Kate Moss covers the March 2012 issue of W Magazine, and these are some selected images from the cover shoot – you can see the full slideshow here at W. She got TWO covers actually, although I have only three words for this Steven Klein shoot: What. The. Frick. In God’s name, WHY? While I’ve never been all-about-Kate, I think she’s rock-and-roll and I think she’s one hell of a model. As in, she’s intriguing and interesting to look at, and she’s incredibly photogenic. This photo shoot is filled with a strange blend of religious and sacrilegious imagery, birds, spiders and corpse styling, and it’s maybe the worst Kate has ever looked, right? Yes, the images are “striking”. The last images of Lindsay Lohan are “striking” as well, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to slap the “supermodel” label on a walking corpse.
Of course, W Magazine didn’t get an interview with Moss. Instead, W got Will Self to write this oddly sycophantic piece about Kate and how she’s aging yet not-aging. You can read it here – I’m not going to bother excerpting it. I will, however, put up some quotes from angry Christians who are royally pissed off with this photo shoot:
While the Kate Moss-W Magazine photos are a hit with aspiring fashionistas, they have caused outrage among conservative groups, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
“Clearly W magazine needs to generate some controversy to pretend it matters, so it’s turned to today’s standby and decided to bash Christianity,” Dan Gainor of the Culture and Media Institute exclusively told RadarOnline.com.
“Everything W has done here, from making the issue the ‘Fashion Bible’ to having Moss hold a crucifix provocatively between her legs, is designed to provoke controversy and mock religion. We get it, hating Christians is certainly in fashion.
“Interestingly, W tried to create twin covers showing a good and a bad Kate Moss. Given how twisted W is for mocking religion, they should have stuck to just one cover — the bad — to reflect the magazine itself. While Moss can be faulted for appearing in this spread, it’s the responsibility of the magazine’s editors not to try to profit by denigrating faith. Instead of high-brow fashion, readers get low-brow bigotry,” he concluded.
[From Radar]
You know how dumb I am? I didn’t even get the whole “fashion bible” reference until that Radar thing. Anyway, even though I’m not going to get all up in arms over the religious stuff in the shoot, I do understand why these photos have upset the devout. Mostly the pics just upset me aesthetically, though. They made her look like crap!
Photos courtesy of W Magazine’s slideshow.
She looks horrible.
She really does look bad. This is BORING. I was raised Catholic, so I SHOULD have a vested interest in offending the church, but as only a true Catholic can tell you… I don’t give a crap. This is so non-intersting in fact I found myself actually looking at the clothing. How is that for boring? It seems to me that W magazine didn’t know what to print, so why not be quasi-controversal, the photographer has no imagination, and Moss is your typical model, i.e. “dance monkey, dance!”. Boring, boring, boring. Done before, done last night by Nicki Minaj in fact, and never done well. If you want to offend a Catholic have two men in a marriage ceremony dressed as Jesus and Mary. That should get their big panties in a knot. On a side note, I love how the use of urinals makes a picture edgy… that was insane sarcasm there if ya didn’t catch it.
The Bluebear doth protest too much, methinks
Blubear, I am in almost complete agreement with you. I am Catholic as well, and this doesn’t offend me, but it does make me sad. When the western world want to get people talking, they seem to immediately go for church iconography. And since the secular world seems to equate all forms of Christianity, it is always Catholic iconography that is used. Debasement of the symbols of our faith is never a good thing, but the “shock” value just isn’t there any more. It’s been done too much.
True! It’s just not all that imaginative, much less shocking. And Kate Moss looks like ass.
First spread I’ve actually found interesting in a long, long time.
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
These images are intentionally occult.
Did they purposely make her teeth look methy?
She looks like a got-damned walleyed alien! *urk*
I’m not a devout Christian, and I don’t mind people laughing about religion or using it in mixed media, but this is just plain crass. No one would dare do something like this with Islam because history and common sense suggest that the consequences would not be worth the effort! All Christians do, on the other hand, is use their words to express their discontent, so it’s safer to pick on them. Not cool at all >: (
I am Jewish, and I could not agree with you more. This is just plain offensive.
What exactly is offensive about it?
They are just pictures. What I find far more offensive are people using religious beliefs to dictate or control very much real-world things like a woman’s access to birth control.
THAT’S a real issue. Kate Moss holding a cross two feet away from her crotch is not.
Well, I am Catholic and I find these not only boring but also very unintelligent. True, they AIM at being offensive and if they were actually well made, not only on a photography level but also and more specifically on a content level, I kind of would have been offended.
A strategically placed cross between her legs? Boring and silly.
A crown made of thorns on a slut-virgin? Boring and inaccurate, reference speaking (unless the reference is to male-female-transgender issues, then I’m listening).
Honestly. The only one that I kind of find interesting is the one with the handbow/straightjacket in a restroom: I’m guessing the hidden theme there is female masturbation?
I’m a Protestant, and these are just boring.
I’m not offended. I’m bored.
Come back to me when you do the same with Islam, you guys.
I agree with you 100% this is blatant disrespect and blasphemy.
Why must the industry always mock judaism, because they know we’ll not say anything
I would like to see them do that to the Muslims
Kurfuffles, thank you.
You can’t have it both ways. If your religious beliefs dictate that you offend or oppress others, prepare to be offended and, hopefully in the coming elections, suppressed. If you don’t like the way religious leaders and politicians present your beliefs to the masses, you should try to involve yourself in changing that, not Kate Moss and her boring photo shoot.
