The notion that “race has no basis in reality” is at the forefront of the thought-provoking "I Am None of This" campaign by London-based portrait photographer, Slater King. King's insightful views on society and the primitive assumptions which people have about others (based on race) are reflected beautifully though his eye-opening body of work.
The photographs featured in "I Am None of This" aim to educate people about the dangers of building misinformed opinions about people based on their hair color, skin color, and eye color. With the help of talented make-up artist Babs Forman and the dedicated wig making team at Alex Rouse, King was able to create a powerful campaign designed to make prejudice powerless and to prove to people that assumptions about others based on race/appearance are meaningless.
Featuring a diverse range of models, King's portraits focus on the unique transformations of individuals from one race into the next. At the heart of the campaign is a poignant message which is grounded in the shameful history of world genocide, racial hatred, and the misguided idea of phrenology. King's message encourages people to suspend their stereotypical beliefs and to refrain from ascribing values, motives, or personality traits based solely on an individual’s appearance. This powerful wake up call rings true throughout this amazing series of photographs.
With a degree in biochemistry and a passion for photography which was sparked from handling a developing tray in a friend’s converted bedroom over 20 years ago, King finds inspiration from tackling a range of social issues and representing them through this inspiring portraits. His other campaign titles, including “Domestic Violence,” “Hate Preachers,” and “Shooting in a Prison,” give an insight into this talented photographers desire to make people stop and think about society and the controversies which infiltrate the larger community. King himself accredits his thought-provoking images to his captivation with people, their thought processes, feelings, and circumstances.
"I Am None of This" features the tag line, “You can’t know who I am, unless I tell you.” This one sentence swiftly encapsulates the strongest message of King's campaign and acts as a social commentary to encourage people to turn their backs on what King calls their “primitive modes of thought.” Through this compelling series of images, King successfully smashes through the preconceived notions of race, personality, and the way in which we view others.
Michelle (before)
Michelle (after)
Lauren (before)
Lauren (after)
Hina (before)
Hina (after)
Jonathan (before)
Jonathan (after)
Dev (before)
Dev (after)
To learn more about Slater King and his work, visit his website.
Good point. We should probably eliminate any identification regarding sex, height, weight, religion... Well, you get the idea.
We could just go by our SS Numbers. Oh wait, that would identify nationality. 😲
Or...we could trust folks to know these things don't define us. :-/
*In 50 years* Hi, I'm 196270, I'm from planet earth. 🤖
Wrong! They still have names in the future. Like... Sonmi-451.
Take that!
But... you are some of those. I am: American Indian, I am Male, I am 35, etc. Come on.
Really? You're American Indian? Which tribe? I think that's much cooler than being Irish, although maybe you don't think so. Some people think it's cool to be Irish but, to me, meh!
Why would you think it would be cooler to be American Indian??
I guess it's a "grass is greener" thing. It probably wouldn't be. I try not to overthink my delusions if they don't hurt anything.
A racist is really only interested in distinguishing between his own race and "all others," and his own vicarious snap judgment is satisfactory to him.
Maybe some or even most. I know a few racists who distinguish between various "others," sometimes by degrees of hate and others by complete tolerance (which isn't as admirable as advertised) vs some level of dislike.
Oh, don't worry. He'll only face a few moments of question before coming to a snap judgment he's satisfied with.
Not true. I know it's natural to stereotype people you disagree with but it's just as wrong as any other prejudice. Don't do it.
This... this isn't a good idea... well intentioned. But the very first image is blackface, and incredibly cringeworthy. No... just.
WHY.
I agree. If the photographer has to change the appearance of the person, then his point is lost.
You only called out that instance? If people want to be treated like everyone else (more or less), they need to stop acting like they're special as a group. Being made up to look black is EXACTLY the same as being made up to look like any other group. Any disparaging noun (you know which one I'm talking about) is NO WORSE than any other.
I agree with Kirk and find the message of the project very muddied by artificially modifying people and then saying "you can't tell who they are." I personally think it would have been much more effective to photograph naturally mixed people or people who are commonly incorrectly assumed to be of a certain background to make the point about inherent assumptions and biases. With regards to the blackface, while you can argue that on an abstract level, Patrick, I think one must consider the massive history associated with blackface that unavoidably creates instant associations in any viewer to a much greater degree than the other changes. That being said, I still find the project as a whole problematic.
I wasn't saying it's acceptable (although I think context is everything). I'm saying it's no worse than the others. I understand your point about history but that kind of thinking makes it more difficult for people to accept others as being "like them." Not exactly like them, of course, but with the same hopes, fears, desires, concerns, etc...
I found this problematic as well, regardless of how well his intentions are. Pushing the idea of being "colour-blind", in the racial sense, removes the concept of intersectionality.
