Christian Louboutin Fall 2011 Lookbook (NSFW)

Posted on June 20, 2011

We’re in the mood for some pretty. Who’s with us? The Christian Louboutin Fall 2011 Lookbook, photographed by Peter Lippmann and styled by Catherine Gorne in the manner of famous paintings should do nicely, wouldn’t you say? If a picture’s worth a thousand words, you’ve got some pleasurable reading ahead of you. Enjoy, darlings.

[Photo Credit: fashionising.com]

    • Anonymous

      Interesting concept, but it felt like I was reading “Where’s Waldo” trying to find the shoes.

      • Anonymous

         That was my initial impression – then I got to the one with the purse, figured the purse was the thing… but after the “where’s Waldo” comment, I had to go back and verify that there wasn’t a shoe in that picture somewhere???

        • Anonymous

          there’s not, right? Just the purse?

      • MilaXX

        Like the pictures, but you do have to take a minute to search for the shoes. If spending more time looking at the pictures or creating buzz talking about the pictures is the goal, then its a success.

      • http://visceralresponse.com Dina dV

        Then you really should visit this tumblr:  http://vintagewaldo.tumblr.com/

        But I agree.  To paraphrase Mars Blackmon, “Money, where the shoes?”

    • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

      Love the “Penitent Magdalene” one!

      • Anonymous

        That one is fantastic — painting is immediately identifiable AND you can see the shoes.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1303837450 Lauren Dorsee Dillon

      LOVE the styling. I have not one critique, yet another sign the Mayans were right.

    • http://twitter.com/graykeller gray keller

      Is it sad that the only dress I like is the one on the pregnant girl?

      • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

        Not sure which of these women is pregnant…

        • Anonymous

          If the one holding the skull isn’t supposed to be pregnant, she has really horrible posture.

          • Anonymous

            doesn’t really seem like people are getting that these photos are based on famous paintings.

            this one is the magdalen with the smoking flame by georges de la tour.

            read about it here: http://collectionsonline.lacma.org/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=focus;id=33156;type=101

            • Anonymous

              I got it, actually…I saw the Negresse in person nearly 25 years ago, and I saw the Whistler last year.  Not to mention I read the first paragraph above.
              :)
              I was making a joke…Magdalen in the painting is a much more proportional lady and doesn’t look pregnant, but this model sure does.

            • Anonymous

              apologies!

          • Anonymous

            doesn’t really seem like people are getting that these photos are based on famous paintings.

            this one is the magdalen with the smoking flame by georges de la tour.

            read about it here: http://collectionsonline.lacma.org/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=focus;id=33156;type=101

          • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

            Nope, it’s Mary Magdalen.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah, cuz it’s about the shoes not the dresses.

    • Anonymous

      The de la Tour is the best, but like others, I find it difficult to find the shoes.

    • http://twitter.com/ILikeShiny Cindi Williams

      Why does the black woman have to show her boob?

      • Paigealicious
      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RK5MAF2VNT32ULNYFIXDANTEC4 Terence

        Because it’s based off of a French painting where a black woman “shows her boob.”

        The painting:

        http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Marie-Guillemine_Benoist_-_portrait_d%27une_negresse.jpg

        The artist:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie-Guillemine_Benoist

        • http://twitter.com/starrika Ali

          And not to be flippant, but in France, boob-showing is de rigueur.

        • http://twitter.com/starrika Ali

          And not to be flippant, but in France, boob-showing is de rigueur.

        • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

          Not to mention the picture clearly has allusions to Greek sculpture, with the single bared breast and the drapery.

          • Tina Hurd Winston

            If the point was to show great works of art, you mean to tell me there are no other works that depict black woman half naked? Or at least balanc ethis out by showing nude white women.  The shoes and the statement will get lost in todays realty.  All of the commentary that Terence speaks of doe not hold up.  The other thing is that I am surprised to see Michele Bachmann ad on this website

            • Terence Ng

              You’re right.  They should have just taken pictures of shoes instead of thinking to use iconic and historic paintings as a creative platform.  Who cares if the painting is a symbol of women’s liberation and black emancipation from slavery?  Who cares if the paintings are classics?  What matters here is that a woman’s breast is exposed and a nipple is shown, and as a black woman bearing her breast, that’s just racist and offensive.

              Attention everyone:  From now on, please only do things that pander to the lowest common denominator.  When you interpret your next painting at a museum, please only do so in the lens of the present day and disregard artistic motivation, style, craft, skill, and history.  Otherwise, the people of “[today's] reality” just won’t get it.