Kerfuffle,
you could show objectivity. It doesn’t hurt. You can find these offensive and say that some religious people are offensive. It’s not either or.
I am not particularly squirmish over things like Da Vinci’s Code, etc. But lately…its become bizarre and almost frightening. These pics actually made me …scared. I wasn’t offended, but there was something highly unnerving about it.
She looks black and soullness thus making the pictures very disturbing. If you cannot see that then you have lost all objectivity.
Oh come on, I can’t believe people still get hung up about the out-of-context use of christian religious symbols! It was edgy when Madonna did it in the 80s, but haven’t we seen it all by now? I agree, this is not cool, but mostly because it is in poor taste and has no meaning. It’s just a cheap way of trying to get everyone’s attention. We’d best be ignoring this photo shoot, instead of yelling things like ‘blasphemy!’ Cause that’s exactly what they want us to do.
Madonna did it, then Xtina did it, then Gaga did it, now Kate’s done it – even if I was offended the first couple of times, by now I would be bored!
See also: Nicky Minaj at the Grammys, who wasn’t quite “edgy” enough to turn up in a Burka with a guy dressed up as Mohammed though, eh?!!
Amen, excuse the pun. Completely agree with you, people need to stop using religion to be offended and yes I believe that a lot of people just use the excuse that there were religious overtones in somethingorother in order to cause a big to-do. Get over yourselves, find something else to be offended by, say for instance the starving children all over the world, war, and disease. I’m much more offended by those things than by these pics.
Signed,
A Roman Catholic.
I am agnostic and I agree with your point about the Christian bashing.
You never see this sort of photo shoot with Islamic over tones, because thats racist/bigoted, but its a okay when its Christianity.
The PC/Liberal fanatics have a serious case of hypocrisy when it comes to religion.
I’m getting sick of people blaming terrorism on Islam. The truth is that people don’t do this to any other religion than Christianity because it is the majority faith in the world. If any other religion was mocked, especially Islam, the consequences would be greater (as in it would spew hatred towards Muslims who are mostly Middle Eastern or African) than it would with Christianity. Exactly because Christianity has the majority of followers in the world.
I’m more offended by the photos because they are ass-ugly. She looks like an alien.
I don’t recall any mention of “terrorism” here, but the fact that you seem to think it’s OK to mock one religion over another based on the # of followers it has is backed by pretty feeble reasoning. Side note, using Islam in humour or art is not what spreads hatred against the religion itself, but rather it is the reaction of fanatics who are completely incapable of remaining calm about it. Be honest, what’s more harmful to Islam, in your opinion: a joke/risqué photoshoot, or a fanatic making death threats over such things?…yeah, thought so too.
”No one would dare do something like this with Islam because history and common sense suggest that the consequences would not be worth the effort!”
I think we all know what you meant by that.
”People are more accepting of criticism of Christianity in America country because it is the dominant religion, and members of this religion are attempting to turn their beliefs into law on many fronts (which is ironic, considering how many people freak out about the idea of sharia law spreading). If someone insults Christianity, it’s not like any Christians are going to be in danger. Islamophobia, on the other hand, further marginalizes a minority group and contributes to the hatred of anyone who isn’t Christian in large segments of our society.
This all seems very obvious to me. It’s frankly grating to see Christians with a persecution complex trying to use people taking offense at Islamophobia as evidence that they are being disrespected more than anyone else. This situation is comparing apples and oranges. I don’t see any Muslim senators or representatives in the U.S. trying to ban gay marriage or abortion based on what their religion tells them God wants. In fact, the first Muslim representative happens to be the one elected by my district. He champions women’s rights, gay rights, and progressive ideals.
And for the record, I’m not Muslim. I’m an atheist. From this perspective, maybe it’s clearer than it is to religious people. As an outsider, it is ludicrous to me that some Christians think they’re oppressed. It really shows a lack of ability to empathize. You really don’t know how good you guys have it, or how strongly society reinforces Christian beliefs simply because there are so many more Christians than anyone else.”
Someone posted this on another thread and it’s exactly what I think. I’m an atheist too. For me, I think religion is about peace. And all these other stuff are getting in the way. People are trying to restrict each other. That’s where all the problems begin. When the Monosteitic books were written… those were different times. They teach kindness, tolerance and acceptance but it was also thousands of years ago. A different time. That’s why they shouldn’t be taken literal, in my honest opinion. When it comes to stuff like gay marriage, polygamy etc.
Asli-I was going to say the same thing. I just find it odd that so many of the first commenters brought up Islam. What does that have to do with anything?? There are a million religions that make up with country/world so why drag (specifically) Muslims into it? Odd…..Anyway, once again you said everything in your posts that I would have said myself. Well done 🙂
“People are more accepting of criticism of Christianity in America country because it is the dominant religion.”
Which, by your rationale, should mean that criticism of Islam would be more widely accepted in Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan!
No, Tapioca, because American culture is not interchangeable with the various culture(s) that exist in the Middle East, or any other part of the world for that matter. In certain cultures where so-called “honor killings” are deemed acceptable behavior, you better believe that most naysayers are used to keeping quiet. In other words, we should all be happy that we live in a country where dissidence is allowed and often encouraged and freedom of expression is embraced.