If ignoring race is all it takes to fix problems, why don't we get the world to fund a program where everyone is changed to look like a white male through plastic surgery?
I agree with Morgan Freeman about no longer speaking about the nonsense of so-called widespread racism in America against minorities because that time passed long ago. His success, and the widespread success of many black people, including the previous president, is a perfect example of that.
By far the most racism I see is minoritiy racism towards whites. The big problem is that kind of activity is actually encouraged by the race baiters (like Michell Obama and her husband) and the so-called politically correct on the left. Trump is often called a racist and the KKK is often mentioned alongside him as a way to put him down and yet his rival Hillary Clinton in the election actually spoke at an official gathering of La Raza (which means The Race), which is a racist "Latino" group! When did Trump ever speak at a gathering of the KKK? In fact, Trump has never been proven to be racist!
The biggest problem in our world isn't racism. It's the rampant spread of idiocy, aided by social media and the internet.
No, social media and the internet is a much better thing overall. Now media can no longer control the conversation and spread its bias and misinformation unchecked.
Oh, I don't know about that. Some of the stuff I see being lapped up by minions on Facebook leads me to believe that "checking" is not something most of them engage in.
Not perfect but at least now they are able to check if they want to. Bypassing biased and dangerous establishment media is the best benefit that has come from the Internet.
"By far the most racism I see is minority racism against whites."
Peter Brody, I'd suggest that if you're quite so blind then you're probably also a very poor photographer.
So a contrary opinion to yours leads to an ad hominem attack? Priceless intellect that.
@William Eggleston If that were not the case then how do you explain the existence of so many racist black and and so-called Latino organizations? One of the later ones is called La Raza (The Race). We have many mainstream black only and Latino only TV channels and magazines. Why? There are certainly no white equivalents. None, zip, zero.
As for my photography skills, that can be very subjective. I will say though that I do like black and white. :)
How can you say there are no equivalent stations when almost every other station besides BET and whatever Latin channel you speak of is predominantly featuring non people of color. Unless of course its a hip-hop geared commercial to sell a product. There is no need for an all white station because most of the stations are already all white. Besides stations like BET also feature programming with white actors/shows.
No, there are no stations, radio channels or magazines that are all white or call themselves something white or promote whiteness, unlike what goes on for black and so-called Latinos. To say or suggest otherwise one would have to be blind or in deep denial.
BET means Black .. If there was a white channel that called itself WET there would be hell to pay. Meanwhile it's somehow OK for minorities to be racist. Funny how that works.
Why do you keep saying "So called Latino"? That is hilarious. Nowhere did I say all whites, just as there is no all black station. There is a Black Entertainment Television because until then, blacks were grossly under-represented on television, unless depicted in a negative way. Black people and "so called Latins" cant even have ONE channel huh?? lol. Thats wayyyyy out of the limits or acceptable. Its been nice chatting with you. Keep up the awesome photography.
Because Latino is a bogus appropriation of the term Latin to describe a group of people that have no justification to call themselves that. Latin is the language of the Romans; that's it. It wasn't a culture. Roman, and the Latin language, has affected all of the Western World. There is no such thing as Latino culture. It's a ridiculous thing to claim. And unfortunately it is also used in a racist way to divide America.
I have no idea what you are meaning when you say "nowhere did I say all whites." Go back and read again what I wrote. BET and other minority racist organizations and companies exist due to racism. There's no getting around that. Even if you have some white people on BET it is obvious and explicit in their mission that the channel focuses on giving back people priority. If there was a white equivalent called WET doing the same for white people, they would rightly be called a racist organization, yet somehow it's OK for black people to be racist.
"Black people and "so called Latins" cant even have ONE channel huh?? lol. Thats wayyyyy out of the limits or acceptable."
Read again the scenario I wrote above and think that through for your answer. If you want to not be victims of racism then don't becomes racist yourselves.
Of course in America when it comes to so-called Latinos they don't have "ONE channel," do they? No, they have many channels and in some parts of the country half the radio stations are Spanish language. How does such racist nonsense help keep a country united, and under one language.
I grew up in New York City and it was true in the 70s and it is still true today, the most racist people I have ever met were minorities that often liked to claim themselves as victims of racism. And not all those minorities were people with dark skin. Many were Jews, that would give you the stare of death if you dared to walk into their stores and bakeries.
Think.
These are familiar tropes from the so-called alt-right and their ilk – that there is no racism against black and latino people and other minorities, that the real racists are the minorities themselves, and that any media who dares suggest otherwise is biased, dangerous, and untrustworthy. These people will also claim that any organisation standing up for the rights of a minority group is racist. They'll attempt to reframe the word 'discrimination' as a positive. They'll claim that because Trump hasn't been photographed with the KKK, he can't be a racist – despite him using dog whistle racist tactics throughout his campaign, surrounding himself with far right creeps such as Bannon and Sessions, and despite the many well-documented examples of racist behavior that have been revealed throughout his career.