              Excuse me while I go clothe the Venus di Milo in daisy dukes, whore lipstick, and a a thong to make her “hot” in a modern context and put David in Old Navy jeans to make his exposed penis less offensive.

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Richard-Harris/729969026 Richard Harris

              Thankyou

            • Anonymous

              I’m not trying to make waves here, but as a black woman I’m tired of seeing black women in fashion as exoticized nudes. I can appreciate the social milieu of the painting and how the photo is references it, but still be annoyed that yet again the black woman is partially nude. For instance the recent Italian black beauties shoot or the this very very NSFW and pretty horrible photoshoot http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/whats-little-nudity-between-friends.html. No all the photos are not the same, but they fall along a similar spectrum of othering black woman. Again in general, I’m perfectly fine with nudity, but when its the black woman or woc who’s nude, I sigh and think “That’s it? That’s all the imagination they have?. I’m not calling Louboutin a racist, sexist, horrible human being, just stating that it is somewhat problematic.
              While the photographs are lush and artistic and the concept is very very clever, they don’t appear to impart radical message. The bottom line is to showcase and ultimately sell the shoes, not a particularly lofty purpose. In addition, its simply insulting to assume those disagree with the advertisement couldn’t possibly understand nuances of fine art. I completely agree with Tina’s point that a little balance would have been nice. Here are some excellent examples that the ad could have utilized.
              http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/africans_in_art_gallery_03.shtml

              http://georgianaduchessofdevonshire.blogspot.com/2009/09/favorites.html

              Again, not trying to start an argument here just pointing out an alternative viewpoint. ^__^. *goes back in to lurkdom and enjoys the pretty

            • Jaeda Laurez

              “I’m not trying to make waves here, but as a black woman I’m tired of seeing black women in fashion as exoticized nudes. ”
              Thank you- it’s really not about the painting itself, and it’s rather a condescension to assume that those of us who disagree are too stupid to understand the import of the painting or disagree completely with the artistic concept.   

            • amanda crow

              Glad you spoke up. It’s okay to point out that works of art, even respected and/or famous ones, can speak to social attitudes that aren’t always the most progressive toward underrepresented or oppressed classes.

              Bringing this up doesn’t have to be a condemnation of the entire campaign or of the painting(s) referenced therein; in fact, it should actually be a welcome contribution to an intellectual discussion surrounding this work.

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=637520850 Madison Chua

              Breasts are natural. Why should they be hidden? Or be ashamed of them? I am constantly surprised at how prudish the US is. No nipples, no breasts. LOL. Ludicrous. In reality, every woman has two molds protruding from her chest. Are we to pretend that breasts are unnatural? How arcane and stupid. If you’ve got it, flaunt it. Now, if one has three breasts, that would be a different issue altogether.

            • Anonymous

              I don’t think you read my comment at all. I’m not a puritanical prude. I said I have no problem with nudity. What I do have problem with is when black women are the ones who almost always the “othered” eroticized nude. She stands out because other the white women are clothed and she is not, which is problematic. Black women have to deal with the stereotypes of being completely oversexed-the jezebel, asexual-i.e. mammy and the spitfire-sapphire.
              More often than not in fashion, black women are often relegated to the soley exotic/erotic, rather than actualized human beings. Not saying that women don’t have problems in fashion in general but this is what I’ve noticed. I liked the campaign a lot but would really adore this campaign, if there was some balance. The ad could have easy utilized one the many nudes of white women.

            • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

              Maybe they just wanted to use a recognizable French painting of a beautiful black woman.

            • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

              Further, these all seem to be works located in French museums.

            • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=66100189 Joslyn Bloomfield

              I just want to give a handclap for this. It is so true. As a person, people usually formulate ideas about you before you open your mouth. If you’re a black female you also have stereotypes and misinformation to deal with as well. It is disheartening to always see a black female sexualized or over the top in some way in a setting where everyone else is so completely covered.

              I mean the most you’re seeing out of the other girls is some shoulder action. I understand that it’s art. It’s a fascinating part of history. However, the symbol was more empowering for the artist than the depicted. It certainly isn’t empowering for me now. And most people who see the ad are not going to have this discussion, they’ll see a black woman’s breast, shrug, and move on.