Hi Kitten! 😀
Thanks. Basically I think it all comes down to culture and not religion. I agree with Kitten, and I’m happy I live in a democratic, safe and accepting country. Live and let live, to each their own and all that jazz Tapioca, maybe you should check out what kind of laws your Republican candidates want passed. They are definately not in favor of women or any minority.
An alternative point of view may be that Christianity has the confidence and the maturity to explore its imagery and its tenets. I’m no theologian, but I don’t think that mainstream Christianity has ever had laws against the artistic portrayal of saints or symbols like Islam has. So you get the classic freedom of speech conundrum: by allowing liberty of expression, one must also allow points of view with which one may disagree. I’m glad we’re there.
Word.
You don’t know nothing about religions history so why make stupid remarks about things you don’t even know.What’s the point?
Well, you’re somewhat right. I haven’t been to church in a LONNNNNNNG time, but there is mention of “Thou shalt not bear graven images”; however, i think most people are sensible enough to take that lightly.
Well said. Kate is just an ugly fool. It’s degrading, selfish, ugly, hideous, stupid….all for money…
It’s all about the $$$$.People don’t care anymore about others people’s beliefs and feelings.It’s just disgusting.
I agree. I’m kind of ho-hum about it, waiting for blaspemous images of Muhammad. I can see how someone might find it offensive both aesthetically and religiously. I just dont have much energy to waste on it.
@ Jean Harlow
What are you talking about? Whenever someone says anything about Judaism, the Jews call it anti-Semitic and make that person seem like they are racist. Jews don’t just sit quietly, they make everyone get angry about saying anything about Jews.
@ Badrockandroll
The reason Islam has laws against it is out of RESPECT for religious figures.
Why does everything have to be sexualized like with this photoshoot ?
100% agree with you UniqJazz there should be some kind of laws to protect the Christians from that too.Religion is Religion you don’t play with that just for the sake of the $$$ OK!
I was raised Catholic/non-Evangelical Protestant. I’m baptised Catholic. I find these offensive to the Byzantine and Renaissance artists because they are HIDEOUS and methy. I’ve never “gotten” Kate’s appeal and this totally supports that. She makes black rubber look dirty instead of sexy. Dirty as in un-hygienic. She is no Dita von Teese (who would at least do justice to poor Michelangelo).
These are English people, they are even more institutionally and culturally Christian than we are. WE don’t have Advent calendars as a culture – only some people do it here. We certainly don’t celebrate Michaelmas.
I have no problem with Christians (devout or lapsed) making fun of Christians. I would have a problem if the Muslims did it – especially since we don’t put a hit on Danish cartoonists if they mock Jesus but woe to anyone who mocks Mohammad.
“These are English people, they are even more institutionally and culturally Christian than we are.”
This is absolutely wrong. I’m assuming the “we” are American. The UK is 30-40% atheist, Christianity is fading out and only institutionally involved with the royal family – which has no impact on the majority of British people.
only1shmoo, You are so very right!!!
Feel free to look these terrorist people/groups up:
The IRA
The Ku Klux Klan
Anders Behring Breivik
The Gunpowder Plot
Army of God
Lambs of Christ
Hutaree
Eric Robert Rudolph
Concerned Christians
The Covenant, The Sword and the Arm of the Lord
There is also a sniper in Sweden who guns down ethnic Swedes. So far 15 men and women have been hit. The police suspect him to be a Christian fundamentalist and racist.
Sure, ALL Christians use words to express themselves. Yeah right.
None of those that you listed are even remotely accepted by Christians. I certainly don’t.
They’re just wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Asli, this could go on for ever. The point I was trying to make is that in a free and democratic society, people should be permitted to explore (and yes, even criticize) other religions. However, there is often a reluctance for people to use Islam in an artistic context that is, perhaps, unflattering because there is a greater likelihood of violent repercussions. Since moving to Europe, that has become even more evident. The Catholic church and Judaism are often criticized (and rightly so), but when Islam is brought to scrutiny, news agencies are more apprehensive because they receive death threats. In a free society, everyone should be fair game and this type of behaviour is frustrating!
Thank you for the reality check Asli.
Annie_grey do you think that Al Qaeda is accepted by muslims too?”They’re just wolves in sheep’s clothing” too like you said. WOW!So many double standards.
Wow those are strange looking photos. That is all for me.
Never found any appeal in her, never understood why she is such an icon and a sex symbol.. and those shots are beyond horrible and unflattering.
Seconded.
Third. Don’t even get me started on those horrible teeth.
WWD is & has always been the fashion bible. Vogue is for the average consumer & her sister W is for the more fashionista (fashion inside news, etc)
They both fail miserably beside WWD. Oh & Kate looks like hell.
So that’s the show everyone talks about? The walking dead right? Impressive zombie makeup!
I am a Christian, and I do find these offensive. But I am also an adult and I don’t have to buy this magazine if I don’t like. I don’t need to scream and shout and have W punished or shut down.
In other news, Kate Moss looks like she is long past her prime, maybe it’s just the lighting and the make up.
Well said Katie.
Agree. I think it is wrong and would love to see this issue not sell well at all so that the frequency of these themes/images die down in media. However, I’m not buying an issue and that seems to be the main way to stand against it. So, good point.
