna Wintour does not want you to consume fashion as a democratic art form. It wants you to value that feeling of yearning that spurs you to spend money with its advertisers. It doesn’t want you to extract value from looking at it, reflecting on it, creating a three-dimensional space in your mind to look at it from different historical, political, psychological, or societal perspectives.
That is, after all, what you do when you look at an art book or go to a museum. You experience the Picasso, you let it be a part of you, however ugly, disturbing, beautiful, moving, etc. it may be. Then you go home. It’s enriched you, but you didn’t buy the painting. You didn’t take out a line of credit to live more like an art collector or a famous artist. You didn’t pour over advertisements telling you what you needed to buy to fit “x” lifestyle in order to be worthy of “y” painting.
No – you didn’t have to. The art is what it is and it meets you where you ARE. It’s at its most powerful when it’s allowed to speak from different voices, to challenge you where you sit or validate you when you’ve felt isolated. You didn’t need to buy it for it to give your life value.
What Anna Wintour Fears
A theory I have running in the back of my mind is that, fashion publishing being so tied to ad revenue, Wintour fears that taking away the “exclusivity” factor – which in so many cases manifests itself into straight-up racism, let’s be clear – would drain the Condé Nast coffers dry. I’d like to see her, as innovative and scrappy as she is, challenge that belief. What if, instead of waving the Picasso in front of the crowds, then snatching it away and showing them what they need to buy to be worthy of it, Vogue taught us a new way to consume it?
A couture show is, after all, art. So is a ready-to-wear collection. So is, believe it or not, the men’s undershirt I’m wearing right now from Target. I bought it in a six-pack.
If anyone ever gets anything from this blog I hope it’s this: you don’t have to consume fashion the way you’ve been taught. There’s a different way, and it’ll change everything for you – at least, it did for me.
It’s art, ANNA. Let it live as art does, and show people how it can enrich lives. Make space for Black voices – designers, editors, photographers, journalists – because until Fashion embraces the fact that it is an ART FORM and as such needs to honor a diverse talent pool, it’ll never live up to its potential. And neither will Vogue.
love,
Stig
Cover image: Pierre Suu/Getty Images Europe)