              I agree, if someone else got nude then it wouldn’t be a big deal, but picking this particular picture out of all the pictures of black women ever painted might not have been the best move. Of course, the designers might say now, “See all this backlash? This is why we don’t put black women in photos” and be completely missing the point…

            • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

              Just for the sake of argument, would you prefer they had chosen a picture of a fully-clothed black woman dressed as a mammy?  Or a servant?  Or just not used an image of a black woman at all?  As I mentioned above, they may have simply chosen that painting because it’s a famous piece of French art that depicts a beautiful black woman.

            • Anonymous

              I believe that besides a mammy, a servant or breasts being exposed, there are beautiful works of art of black woman that could have been used instead.

            • http://profiles.google.com/paigemano Paige Mano

              From the time?

            • Anonymous

              That’s very true, you’ve raised what I was thinking. They’re referencing classic, known works for this series so the option to this notable painting would pretty much be servant or nothing. And as none of these feature more than one person that would rule out the servant choice, which they would be slated for anyway. And omission would bring equal flak.

            • ferdinanda

              In Western art history, the depiction of a nude female woman of color is automatically problematic, and fraught with difficulty.  Though this may indeed be a call for women’s rights, the original painting is not a racially empowering statement, if judged by modern standards.  On the contrary, as the the article cited above notes: 
              “And in this respect, it is a typical colonialist picture in that the artist who created it made use of the racialized Other to define and empower the colonizing Self. That is, the portrait constitutes a visual record of white woman’s construction and affirmation of self through the racial and cultural Other.” In other words, this anonymous woman is still be used by another (more privileged) woman. The painting may be a progressive work for its time…but we do not live in the early 19th century. It’s an inappropriate reference for a modern advertisement.

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/judi-townsend/578042503 judi townsend

              I totally agree! Thanks for such detailed commentary

            • Geno Boggiatto

              A lot of internet advertising is based on browser history and previous web searches. You probably have searched for Michele Bachmann or been to a website recently about her, which means you’ll see her ads here.

              For instance, I was recently at the Palazzo in Las Vegas, and now at least half of the ads I see are for rooms there!! Darn advertisers, taunting me!

            • http://profiles.google.com/sara.e.munoz Sara Munoz

              What Geno said. The majority of ads you see are based on YOUR internet history. Which is why I get cafepress ads for pink dinosaur and atheist t-shirts, but assume most of the other minions don’t.

            • http://profiles.google.com/sara.e.munoz Sara Munoz

              What Geno said. The majority of ads you see are based on YOUR internet history. Which is why I get cafepress ads for pink dinosaur and atheist t-shirts, but assume most of the other minions don’t.

            • http://profiles.google.com/sara.e.munoz Sara Munoz

              What Geno said. The majority of ads you see are based on YOUR internet history. Which is why I get cafepress ads for pink dinosaur and atheist t-shirts, but assume most of the other minions don’t.

        • http://twitter.com/ILikeShiny Cindi Williams

          Thanks! Aside from a few art appreciation classes in college, my art history is pretty weak. And I raised the question because I figured someone was going to eventually. :)

          And the comments have been very enlightening. I appreciate everyone’s point of view; I may not always agree but opposition usually helps me clarify and understand my own thoughts.

      • http://twitter.com/la_margi la_margi

        Totally agree. It would be different if there was another woman of color who was also
        robed, and/or a white woman who was also partially nude (we
        certainly all know that there is an abundance of classic paintings
        representing that).Out of all the women, of course the woman of color will be the one who is exposed. As mutemia points out below, it’s the continued othering and fetishization of women of color in our culture.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1519929516 Kelly Dennis

      Gorgeous! At first glance I thought the first pic was just Whistler’s Mother, but then realized she never had shoes like that! LOVE the last 2 pictures the best. Holding a skull while looking at shoes, and then the last has a look on her face like, ” what are you looking at, this is MY shoe!”  Just love the attitude!

    • http://twitter.com/jennsaysmeow Fifi LaRoux

      Beautiful! I love the last shot.

    • http://twitter.com/ang_ee_la angela gandhi

      i like the last pair of heels best. but why was the boob necessary. 

      • Anonymous

        Because the painting it is based on, Marie-Guillemine Benoist’s Portrait d’une Negresse, also has a boob.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RK5MAF2VNT32ULNYFIXDANTEC4 Terence

          All this talk really IS making me giggle.  “Boob” is so funny sounding, in any context.  (http://youtu.be/-Ky6p0gqXWY#t=00m46s ; http://youtu.be/YiGY_loRoTU#t=07m17s)

          Let’s go with breast, so I can feel like more of an adult.