I agree. I’m kind of ho-hum about it, waiting for blaspemous images of Muhammad. I can see how someone might find it offensive both aesthetically and religiously. I just dont have much energy to waste on it. Honestly, these sorts of images have been done so many times before that they are almost passé.
I see your point. But after the incident with the Danish cartoon, I think it will be a long time before that occurs.
Honestly, these sorts of images have been done so many times before that they are almost passé. If this is an attempt to be shocking, maybe they should try targeting radical Islam (note, I did not state ALL Islam). As a devout Christian/Catholic, I can see how these images can be found offensive but I don’t have the energy to get all revved at these things.
You are repeating yourself.Do you know that there is radical people in every religion?
Jews ,Christians,Muslims.
Do you know that the majority of the people in the US are christians and jews?So what’s the point of talking about muslims in this thread?Do you know that muslims believe in JESUS CHRIST too.He is their prophet too and i’m sure they’re no fan of that cover either.
I’m “past my time” like Kate these days but I never found W or WWD very interesting. Even in my 20s at the peak of my “fashionista” phase I never ran out to get the latest W or WWD. I may have skimmed it but not worth buying. I’d heard to 3rd Street or Robertson and see what was up in the boutiques.
Honestly, it’s only now that I’m “past my prime” that I even look at Valentino and Armani and what’s it. It may come in very tiny sizes but it’s more for the career woman in her 30s-50s than the fun young one, she was in the fashionista days.
It’s for the fashion crowd. The NY crowd that also found Mapplethorpe interesting. The average New Yorker and Londoner is rolling her eyes just like I do out here in LA whenever I see a Kardassian.
If the goal was to make her look horrifying, they succeeded. Very gross and offensive.
@brin…I agree w/you. Putting religiosity aside for a moment…& just examining the photos w/an objective eye…there is just absolutely NOTHING TASTEFUL about these pics…NOTHING!
I think the “motive” was going for shock..I really do. Kate is made up to look absolutely distasteful, IMO.
As far as the religious overtones…they especially scream CATHOLIC, due to the “nun photograph,” I can definitely see where this shoot was going. It was definitely staged to give the middle finger to Christians…but I think Catholic-Christians have been especially singled out.
I was raised Catholic, but nowadays my spirituality has migrated toward a more sensible/believable eastern doctrine (Tao Te Ching). That being said, I’m not a diehard Catholic….but I must agree…this shoot was meant to be offensive. I am of the opinion that, although such a photo-shoot is well within W Magazine’s “right,” they are not making many friends.
Agree.There is nothing tasteful about that shooting.
As a non-Evangelical (Catholic/mainline Protestant), they have to bash the Catholics if they are going to do it in the visual sense. The Evangelicals and the Protestants are a lot less visual. There are no icons in Protestantism that I know of. They would have to mock Jesus and well… that would be going a tad too far.
PS to whomever mentioned Nicki Minaj. That wasn’t shocking, that was painful.
Creepy nun is way fucking creepy.
OMG! you’re right she looks like something out of the Exorcist. BEGONE! DEMON! BEGONE! THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!
Gee if that only worked without a priest and over the internet maybe she would be gone finally.
Oh, don’t worry, it’s alright as long as it’s “fashion”. /sarcasm
I wish Christians would stand up against these things. I’m not a Christian, but these sort of things really irk me.
What do you mean ‘stand up against them’? they’re pictures, christians have a choice to either buy the magazine or don’t.
Christians (conservative ones, anyway) are standing up against it…?
And fashion is routinely offensive. I don’t see the big deal.
Trust me, in the united states at least, conservative christians don’t really need you to prompt them to say when something disagrees with their values or makes them uncomfortable. Just an observation. Not putting any negative connotations on that, take it as you want to. just saying, here they’re very vocal.
Obviously you are not a Christian. These photos are of Catholic iconography. Unless the Bishops bother, no one will stand up in the US. The Evangelicals don’t like Catholics (and vice-versa).
The only good thing I see about Santorum (sorry coughing and choking here I said “good” and “Santorum” choke…) Anyway – he seems to be bridging the gap between Evangelical Protestants and Conservative Catholics. I’m hoping that will push the Moderate and Liberal Christians of all denominations to start getting along too.
These pics are disturbing …and what the hell is wrong with her teeth?!
Her teeth look like they’re nicotine stained……..yuck………has she forgotten to have her teeth whitened or is it supposed to be part of the look???
True.Her teeth are weird in this cover probably to make her look scary,i don’t know anymore with all this F*ckery.
METH!
I think the photos are amazing.
As for the “devout”–don’t buy W. Problem solved.
They were probably more amazing before processing. I do find them a little offensive, but whatever. My main issue with them is that they are so oddly processed. It cheapens the look. Those spiders look so flat and unrealistic… I think they made a mess of the whole shoot with the photoshopping.
They have a fairy tale quality to them. Beautiful and disturbing.
I agree. These pictures are great! It is all about art bitches, not fashion! So I do not get the offensive thing at all, although I am a Christian…
No!It’s all about the $$$$ and yes i’m a fashion addict and yes i love Kate.
I love the one with the red swan. 🙂 the others, not so much.
Everyone on this shoot must have been on mind-altering drugs. At what point did anyone not think this was going too well? Kate looks horrifying. What…it’s “fashion”? Baloney. I’d be peeved if I was her.
I don’t know if these photos are sacrilegious, but the “soul-sucking zombie demon from outer space” vibe is certainly making me want to hold up a crucifix to my computer screen and sprinkle holy water all over the monitor.
