I feel that there is a difference between painting someone’s skin darker for an editorial shoot and painting someone’s skin darker to imitate a person of darker skin pigmentation. Lara is clearly being Lara under body paint. However, considering the difficulties black models face in the industry, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. Why is it better to have a white girl painted dark than to hire a darker skinned model?

I wonder what’s the title and the concept of this photoshoot. That might clear things up.

I agree, what is the concept? Until we know that how are we supposed to perceive it? And for the record, she is covered in body paint, not “black face” which is something Totally different. Look at photos of Al Jolson, and then look at Lara Stone, and you will understand how this is hardly as controversial as it seems.@Harry

This is crazy offensive. As an African American woman, I just wonder why couldn’t there be a beautiful black model present for this shoot? Black models have faced a lot of hardship for the past 20 plus years, with a black man in the White House things should be different. Much different! This concept is ridiculous. First we are treated harshly becasue of our skin color know it is being mocked. If we are going to have stereotypes of people with darker skin and associated them with particular areas, for example: The Ghetto, Oakland, Rap music and so on, then lets associated this wonderful Vogue spread with the same things, becasue clearly this model is photographed with darker toned skin. No, we won’t do that because we are aware of what lies beneath, and that is a white woman, so we immediately associate it with style and grace. Black models are not used because they are not associated with that. Only the small few like Chanel Iman are, but for whites there are more than a handful. Just try to see our side for once!

@ Michelle I don’t see how this is, as you say, “mocking” dark skin. I don’t see this as a comical portrayal of a white woman painted to look dark-skinned, this is a fashion editorial that portrays art and beauty. How is this different from a fashion spread that emphasizes unattainably pale skin, even for an already white woman, or unattainable thinness. Editorial fashion is always a heightened reality—extreme imagery that gives commentary on real trends. Why has this not been received as just another version of an unattainable beauty ideal propagated by fashion? I don’t think that point would have been made had they simply used a model whose skin was naturally dark.

Well, This is French Vogue, Not american! So having Barack as President has nothing to do with this photo shoot! I don’t think it’s offensive. It’s called “creative”.

If this were american vogue, I would say that this was done purely for the controversy, publicity , and reactions such as these. Since it is French, I would tend to think it was done for ART, controversy, publicity, and reactions such as these. My first reaction to the picture was, “That’s sexy”, then, “That’s beautiful modeling and great photography”, then I read the words beneath the photos and it made me think about my beliefs, my values and whether this piece conflicted with them. I have to say, how much of the art out there does all that for you? On the other hand,when I first saw this,I thought the woman was actually of african heritage. I still like this because it makes people think about the issue of race in modeling.In general though, I feel they should have used a model whose complexion was actually that dark.