Of course, these same people will simply dismiss the evidence as 'dishonest media,' ignoring the fact that the far right's resurgency in the US, UK and Europe has been fuelled by misinformation and scaremongering from a mainstream media that is predominantly owned by wealthy vested interests, in combination with social media strategies that seek out the easily manipulated. These people love to present themselves as heroic seekers of truth, but they're not – they're just nasty racists with an axe to grid, and right now they're having 'their moment'. Post Trump and Brexit, all kinds of low life have crawled out from under the rocks either side of the pond. They may be failed professional photographers who need someone to blame. They may be gun-toting Southern boys with an axe to grind. They may be white South Africans still smarting because daddy lost the farm. They'll team up and hunt in packs, they'll poison the well of discourse, and they'll keep on doing it, because they've always got more time on their hands than anyone else – mainly because thoughtful and sensible people want nothing to do with them.
@Peter Brody, I'd suggest that you go 'Think', but from all the evidence I've seen so far, you're incapable of doing so. So just carry on posting your nonsense, and I'll carry on pitying you.
Fact: There are many racist black and so-called Latino organizations in America accepted as somehow normal by media and the left.
Fact: There are no white ones. Zero. None. And if there was media and the left would crop foul, and rightly so. And yet, they are OK with those black and so-called Latino organizations existing, and even promote them.
Fact: I never said or suggested there was no racism against minorities.
Fact: There will always be some racist people.
Fact: You can't fight racism by becoming racist.
Fact: There is zero proof thus far that Trump is racist. Zero. None. Feel free to make the scoop if you have any.
Fact: It isn't "scaremongering" to want to secure your borders against potentially dangerous individuals and those that somehow think they have a right to enter and live in America.
Fact: Mainstream media is overwhelmingly leftist and therefore against Trump and conservatives. They have done the opposite of what you claim. They have downplayed the potential threat of so-called migrants from the Middle East and have protected and encourage illegal immigration from a Mexico and beyond.
Fact: Playing the race card is a favorite and dishonest tactic of the left to try and discredit their opponents. Simply wanting to deport illegal immigrants is somehow racist to them. That is dishonesty at best and insanity at worst.
Fact: It is the left that "poisons the well of discourse"! It is the left that pretends to be liberal but is in fact no more liberal or tolerant than the worst on the right. At least those on the extreme right are honest about who and what they are. Meanwhile the left pretends it is good and open and tolerant. Nonsense.
******
"..thoughtful and sensible people want nothing to do with them."
"go 'Think', but from all the evidence I've seen so far, you're incapable of doing so. ..carry on posting your nonsense, and I'll carry on pitying you."
That kind of attitude is what is getting people with likewise views to yours kicked out of government. So much for wanting "discourse," huh?
I am none of these: Female, Arabian, Caucasian, Indian, Hispanic
I like this. In my view, very simple. George Eliot "Don't judge a book by its cover" or MLK, don't judge by the color of ones skin, but by the content of their character. We are all individuals and should be treated as such!
"Isn't real"? Maybe "isn't meaningful" would be more accurate. But to call race not real is silly. Anthropology is a matter of importance. Ignoring such a salient identity is as egregious as ignoring culture.
Anthropology is indeed important, however, it's not the study of race but rather the study of culture, society, ethnic groups and language. I think what's meant here is that race is not real as a biological reality.
Anthropology is indeed important, however, it's not the study of race but rather the study of culture, society, ethnic groups and language. I think what's meant here is that race is not real as a biological reality.
My main issue is that there are a bunch of different nationalities listed, but only ONE of them doesn't reflect an identification based on a geographic region. Where do "black" people come from? I get what the artist was trying to do, but these types of heavy topics require a bit more research and understanding of the cultures your'e communicating with/to. Its flawed, but maybe it can be adjusted.
Interesting, distinguishing our selves, by our "color", "religion", or social standing is quite nessary for society to exist in a multicultural way. It the differences that make us better not worse. Bigoted views are alway going to be prevalent in our world, its a fool game to think that it wont. Pointing out theses "problems" does not make it better sadly. Making white people black, or black people asian will not ever stem the tide or bigotry, yet may indeed make it worse. Our individuality lies in who and what we are not being "blind" to what others are or are not.
This made me laugh if anything. Well intentioned but a bit extreme and ridiculous. We are indeed our race, ethnicities, tribes etc etc - in regards to family, origin, identity.... Knowing where we are from is not a problem, never will be. The first photo might come across as offensive to many black people, the white lady painted in black face. I understand the point the photographer is trying to make about it not being possible to know who a person is characteristically just by looking at them and dumping them into racial stereotypes and archetypes, but this attempt/execution is a fail for me. Sorry.