LOL!
I like those photos quite a lot. Much more then the same old boring sexy posing. At least these are interesting and make you think for a bit.
I like them too, they’re quite striking images. more art photos than fashion photos. much more interesting than just another set of “pretty model wearing pretty dresses”.
I’ve never understood the whole appeal of Kate Moss… seems like a dirty ho hype to me
I find her bleached eyebrows more offensive. : P
I can see why religious people would be offended by the use of their iconography in a fashion shoot, but really, this is the price you pay for being popular, isn’t it? It’s like if, say, Lady Gaga complained about being mocked on Saturday Night Live or something (not that she has, as far as I’m aware). You wanted to be everywhere, you got your wish, but don’t complain that not everyone is worshipping you.
The visual history of the West is steeped in a hundred flavours of Christianity. Once upon a time, the Church wanted to rule the world, it got its wish, it dominated the west, and now it belongs to everyone. To some people, the imagery is sacred. To others, it’s just part of the fabric of life.
I was raised Christian, though I no longer believe. Though I’m sympathetic to the people who are offended, I also feel they have no right to tell other people they can’t use these symbols that are just as much a part of my life as any devout Christian’s. They just have different meanings to me, and presumably to Kate and the people who designed the shoot.
The pictures are kind of dull, though. So maybe a little controversy is all they have going for them.
The visual imagery of the West is saturated with Christian images, as you say – and so when you aim for creepy, you can get an easy emotional reaction by using Christian imagery. Its just a bit of a lazy tactic though. And the net result is the photo shoot has ended up looking like a promo for a new horror movie.
Oh totally, I’m not saying it’s not a hackneyed tactic. It’s an easy way to generate a little controversy over nothing.
But they have as much a right to use this imagery as anyone…irrespective of whether they do anything original with it! 🙂
The point here is about having some respect for other people’s beliefs.Religious people ask for respect.That’s all!
I think she’s an incredible model, but it must be a nightmare to shoot and stlye her now because there must be a several million pictures of her floating around…how on earth do you make anything new?
I think they’re interesting, i’m not religious but even i find the pic with the crucifix offensive, just a cheap move and unnecessary really
Awful photos… yuck
I’m quite impressed by the few religious people who have responded to this post with very mature answers. It’s actually pretty refreshing!
As for the people who are offended.. well, have fun with that. NO ONE needs to respect your beliefs to the point where they can’t use religious iconography as props in a photoshoot or use religion as a theme in a music video/art/whatever. Your religion may be sacred TO YOU but it isn’t TO ME. I would strongly disagree with advocating violence to any particular group, but these images are harmless.
Being offended won’t kill you, y’all.
Co-sign this
She looks like Goop in the first pic
I’m an atheist who grew up with a Catholic background (Italian), and I think there is a difference between mocking some (if not all) concepts of a religion/cult/belief, and plain disrespect of their symbols and ideas. This spread is completely in the second group, with the aggravation that it’s not for the sake of “art” or a real “provocation”, just for some scandal in the fashion field.
And I would think the same if there was another (any kind) religion involved.
Co-sign this!
The only one that bothers me is the one with the crucifix and the crown of thorns. It went a little too far in my opinion. And it could have been done a LITTLE classier at least. It just doesn’t seem in good taste.
Overall though, I think these are some of the most unattractive photos I’ve ever seen. Oh, they’re interesting, but that doesn’t automatically make them good. They’re so overly processed she looks more like a video game character than an actual person.
christians are always pissed off about something or other, so that’s not a yard stick. this photo shoot is just ugly – totally aesthetically unpleasing. full of attention-grabbing moves, so who really cares (no one should).
I think the pics are interesting. The second one is just plain creepy though.
She looks horrible…why do her teeth look gross in these shots? As for religious/sacrilegious.. Leave it up to individual minds… Poor taste? Maybe…a few yeah.
this is super weird. SUPER DUPER WEIRD. i don’t like the pictures aesthetically at all…
Religiously… i figure Jesus would be all like “meh”…
The f–k?
Too much photoshop to the point were it comes off looking cartoonish.
It looks like the same SFX team that handled making Kristen Stewart look like am emaciated living corpse whose hybrid baby was sucking the life out of her also worked on this photo shoot. Kate Moss has the same look.
Johnny Depp did it with a song now she had to do it with pictures. She is coping him again. If he does it she tries to up him one. She needs to get over it, He wouldnt date her now, hes been there and done that hahahaha
What’s the name of the song PLEASE?
In every picture I’ve seen of her she always has her mouth open to some degree, showing off those god awful teeth. Why she’s a supermodel is beyond me – her skin is terrible, her teeth wonky and yellow and her eyes go in opposite directions. Close the cake-hole Kate!
The point of fashion is not always to be pretty. It’s also to push limits and that can make people uncomfortable sometimes. If you’re offended than don’t buy the magazine!
The article in W regarding the photos was very interesting to me. I liked his Dorian Gray reference.
She is probably the best model ever. She’s not pretty in a standard way but that is not required of a model. She’s extremly photogenic and that’s what matters. She can do everything. Just name the theme of a fashion shoot and she can do it. Sexy, innocent, wild, futuristic, elegant, rock’n’roll, hippy, every type of clothes, make up, jewelry, everything. She can do everything and she always looks the part, she always looks believable and yet is always recognizable. I can’t think of any other model that can match Kate.