          • Anonymous

            You go with breast. Boob will do me fine. And it kind of underscores the inherent silliness of posing the question “Why boob?” to begin with.

            • Terence Ng

              No, I agree, which is why I like to use it, but I just can’t stop picturing a “boob” as a disembodied thing as depicted in Woody Allen’s “Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex”.

    • http://twitter.com/ang_ee_la angela gandhi

      i like the last pair of heels best. but why was the boob necessary. 

    • http://twitter.com/celeriac enna.

      That’s actually kind of annoying.

    • http://twitter.com/celeriac enna.

      That’s actually kind of annoying.

    • http://profiles.google.com/gillianholroyd gillian holroyd

      Lush.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aboutelle Ashleigh Boutelle

      These are incredible. How can you NOT see the shoes??

    • Anonymous

      I don’t care about the shoes, but the photographs are absolutely gorgeous.

    • Joyce VG

      Oh I needed that…thank you!

    • Anonymous

      Beyond!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RK5MAF2VNT32ULNYFIXDANTEC4 Terence

      Oh man!  I loved this episode of ANTM!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=502834383 Jennifer Marie Wegmann-Gabb

      As an art history student and photographer…love these!

    • Anonymous

      Every aspect of this is perfection.  The styling, models, choice of paintings and pairing of shoes or bags is inspired stuff.  Bravos all around.

    • suzq

      It’s weird to me.  There were thousands of other classic paintings into which one could have inserted a shoe or purse for comedic or contrasting effect.  But these fall flat for me. 

      – Inserting fine shoeware into sublime portraits of Mayans and Africans only serve to make those shoes seem ridiculous in comparison.

      – Putting a sad, wrinkly shoe on top of a glorious still life only makes that shoe look cheap.

      – Inserting a shoe or purse into a painting of a woman of high royal stature, arrayed in the greatest finery of her era only points out that the greatest finery of our era is pretty uninteresting.

    • mcarlson

      What a fabulous way to show off accessories. Loved it.

    • Anonymous

      Lovelier concept than shoes, mostly. And those ones that seem to be made of pony skin??? Ugly.

    • Anonymous

      Wonderful, luscious, thanks for posting.

      LOL I was reading the comments just waiting for the boob complaints…. it didn’t take long :)

    • Sabrina Sorich

      the art history nerd in me is having a pretty attack.

    • Anonymous

      that is some good photoshop! very dreamy!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NWP6E7VB7EHLCCFKYDFGQQ5TX4 hannah

      I loved the pictures themselves- mostly because I love that style of painting, but at times I felt like they just stuck the shoe or bag in last minute to make it work. But overall, I think it’s an interesting concept, and there’s no way to NOT look at these images if you saw them. All in all, me likey.

    • http://www.facebook.com/flowercam Camille Chapman

      LOVE IT!!!

    • Anonymous

      Is it weird that I can’t look at Magdalen with the Smoking Flame without hearing “What’s a fire and why does it, what’s the word, BUUUUUUURN?”

    • http://vhanna26.typepad.com Vera

      Love it.

    • Anonymous

      I love the paintings, but even better if the shoes were on their feet.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Poytinger-Baumer/1516981341 Mary Elizabeth Poytinger Baume

      ok this is just fucking fantastic. thank you for the pretty!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Poytinger-Baumer/1516981341 Mary Elizabeth Poytinger Baume

      ok this is just fucking fantastic. thank you for the pretty!

    • Anonymous

      OMG this is so over-the-top ridiculous I do believe it might be impossible to satirize.

    • Anonymous

      I like it as a concept, but in reality, not so much. The paintings are beautiful, but they have so much texture that sticking a shoe there makes the shoe look like a splat of plastic. And the purse looks cheap. That’s what you get by hanging it on a gal wearing a mile worth of silk

    • Anonymous

      bad execution of the concept…too bad you have to search for the shoes.

    • Anonymous

      GORGE. I love.

    • http://tigergray.blogspot.com/ Tiger Gray

      Find the fact that only the black woman is topless a little uncomfy. Gasped at the woman in the red dress, however. I adore that shot.

    • Anonymous

      They need John Singer Sargeant’s Madame X actually wearing the shoes. Sex on a stick.

    • http://www.twitter.com/jetterz jetterz

      i literally gasped at the first photo. WERQ Louboutin!

