Why a Vogue Cover Created a Controversy for Olena Zelenska

One other season, one other Vogue story on a politician inflicting a kerfuffle. After the hoo-ha over the journal not giving Melania Trump a canopy (regardless that Michelle Obama received three) and the to-do over Kamala Harris’s “relaxed” portrait being chosen over her extra formal cowl strive, comes a brand new controversy, associated to a “digital cowl” launched on-line that includes Olena Zelenska, the Ukrainian first woman.

Entitled “Portrait of Bravery,” the article is a collaboration between the Condé Nast Vogues (just about all of them) and Ukrainian Vogue (a licensed journal owned by Media Group Ukraine).

It has moody, swish portraits of Ms. Zelenska by Annie Leibovitz: sitting on the marble steps of the presidential palace, staring grimly forward; holding arms along with her husband, President Volodymyr Zelensky; and standing subsequent to feminine troopers at Antonov Airport, clutching the lapels of a protracted navy overcoat. The images are accompanied by a prolonged interview and a few BTS video footage of the primary couple and Ms. Leibovitz. It is going to seem in print later this yr.

Not like Ms. Zelenska’s first Ukrainian Vogue cowl, which appeared in November 2019 not lengthy after Mr. Zelensky was elected, and which confirmed the primary woman romping along with her household and styled in Celine, Prada, Lemaire and Jimmy Choo, the brand new function eschews style credit. Ms. Zelenska seems polished, however the story focuses on the ache and trauma of her nation and its folks, in addition to the couple’s relationship. Not one of the topics are smiling.

A single line underneath one {photograph} notes that Ms. Zelenska is sporting solely Ukrainian designers and lists their names. This will appear to be a small factor to most viewers, nevertheless it takes the industrial factor out of the shoot. No matter it’s promoting — and it’s undoubtedly promoting one thing — it isn’t garments.

Nonetheless (and unsurprisingly), the article has provoked one thing of a backlash. Some viewers have a visceral response to juxtaposing the thought of “Vogue” — with its historic connections to elitism, fantasy, wealth and frivolity — and the fact of battle. It appears, they are saying, tasteless. Particularly given a number of the journal’s missteps previously.

For instance, there was an embarrassingly fawning profile of the Syrian first woman, Asma al-Assad, printed in 2011 simply across the time Ms. al-Assad’s husband, Bashar al-Assad, was revealed to be a bloody dictator. (The piece, which made the journal appear morally compromised within the face of fanciness, was later faraway from Vogue’s web site, although it nonetheless casts a shadow on Vogue’s protection, particularly with regards to political figures.)

“Whereas Ukraine goes by hell, Vogue is doing a photoshoot for the President & his spouse,” wrote Amrita Bhinder on Twitter.

Consultant Mayra Flores, a Republican from Texas, seized the chance to assault the Biden administration for its monetary help of Ukraine, implying it was funding vainness. Breitbart wrote a gleeful article aggregating the criticism, particularly because it associated to authorities funding.

Nonetheless, different readers have come to the protection of Ms. Zelenska, seeing the shoot as a logo of nationwide pleasure: a method to indicate the world Ukrainian class; a reminder of the balm that may be present in magnificence; and a refined nod to shared humanity within the face of inhuman aggression. She shouldn’t be, in spite of everything, in a ball robe consuming cake. She is in a battle zone, wanting haunted.

To a sure extent, the talk merely exhibits how tangled our emotions about style nonetheless are and the way entrenched the view of it as a nonserious topic stays — although style is a key half of popular culture and the uncommon equal of a worldwide language. It’s one that each politician, and public determine, employs to their very own ends, whether or not they need to admit it or not. (That’s why, regardless of the dangers, they maintain showing in magazines like Vogue.)

The Russian-Ukrainian battle is a battle being performed on all fronts: on the bottom, within the air, within the digital sphere and within the enviornment of public opinion. (See, for instance, Ms. Zelenska’s look in Washington final week.) Vogue — and, certainly, any outlet that enables the Ukrainian folks to achieve completely different swaths of the worldwide inhabitants and affect sentiment — is one in every of them. As Ms. Zelenska and her husband, who based one of many largest tv leisure manufacturing corporations in Ukraine earlier than stepping into politics, know.

By placing Ms. Zelenska on its cowl, Vogue is furthering her function because the relatable face, and voice, of the wrestle; bringing her up shut and private for the watching world. And by showing in public, and elevating points in public, when her husband can’t, she is protecting her nation’s wants alive within the worldwide dialog at a time when different crises are vying for consideration. She has, primarily, weaponized Vogue.

She stated as a lot to the BBC when one in every of its interviewers requested her to elucidate the selection: “Tens of millions learn Vogue, and to have the ability to communicate to them direct, that was my responsibility,” she stated, including, “I consider it’s extra vital to do one thing and be criticized for it than to do nothing.”

No matter you assume of the particular piece, nonetheless you are feeling in regards to the journal during which it was printed, you possibly can’t dispute the truth that it as soon as once more put the battle in Ukraine within the headlines — and within the minds of people that could not have been following it as carefully as others. In that context, her interview is not only an interview. It’s a bit of battle technique.