I’ve studied photo manipulations several times and feel ripped off when publications try to pass off altered photos as the real deal. It’s no wonder why so many women have eating disorders and self image insecurities, because media manipulate the female physique and seek to portray perfection on a daily basis. It used to be hard for me not to compare myself to gorgeous celebrities and models, but now that I’m more educated than I once was, I know now that everyone is human and there is absolutely no such thing as perfect.
So when I heard about Marie Claire South Africa’s August 2012 cover and their photo of Kate Middleton being a fake, I wasn’t too surprised, but I was appalled that they’d go as far as superimposing her face onto someone else’s body!
Defending themselves by claiming that the photo is “a fan art tribute” just doesn’t cut it for me. The Duchess of Cambridge has refused many times to pose for magazine covers in fear of being idolized as a fashion icon instead of for her royal duties.
“We were so inspired by her fairytale wedding and her life as a modern-day princess, which is why we elected Kate Middleton as our cover star for the August issue,” Marie Claire writer, Marisa Crous, writes. “But upon closer inspection, the cover is — much like her life — more fantasy than reality. The cover is actually a hyper-real illustration of Kate, meant to be a fan art tribute to fashion’s new royal icon.”
The most startling thing to me is the haphazardly placed citation that sort of indicates that it’s not really Kate: an asterisk following the phrase “Fashion’s new royal icon wears SA’s best local designs*.” They try to cover their butts at the bottom of the cover in white tiny lettering that read: “Of course she doesn’t. But she should.”
Everything about this is ridiculously misleading to me. How could they think this was okay?!
Does this Marie Claire cover anger you, too? What’s your take on photo manipulations?
guest
It doesn’t anger me, but I think that if Kate does not want to be painted as a fashion icon, if I were an editor, I would never do a spread like this one. If I wanted to pretend like my magazine was providing healthy role models for women, I would highlight Kate’s work and leave it at that.
Most of the time, you can look at the photo and see that it has been edited. Beyond that, the models are always dressed, made up, and lit in the most flattering way possible. No magazine will ever do a photoshoot of a model in a dress that hasn’t been pinned, sewn, etc to look absolutely perfect, without make-up (usually stage make-up), in ambient light which usually causes shadows on the face that can be unflattering if the model/photographer isn’t careful. The point of a fashion magazine is not to provide self esteem no matter what the articles on the cover claim. Fashion magazines were made to sell fashion. I don’t know anyone with an eating disorder for whom fashion magazines are a significant reason for their eating disorder. I also understand that some little girls do not have responsible adults in their lives to help them understand that even celebrities don’t look the way they look on magazine covers, but after a certain age, you are responsible for your own self esteem. Are there really women over the age of 18 who think lesser of themselves because of a magazine cover?
tulip / 5 posts
How dare they put Kate’s head onto somebody’s body and pretend she’s the cover? Isn’t that illegal especially since she’s now part of the Royal family? Seems like she isn’t even notified about her “cover”.