    • Anonymous

      I love these pictures! The shoe kind of blends in with the dress in the last one, but otherwise, this editorial really made me smile.

    • Christine Marie

      I am confused as to why anyone would not absolutely be in love with this. 

    • Christine Marie

      I am confused as to why anyone would not absolutely be in love with this. 

    • Christine Marie

      I am confused as to why anyone would not absolutely be in love with this. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/judi-townsend/578042503 judi townsend

      This campaign is a big OUT! Didn’t like it in general and did not like the portrayal of the black women in particular. Historical significance aside, it is inappropriate for today especially in light of the fact that ALL the other women in the ad were clothed

    • Anonymous

      Oooh…. someone is going to look deliciously cracked out in those fur pixie boots. I can’t wait to see who it’ll be!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=66100189 Joslyn Bloomfield

      That was really cool.

    • http://twitter.com/adoreadora Dora B.

      This is SO cool! I love this concept!

    • Anonymous

      Cute and beautifully styled, but really kind of silly.

    • Anonymous

      Most of these designs are hideous, not to mention passe.

      Never been a fan, give me my Manolo’s or Jimmy Choo’s any day.

    • Anonymous

      Most of these designs are hideous, not to mention passe.

      Never been a fan, give me my Manolo’s or Jimmy Choo’s any day.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_3QK7O6OXEX3AYERJWQUXBSVCTY Candy Kane

      This is just stupid. It’s demeaning to the works of art and doesn’t sell the shoes (or purse). Perfect example of a great idea on paper, but not in reality.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Katherine-Lavender/553350310 Katherine Lavender

      J’adore, j’adore j’adore encore.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ERWMGMWBPWZ224A46FDVS32JYY Celebrate The odd

      Oh, I really like those!

    • http://profiles.google.com/rachelruthlee Rachel Lee

      GORGEOUS. 

    • Anonymous

      Since two of the paintings and artists that these ads were inspired by have been identifed. And everybody recognizes Whistler’s Arangement in Grey and Black. The other three are Francisco de Zurbaran’s Santa Dorothia painted around 1635, the next one is identified elsewhere on the web as Jean-Marc Natier’s Marquise de Pompadour, but I think it is from Marquise de Antin painted by Jean-Marc Nattier in 1738. The last one is from Francois Couet’s Elizabeth of Austria paitned around 1570.

    • Anonymous

      This is the Marquise de Antin http://www.mystudios.com/artgallery/J/Jean-Marc-Nattier/Portrait-of-the-Marquise-d'Antin.html
       
      vs Marquise de Pompadour http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2637278250094285158iJjtiX
       
      It’s Antin, don’t you agree?
       
      And this is Francois Clouet’s Elizabeth of Austira http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fran%C3%A7ois_Clouet_003.jpg

    • lovely liz

      Lol, I saw the shoes immediately, but maybe that was because they stuck out to me as something of a history and art lover.

    • http://twitter.com/Sugarintheplum Neelika Jayawardane

      Louboutin’s Emancipated Breast: AFRICA IS A COUNTRY http://t.co/6VaCll5

      I should be happy that it’s not only white women who are represented in Louboutin’s spread. But the take on Marie-Guilleme Benoit’s “Portrait d’une Negresse” – where (you guessed it) a seated young, black woman poses for the painter, an exposed breast slipping out of Grecian folds of cloth – is a problematic choice. People like to argue that because this portrait was painted six years after slavery was abolished, and because the painter is a woman, it is an iconic image of emancipation: for black people as well as for women. We’re supposed to see “The Negresse” as an embodiment of steely determination and femininity (one would have to steel oneself, if one was asked to pose in a compromised manner by a white painter, a handful of years after the legal end of slavery). And the fact that the painting was acquired by Louis XVIII ’for France’ in 1818 may tell you something interesting, too.

      I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t need to expose a boob in order to celebrate my emancipation form forced labour. Looks more like Benoit’s exploring and exploiting a well-known trope: desire and revulsion projected onto the Dark Other.

      Black Hamlets and White Othellos are now passé, so Alex Wek could have posed in any of these other ‘looks’. Of all the possible paintings that the artistic director of Louboutin’s Fall Lookbook could have picked, one in which a black model could pose, why pick the one with the liberated breast?