True.
@ Cherry : you’re right. Madonna did it better in the ’80’s (Madonna did alot of things better in the ’80’s). Now its just old news to use icons this way. But I still find the crass use of religious symbols offensive. I would find the use of any religion’s symbols to be offensive. I respect other religions and I want people to respect mine – or at least leave it alone.
Well put! 100% agree with you.
I blame Gaga.
I really like them, they are intriguing, interesting, obviously contraversial, but they make me want to spend time looking at them.
Yeh Kate doesn’t look atypically ‘beautiful’ but that doesn’t detract from her unique beauty (even after all that c0ke!!)
The styling is terrible. Somehow, despite her lifestyle and “age”, she usually looks good, but these are just ugly.
Ok, I went and looked at the pictures again, and decided seeing them was the product of an L.S.D. flashback. I must of been temporarily hallucinating. It’s been a couple of decades, but I guess flashbacks are still possible and I just had a wierd one.
demonic
Of course it is demonic,like anything comming from the entertainment biz.
The photos are ass and of course they are offensive, but then again it’s a secular fashion magazine, and I happen to love W, so while it’s offensive, it’s nothing get all upset about.
BUT…
I love it how people on here stand up for other religions in the world that have their own issues and also want to “impose” their religious views on people, but Christianity only get’s called out because we are mean and judgmental.
You prove the points so well that it is okay to pick on Christians, not because you really care about Christians spouting their beliefs, but because it’s the thing to do. Saying Christians suck and grouping ALL of us in the same pot is perfectly fine and liberal, and you you don’t have the same disrespect for Muslims (which is probably at this point neck and neck in terms of the vast mount of believers, especially in the states), a religion that also “promotes” some of the very same stances (and sometime more brutal) than Christianity does (seeing how they both stem from the Judaic faith) that liberals have a problems with. But like with most sheeple friendly diatribes, Being anti-Islamphobia is the new gay is new black. I would have much more respect for people who just said, I don’t like Christians or Christianity and therefore I am already biased instead of trying to make the Christian faith and ALL of it’s followers look like fundamentalist idiots incapable of being rational.
There are people being arrested in Britain who are Muslim for preaching out against homosexuality, and actually making pamphlets about it saying gays need to be killed. And yet they some how don’t represent all of the Muslims out there but a few kooky Christians somehow speak for all the believers?
Having grown up in Philadelphia where the Black Muslim community is very strong and having Muslim friends from all over, Islam like Christianity has its extremists just like everyone else. As for Muslims involved in US politics, of course many Muslims are going to be influenced by their surroundings. The US in theory is supposed to be tolerant of all people not matter who or what they are. But if you go to African countries that are Muslim dominated governments, you’d see that the laws whether official or unofficial are brutal towards gays and women based on their interpretations of the Q’uran.
I suggest the reading material of the gifted Kola Boof, whom not only was born into an Islamic country but has led a very colorful life and does not support Islam, Christianity or any other religion. She created her own, and while I don’t agree with everything she says, she makes you think.
It’s terrible strategy when a media outlet feels the need to come to this. Why even go there? Are they going to get to the point of having models hanging on crosses? Nothing is sacred anymore. Disgusting.
Totally disgusting!
AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!
Someone said ‘awesome’, i’m not sure about that, but it’s defenetly for category ‘eccentric’…
I dislike Kate Moss but LOVE this pix! They are not trying to be beautiful, they are trying to be art. Yeah yeah I know art?? The main aim of art is to cause a reaction, good or bad – and thats exactly what these do.
I really admire how ballsy they are,I usually find vogue / models / fashion really vapid, but for the first time I am thinking well done for stepping up above making mindless sheep worry about whether to use brown or black eyeliner this season.
I’m gonna come right out and say that I really love this photo shoot. It’s an exercise in the grotesque, so yes, if she looks horrible and ugly, that matches the tone and style of the shoot. It kind of reminds me of Lady Gaga’s video, “Alejandro.”
I am tired of manufactured controversy, and that’s what this sad, little photo shoot was all about. But I’m heartened by the discussion on this post — the Celebitchy Community never ceases to amaze me with it’s eloquence & intelligence. And shiny hair, and kicky heels!
Like you said it’s a”manufactured controversy”.
It’s just bad. Very poor taste.
I love when art pushes and provokes. I love beautiful or inspired photography. But this is just ugly. I get what they were going for but I think it falls flat.
There is nothing offensive here. Just some tired old attention seeking PR to boost sales.
The Christians are persecuted card is just plain rubbish. It’s a personal belief that’s up for mockery just like everything else in the world.
Just a bad retread try too hard photo shoot with a no longer compelling model.
Next.
Except, outside of the fundamentalists in Islam who are the regular butt of jokes, who really attacks Islam that hardcore in comedy?
We’re not talking about fundamentalist Christians v. Fundamentalist Muslims who are always talking crap to one another.
In the liberal media and with the propaganda sheeple herding, who really talks shit about Muslims or just about any other religion and aren’t called out for it?
So True. If you look at the fundamental doctrines of ALL of the great traditional faiths in the world, we all believe the same thing. Which makes us fight and bicker among ourselves, sadly enough. Many within the different religions fail to see the comparisons, and so try to stamp out the “other”.
