My wife says that life is complicated because WE CHOOSE to make it so. I agree. I also agreee that life is complicated because it is inherently so.

An atom is a complicated piece of life...it has complicated moving parts, comprised of a complicated system of electrons, in a cloud like atmosphere, some appearing and disappearing covering the complicated nucleus of protons and neutrons.

We could use simple words in life or even grunts and groans, some do but alot of us don't.  We have complicated language, phrases, tenses and possessive forms because complication is a way of life, an additional way of explaining who and what we are.

Life is complicated - if you want to delve deeper into the why. If you do not want to know about certain things - then life can be simple. You live and then you die - simple. Yes and no - simple.

I took a civil rights class in college and one of the pieces of information we were told about Judges was that the better judges (a relative term for sure) not only looked at the facts of a case and then decided guilt or innocence, they also looked deeper into the case, into the "Why" and then made an informed and still judicious decision. They complicate the process in order to reach what they feel is a more fair decision.

So, what does all of this have to do with Lebron and Giselle? I guess that's for you reading this to decide.

For me, I look at history (in 116 years of publication, American Vogue - not the Vogue for Men mind you - has had 3 men on it's cover Richard Gere, George Clooney and now Lebron James). Richard and George are actors, Lebron is an athlete. Richard and George are dressed in suits and are hugging their subject models (Cindy Crawford and Giselle respectively) relatively close, almost cheek to cheek. Lebron is holding his subject model away from him. These are the facts and the pictures prove it.

  http://www.fashionologie.com/fashionologie/2008/03/theres-somethin.html

The question about whether people are making a big deal over this photo depends on if you believe in living life simply or complicated. I don't t hink either one is wrong. For me, I think it does look suspect but that is because: 1 - I am a Black American and I still remember the times vividly when we were called that and worse (Nigger, Spook, Monkey Ass, etc.) If you are younger than 40, you may not have this perspective. For me, these words and hurts still ring in the recesses of my mind.

2- The picture is very reminiscent of the 1930's King Kong Posters.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/kingkongstylea-jpg-1

From my perspective, Vogue and pretty much the rest of the "media" world is in the business of social influence. Any photo spread, by any magazine that features any person on the cover feeds into the stereo-type of what the majority culture thinks a person is or isn't. In this case, it feeds into the mainstream consciousness what a black athlete and black man is. To me, that's harmful and is something to rail against. It could also be ignored, but I think people who do rail against these issues have a point in that if you ignore it, it will still be there, and though the typical black man could care less about who graces the cover of Vogue, the typical white woman who reads Vogue does care.

This particular cover photo helps shape the idea of not only who people think black men are but who black men think they are. Influence is inherent in this process. So, the controversy about the cover is real. To me, it conjures socially construed images of a black man as an animal, and more so, images of a black man who though wealthy beyond measure, still is not allowed to be seen holding a white woman close and in a suit and suave. She needs to be seen as next to him but far away enough to not be offensive.

Side note: I've done photo shoots before, on more than one occasion because I used to be a male model back in my younger days. The funny thing about this photo is that Nancy Liebowitz probably took 300 or more photos of them together. At least one of them undoubtably showed them closer together similar to George or Richard but this one was chosen, purposefully. I'm sure that even the two subjects thought this particular shot was cool and for them, and for them that's fine.

If you are an agent of social influence, and you know history, and you are concerned about changing the past, then maybe you would want to assit in adjusting the hearts and minds of people by addressing the sterotypes and making Lebron like everyone else. Put the monkey in a suit and have him kiss the model, or hug her close. This is the cover of Vogue, not SLAM or ESPN the Magazine. Instead, to me, Vogue fed into the imagery the majority culture has of the black male and the black athlete.

Am I offended? No, because I do not expect the mass culture to want to give an assist to the black race on this issue.  I am, however dissappointed in the fact that Vogue does not have people on their staff that are educated enough to know how images affect the culture the very magazine is trying to influence. So, in the end, though some may say there is nothing wrong with this cover, there's nothing necessarily right about it either, except that everyone got paid and just shut the hell up.