Brands and blackface: it’s time to get it right

by Dana Vernot

The fashion industry tends to mirror the times. It’s through fashion that social messages and cultural ideas are expressed — each decade bringing a re-mixed trend, resurrected from past years. An ugly trend that’s been showing up has been the coincidental use of blackface. What is blackface? Originally, the use of blackface was in theater when white actors played the black minstrel. The makeup was typically made with melted cork, cocoa butter or black grease paint. There were even times when African American actors were forced to wear blackface makeup if they wanted to perform. Blackface makeup was used to personify racist stereotypes. These stereotypes were backed by caricatures of black existence — Coon, Mammy, Uncle Tom, Jezebel, Buck, Mulatto and Pickaninny. 

Recently, Prada, Gucci and Katy Perry Collections have been shamed for creating products or marketing material that had a resemblance to blackface. In the case with Prada, a figurine placed in their window for the Pradamailia 2018 Holiday product line brought to mind blackface. The Pradamailia product was sold as a keychain. Characteristics such as the dark brown color of the figure and its large red lips conveyed this. The intention behind the Pradamailia product was said to be “a new family of mysterious tiny creatures that are one part biological, one part technological, all parts Prada,” according to their website. Shortly after, Prada Group released a statement that read “Prada Group never had the intention of offending anyone and we abhor all forms of racism and racist imagery. In this interest, we will withdraw the characters in question from display and circulation.”

Following this, Gucci released an $890 sweater that covered the bottom half of the face with a red-lined mouth cut-out. Like Prada’s figurines, the sweater also bore a resemblance to blackface. Alessandro Michele, Gucci’s creative director, expressed that the sweater was not intended to portray blackface. Michele stated that he pulled inspiration from performance artist, club promoter and fashion designer Leigh Bowery. Bowery often wore very theatrical makeup and costumes. Michele apologized and has taken full accountability. Vodi Trotter a third-year visual effects student expresses the frustration, “Forget Gucci! It’s sad. Gucci and any other company, whether done intentionally or not, are prime examples of how brands view black people. The level of respect is still little to none.”

The last example are shoes from Katy Perry’s product line: the Rue Face Slip-On Loafers and Ora Face Block Heel Sandals. The shoes were carried on her website as well as Dillard’s website. Both styles came in two colorways: black and a neutral, beige tone. The characteristics of both styles featured blue eyes, a triangle nose and bright red lips. Perry expressed her regrets saying, “I was saddened when it was brought to my attention that it was being compared to painful images reminiscent of blackface. Our intention was never to inflict any pain.” The fact that this incident took place less than a week after Gucci pulled their sweater and apologized makes this occasion even harder to swallow. Fourth-year fashion student Bria Sanders said, “Companies need to stop being dumb. Like the Papa Johns guy saying the ‘N’ word. They believe they can get away with the same things they did 34 years ago. From a business standpoint, it’s very sloppy.”

How does a brand recover? Retailers and brands alike do so many operations with intention. Prada said that figurine had no intention of resembling anything but a fictional character, but there needs to be the intention of making sure that all products won’t offend anyone in any way — rather than focusing on what its “supposed” to be. Break it down and verify what it resembles or may symbolize. Brands have to do better at reading their content and creations in a similar manner that the consumer does. . Journee Artis, a second-year student advertising student, said, “It feels like a slap in the face. To disregard a big portion of your consumers doesn’t make sense. It’s disrespectful. If you don’t support us why should we support you?”

It’s hard to believe that brand after brand continually made the same mistake. Are retailers so eager to make a buck that they aren’t considering how their creations will be interpreted? After so much time has passed, the fact that items resemble this hideous figure, whether intentional or not, is disgraceful. Brands and retailers need to digest that fact that racial insensitivity must be corrected authentically and with care. It’s important that consumers continue to be vocal and hold retailers and brands accountable. Consumers can encourage and influence a brand more than they know. Always be mindful of the companies that you purchase from. The money you spend is an investment. It’s a way of encouraging and supporting a brand. This carelessness should not be encouraged.