The secular world sees us as separate entities as well, and currently, it is the Christians who are up to be targets, and we make it easy because we won’t fight back, but we will get upset about it.
Jews.
You are missing the point. Other religions are mocked plenty. Judiasm has been lin fashion shoots, muslims, wiccan…But it’s not a contest or who gets it more. It’s free speech and personal taste. It is deliberate provocative imagery using the same symbolism you will find in art though out the centuries.
Christianity is fair game plain and simple. Maybe you don’t like that. So cancel your subscriptions, change the channel or write a letter to W.
FUG, OFFENSIVE, CREEPY, CHEAP.
Exactly. Spot on.
I like the one with the horns.
Not spiders, they are ants.
And it’s not offensive, there’s a darker meaning in these photos and too many other similar images in every media outlet, though I preffer not to discuss that here.
Now on the other side I have to say I like them, it makes you feel like you are looking at a painting, not the b&w ones though.
on the cover,she looks alike a russian religious icon
the pics look (again) a few demoniac like in a Tarsen movie or a gorgeous-looking THE EXORCIST
I hate most of them, but the Lida and the Swan reference is clever.
in the W cover she reminds me of Vanessa Paradis
If you look closely, all of Johnny Depp’s women look very similar. Vanessa Paradis, Kate Moss, and Winona Rider. All have the same body and face structure.
I believe strongly in the right to freedom of expression. But with every right comes a corresponding obligation. In this case, it’s an obligation to civility. If you know that something may be painful or offensive to someone else, make a conscious choice not to do it. Do you have a RIGHT to be offensive? Sure! But shouldn’t you CHOOSE to be kind and civil?
There is almost always a way to be provocative without being offensive, if one puts a little intelligence, maturity, and genuine creativity into the process. I don’t see anything in this photo spread that isn’t derivative to the point of being childish.
Indeed. Very well said.
Yes!
Crass, no doubt. All religions should be treated with respect.
Fashion is simply another form of art. It’s meant to create a conversation, to attract attention. It’s meant to create a stir. This, like so many pieces of artwork throughout the ages, pushes boundaries and evolves. Art has always encompassed personal/sacred/traditional views of humanity (sex, religion, gender-based roles, etc.) – things that get people talking. This is just another step in a long, long stairway. It’s not new, and it certainly won’t stop. All I can say it, if you don’t like it, don’t buy it.
I really don’t see the shoot as being offensive. If someone wants to hold a cross to their lady parts then that’s their prerogative. Do you think if God really exists he gives a flying f*** what Kate Moss does with a wooden cross? Is God really that petty? You can’t presume to know God’s ‘mind’ so you can’t be offended on his behalf. Therefore any offence caused is to do with your ego. YOU have a belief – a belief that comes complete with fancy images, objects, holy water, etc, but you can’t decide what people do with those images and objects any more than Bill Gates can tell people not to shit on their computers at home. Once something is out there in the public, it’s open to scrutiny and ridicule whether you like it or not. Like I said previously, the images do not advocate violence. They don’t persecute Christians. A wooden cross to me is not symbolic of God’s magnificence and I can do whatever the hell I choose to with it.
Sasha, if you have no faith, no one can expect you to understand why the expected outcome of this shoot is offence. Bill Gates might not care what you do with his computer at home, but if someone has raised him to a god-like level in their minds, and quite literally has developed a religious mentality around all things Gates, then that person indeed would be very upset by someone defacing or misusing a writing of his or some of his products. (I sincerely hope there is no one out there like that- that is sadder than this photo shoot).
And the only aim of a shoot like this IS to cause offence, whether it does or not. It actually shows a laziness and lack of creativity on the part of everyone involved in styling this shoot.
They’re like stills from The Ring 3.
this isn’t offensive…these are just costumes…and “art”, if you like. chill out!!
1:st cover i thought it was Crackie.
She does look horrible… She’s not attractive in any way imo. :S
Demented and amazing. I love it.
Does she ever shut her mouth?
This open mouth in all pictures, that is offencive
Some photographer finally got a photo
of Kate’s soul.
Roman Catholic here (raised by nuns, in fact) and I’m not offended, other than by how ugly these photos are. Using Catholic imagery to shock and offend is only effective if one does it well and with serious negative intent. Stuff like this, Madonna’s attempts at shock and awe, and that horrific Nikki Minaj crap at the Grammys isn’t capable of shaking my faith, so it’s not capable of offending me.
This has been done to death already – and to much better effect. Kate looks awful and who cares about the clothes? Too busy and, um, stupid.
*Yawn* Another attempt at being provocative. Wake me when it’s over.
dumb and fug that is all….
Yes, it is offensive and disrespectful to Christianity. But this has been done so many times before that it has lost shock value.
Culture, and art is rife with religious, and cult iconography, it always has been. Crosses, halos, swords, wings, horns, fire, the all Seeing Eye, triangles, the list goes on and on.
Iconography has been around for centuries, as far back as the written word, and all forms of art. That is why art is so powerful, and artists have always been the purveyors of this power, whether by their own design, or whether driven by the powers that be, and their wealth. Historically, when has a huge artistic movement ever been driven without some type of religion driving it? Religion has always been a huge presence in any cultural lexicon. Michelangelo was commissioned to paint the Sistine Chapel by Pope Julius II. I only mention that as an example because similar circumstances are LEGION. Historically churches controlled the money behind all rulers, thus driving culture, government, and even war.
