Grazia Cover Photographer Apologises for the ‘Monumental Mistake’ of Editing Out Lupita Nyong’o’s Hair

Grazia Cover Photographer Apologises for the ‘Monumental Mistake’ of Editing Out Lupita Nyong’o’s Hair

The photographer behind Lupita Nyong's new Grazia UK cover feature has been forced to apologize after the actress spoke out upon finding parts of her natural hair had been removed.

Nyong’o – who has made a name for herself starring in films such as "12 Years A Slave" and "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" – decided to speak out against the cover on Twitter this week, stating she was “disappointed” that the publication had “edited out and smoothed [her] hair to fit a more Eurocentric notion of what beautiful hair looks like (sic)."

The actress went even further on her Instagram page, fiercely writing: “As I have made clear so often in the past with every fiber of my being, I embrace my natural heritage and despite having grown up thinking light skin and straight, silky hair were the standards of beauty, I now know that my dark skin and kinky, coily hair are beautiful too

Grazia has apologized profusely to Nyong’o, but were quick to clarify it was not they who altered the photo. Despite acknowledging that they did not “uphold the highest of editorial standards in ensuring that [they] were aware of all alterations that had been made,” the blame seemingly falls on photographer An Le. Having shot for a whole host of worldwide Vogue publications, Le accepted full responsibility for what he now recognized as a “monumental mistake.” In a statement, he confirmed that it was he who edited the hair, and attributes the reasoning being to his own ignorance rather than any kind of hate.

Nyong’o finished by stating that the fulfillment she usually feels gracing covers has been diminished in the case of Grazia UK. What is normally a platform to “show other dark, kinky-haired peoplethat they are beautiful just the way they are” was lost upon seeing that the final images had omitted characteristics of her native heritage.

[via The Guardian]

Lead image courtesy of Marc Pascual.

Jack Alexander's picture

A 28-year-old self-taught photographer, Jack Alexander specialises in intimate portraits with musicians, actors, and models.

Log in or register to post comments
62 Comments
Previous comments

Ha yes. Sophism isn't very far in online discussion.

Frankly I'm susprised we didn't get a Nazi reference yet...

Looks like we just did. Klassy.

The type is easier to see and fits better without her ponytail. That might have been their thought process.

of the three images, the one she is complaining about is the best-as in my favourite. modern woman looking beautiful and sophisticated. it's all about publicity Imo.

Speaking as a black man who has worn a 'Fro since 1968, I don't think such an edit necessarily needed "profuse" apology--depending on the use in the article.

In this case, it appears (from the cover) that this was an editorial story about Lupita herself as a celebrity. In that case, it's in more of a journalistic mode and the photographer should have avoided changing a feature as individually characteristic as her chosen hairstyle.

However, if this had been a fashion spread, IMO the objection to the editing would have no validity. Short-cropped hair is just as natural for African women as an "Afro-puff." More so, actually, and removing it improved the layout of the cover.

If they had edited out your Fro of 49 years Kirk, then that's a little different. If a person searches "Lupita Nyongo photos" it's clear Lupita changes her hair style quite often-a few of them being similar to the photographers cover edit.

I'm not sure you got the two points I made, David. If a magazine did a story about me as a photographer and took a picture of me to illustrate that story, I'd expect them to depict me as I chose to look that day for that story.

OTOH, if they were doing a story about photographers and used me as an illustration for that story, then they'd be artistically free to edit themselves silly.

The difference is whether the mode is more journalistic or more creative.

I got your point quite clearly Kirk, just a little skeptical about fuss over a style she herself duplicates from time to time.

Not Racist at all. Maybe Racially insensitive (Unintentionally of course...but that too is a slippery slope) But I would chalk this up with the industry creating their own standards of what beauty is, or what a perfect body or face is, with all the nip tucking we do via Photoshop. Racist=The worlds most overused and misused word. Signed.....This Black Man.

This is quite surprising to me coming from Europe, it might be a cultural thing too so please accept my apologies in advance if i'm totally off the bat.

To me, magazines are private entities, selling their pages to advertising companies, filling them with ads and content to support the ads, preparing the buyer to consume, which to extend is what the director of a large TV corporation stated a few years ago. (Television programs are here to prepare the brain of views to react positively to advertising time, placed at the appropriate moment, for whom businesses pay to be seen).

Now when I watch a movie, I know the reality is not what I see. Yes my brain can't make the difference, that's why we cry, laugh, smile, jump whilst watching a movie, but I for sure know the actor or actress is not his or her real self, but they are here for the show.

Same holds true for magazines, models are like actors, they are chameleons, and sometimes pose for one topic or another, and their bodies, figures, are a "placeholder" for what is sold or showcased.

May it be a heritage which I totally understand, it would be like an actor accepting a role and then saying... but you're not cutting my hair, or you're not going to enhance any feature whatsoever, because I don't want to. I can see that she could see within that a "what white people want to see" edit, but to me it's more about ... who buys the magazine, and we are working to support our clientèle.

If apple started doing non-slick products because of "heritage" they would loose their clients, and that would sound totally unrealistic to anyone, but in this case it requires apologies... and that is kind of odd. A bit like when teachers apologize for telling kids off or giving them bad grades because they are not good and parents going at them for that because their kid is certainly not like they describe.

Now let's hope i don't get totally slashed for that view, but I am perplex about the whole topic.

He did not have to apologize, that picture was taken with aesthetic sensibilities in mind and what makes a good cover. Well, if Lupita wants to play this media game, that is fine, but photographer should be more confident in his artistic choice.

So basically they made her "bald"? I kind of prefer the "bald" edit.... there's something more streamline and elegant about it, allows me appreciate her face/beauty/make up more...