    • http://twitter.com/Sugarintheplum Neelika Jayawardane

      Louboutin’s Emancipated Breast: AFRICA IS A COUNTRY http://t.co/6VaCll5

      I should be happy that it’s not only white women who are represented in Louboutin’s spread. But the take on Marie-Guilleme Benoit’s “Portrait d’une Negresse” – where (you guessed it) a seated young, black woman poses for the painter, an exposed breast slipping out of Grecian folds of cloth – is a problematic choice. People like to argue that because this portrait was painted six years after slavery was abolished, and because the painter is a woman, it is an iconic image of emancipation: for black people as well as for women. We’re supposed to see “The Negresse” as an embodiment of steely determination and femininity (one would have to steel oneself, if one was asked to pose in a compromised manner by a white painter, a handful of years after the legal end of slavery). And the fact that the painting was acquired by Louis XVIII ’for France’ in 1818 may tell you something interesting, too.

      I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t need to expose a boob in order to celebrate my emancipation form forced labour. Looks more like Benoit’s exploring and exploiting a well-known trope: desire and revulsion projected onto the Dark Other.

      Black Hamlets and White Othellos are now passé, so Alex Wek could have posed in any of these other ‘looks’. Of all the possible paintings that the artistic director of Louboutin’s Fall Lookbook could have picked, one in which a black model could pose, why pick the one with the liberated breast?

    • http://twitter.com/Sugarintheplum Neelika Jayawardane

      Louboutin’s Emancipated Breast: AFRICA IS A COUNTRY http://t.co/6VaCll5This is the first blog I’ve seen where people are actually discussing the problematic manner in which the sole Black woman in this Lookbook is portrayed. While I should be happy that it’s not only white women who are represented in Louboutin’s spread, the take on Marie-Guilleme Benoit’s “Portrait d’une Negresse” – where (you guessed it) a seated young, black woman poses for the painter, an exposed breast slipping out of Grecian folds of cloth – is a problematic choice. People like to argue that because this portrait was painted six years after slavery was abolished, and because the painter is a woman, it is an iconic image of emancipation: for black people as well as for women. We’re supposed to see “The Negresse” as an embodiment of steely determination and femininity (one would have to steel oneself, if one was asked to pose in a compromised manner by a white painter, a handful of years after the legal end of slavery). And the fact that the painting was acquired by Louis XVIII ’for France’ in 1818 may tell you something interesting, too.I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t need to expose a boob in order to celebrate my emancipation form forced labour. Looks more like Benoit’s exploring and exploiting a well-known trope: desire and revulsion projected onto the Dark Other.Black Hamlets and White Othellos are now passé, so Alex Wek could have posed in any of these other ‘looks’. Of all the possible paintings that the artistic director of Louboutin’s Fall Lookbook could have picked, one in which a black model could pose, why pick the one with the liberated breast?

    • http://twitter.com/Sugarintheplum Neelika Jayawardane

      Louboutin’s Emancipated Breast: AFRICA IS A COUNTRY http://t.co/6VaCll5

      This is the only site where I’ve actually seen people even attempting to approach the problem of finding the Sole Black Representative in these images with a boob hanging out. I should be happy that it’s not only white women who are represented in Louboutin’s spread. But the take on Marie-Guilleme Benoit’s “Portrait d’une Negresse” – where (you guessed it) a seated young, black woman poses for the painter, an exposed breast slipping out of Grecian folds of cloth – is a problematic choice. People like to argue that because this portrait was painted six years after slavery was abolished, and because the painter is a woman, it is an iconic image of emancipation: for black people as well as for women. We’re supposed to see “The Negresse” as an embodiment of steely determination and femininity (one would have to steel oneself, if one was asked to pose in a compromised manner by a white painter, a handful of years after the legal end of slavery). And the fact that the painting was acquired by Louis XVIII ’for France’ in 1818 may tell you something interesting, too.

      I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t need to expose a boob in order to celebrate my emancipation from forced labour. Looks more like Benoit’s exploring and exploiting a well-known trope: desire and revulsion projected onto the Dark Other.

      Black Hamlets and White Othellos are now passé, so Alex Wek could have posed in any of these other ‘looks’. Of all the possible paintings that the artistic director of Louboutin’s Fall Lookbook could have picked, one in which a black model could pose, why pick the one with the liberated breast?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=583505025 Kelley Comfort

      A feast for the eyes, but the shoes look like torture. I don’t care if the shoes arch my foot so high that it mimics an orgasm gone supernova. Sorry, Mr. Louboutin. I pass.