Symbols can mean many things such as power, wealth, innocence, beauty, belief, knowledge, evil, etc. Depending on the perception, culture, religion, and filter of the viewer. No one religion holds any of these symbols as completely their own, most use some form of all iconography, which can be eerily similar to other religions going back centuries. All religions were viewed as cultist, iconic, idol, god worship at one point or another, especially in their early stages.
Jay-Z has used the hand signal over left eye, to some it’s the all Seeing Eye and represents cult ties, it’s a triangle, he says it’s representative of a diamond meaning wealth.
In the Bible the Holy trinity is represented as a triangle, God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, in statues, paintings, etc., for centuries.
Victoria’s Secret has their “V. S. Angels”, women on runways wearing wings and lingerie. They are put forth as the epitome of sexual desire, yet they are called angels, just like the Angels in the Bible no?
In the Bible Angels are depicted as the winged messengers of God. The warring Angel army of God is said to be led by the Archangels, Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, with their swords of fire. Islam adds The Archangel Azreal, and Izraphel could be a different interpretation of Raphael.
Ancient artists put halos on statues, paintings, or wall carvings representing their gods, Ra with a halo representing the sun, Buddha with a halo representing enlightenment, The Virgin Mary with a halo to represent sainthood. Many ancient leaders had themselves represented with halos because they felt they were living gods, many Pharaohs did this.
Many religions can choose to see this as an affront; however that defensive stance is fickle by nature. I don’t see this as an attack on religion, it’s just uses iconography, yes it’s most likely meant to cause a reaction, but that reaction is subjective to the viewer, as is all art. Personally I find it simply unattractive and lacking in true creativity.
She isn’t meant to look hot here! Why do you think she is such a successful model? It is largely because she is super versatile and able to look, at times, frightening and hideous and, at other times, lovely. I think she does a great job at her job, and her career would attest to same. Even if the images being portrayed offend you, it is not Kate who is making the religious statement – she is just doing her job.
“Just doing your job” has been used as a defence for many things. It is not useful as such. I do not know her beliefs, or lack thereof, but you cannot defend her doing this shoot on that basis.
Yes, jobs sometimes have us do things that we dislike. This is not the same as doing something you believe is wrong. Take for example the Victoria Secret model who just quit because she said that her faith was – over time – telling her that her job was making her do things she did not believe in. Here, I found a link.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lingerie-model-kylie-bisutti-to-quit-victorias-secret-over-religious-beliefs/910863/
I’m Christian (Protestant), and so is my fiance, who was sitting beside me as I looked at these pics. As many before me said, I’m not really offended by these pictures…they’re just annoying and at this point cliche. Kate looks trashy and affected. And even though I’m not too bothered by the images, I do find it hypocritical that she could get married in a church and then turn around and pose in something like this spread. Anyways, I just asked my fiance if the images offended him, and he said that he’s offended that the photography is so bad. Ha! Interesting to get a male’s perspective…and I guess he’s not too taken with the “amazing” Kate Moss either. I’m over her.
I love artistic photo shoots. They rarely seem to occur now.
I love everything about these photographs. Gorgeous, gorgeous, gorgeous! Clever and beautiful. I love when models are not afraid to step outside of the accepted beauty norms. I love her teeth in the first cover.
People miss the point of the whole thing.
Being a good high fashion model is not about being cookie cutter pretty. It’s about being photogenic, alien looking and able to embody different kinds of personalities, much like an actress.
Being vanilla pretty is good enough for a commercial model but not for artsy spreads like these.
The pictures are fantastic, very Steven Klein but I also see some David Sims/Paolo Roversi elements here and there.
Kate is great as usual. She may be getting older and not as gracefully as I would like but she’s flawless as a model. There’s nothing she can’t do.
I love how she’s not afraid of letting photographers explore her bad angles or making her “look like crap”. She’s up for everything. She’s not vain about her image. Just look at her work with Chuck Close, for instance. Most supermodels and/or female celebrities wouldn’t do that for anything in the world.
About the whole religion debate…meh.
People aren’t necessarily “missing the point.” Art is subjective. People think Jackson Pollack is a genius. I think his work looks like he backed over a canvas. It doesn’t mean I don’t “get it,” it just means I don’t care for it. Same with this photo spread. I get it just fine. I just don’t care for it.
In another day and time, ten or more years ago, it might have worked on Marilyn Manson, but not her, ever. This idea, the whole shoot, was a complete mistake and waste of time and celluloid. I think Kate just adores to spend hours in hair and makeup, probably prefers it to “real” life, and therefore doesn’t give a damn about the end result just as long as it keeps her working her super model schtick, to which i say “ick.”
not taking a day to read all of the above, my take = it’s art. I give the photog a A for effort.
Has anybody noticed she has almost exactly the same in every picture? I remember when she was hot model sh**, but her expressions here are not contributing to whatever look they’re going for.
Beautiful and artistic
the only thing i find offensive about this is how f***ing ugly she is.
sorry, love it. the strangeness, and the detail are striking. things don’t always need to be pretty to be beautiful
I too am tired of this sort of manufactured controversy. It’s been done for too long and I’m more bored than anyone else. Ooo a slutty nun. Yeah there’s about a thousand porno’s with the same imagery and idea. How about you try and show case clothing or talk about how the fashion industry has been better at spreading bulimia than art. How about that be a discussion.