January 17, 2014
Yesterday Gawker offered $10,000 to anyone who would send them the original unretouched images of Lena Dunham's Vogue cover shoot. They received the original images in under two hours, so I can imagine some employee in midtown might be getting their ass sued today.
We all know that Vogue and most other magazines want to sell as many copies as possible. So what if this involves perpetuating inaccurate body portrayals of celebrities? It makes the celebrities more admired and famous and as a result, sells more magazines with their perfectly symmetrical faces on the covers. It makes total sense and I can't say that if I were running a magazine I wouldn't do exactly the same thing. I mean, these people are answering to Anna Wintour, and she's answering to that guy from The Devil Wears Prada who threatens to fire her until she shows him "the list." The stakes are like really high, you know?
However, silly Vogue, Lena Dunham happens to be like the ONE person who proudly walks around naked with much greater frequency than she walks around clothed, so we all know exactly what she looks like. And it's not like this.
Between two seasons of Girls, I've seen this woman naked more times in the past two years than I've seen all of my friends naked my entire life. The image of her true figure is burned in my brain, which she chose to put there by constantly being naked on the show she consciously writes and directs, so you can't show us this fake shit and expect anyone to think it's real. Lena Dunham is not like every other celebrity with their heavily managed images, or like Kim Kardashian, whose entire image/life is photoshopped, so when I see a retouched image of her I don't even question it because I've never actually seen a REAL image of Kim Kardashian.
I think Lena looks fine in the originals and not only that, but a Vogue shoot without serious editing would be far more shocking to most people (and probably sell more copies, because rare things, such as a Vogue shoot sans photoshop, are more valuable than commonplace things, obvi). Like you're going to go to all the trouble of interviewing her and telling the world what she's all about in a major profile, but then you still go ahead and proudly butcher her original photos. Yes we promote being skinny, but we also promote being fucking real.
Here's Jezebel's photoshop analysis.
Now we obviously don't take issue with changing the lighting or effects or changing the position of her dress to make it actually fit (we know she has trouble with that), but changing her chin, neck, and hips is just so obvious and you're doing it to the one person who's iconic for the exact opposite reason.
And here's what they did to the cover. Like 10 pounds off her face.
So since we're not Gawker we're not going to offer you $10,000, but anyone who can provide us with the unretouched images of Adam's boner would be much appreciated. Reward TBD.