seriously!! all this is much ado about nothing. i am an african american woman and i think the double entendre is clever. not offensive in any way.

What, exactly, specifically, and in no vague "I just don't like it, it's offensive" way, is the problem people have with this photo? I like it.

I love how even AFTER knowing the story behind where the image came from (a book being featured), who picked it, and why, commenters are still desperately trying to feel offended.

Brushing off a perfectly reasonable explanation with, "I'm sure that's true, but ... I'm still offended!" is laughable.

Are we *ever* going to be able to see each other as equals and enjoy many generes of art (photos, illustration, books) if we insist on being so uptight and wounded about everything? The "this depicts an aspect of a much larger black culture -- I feel funny. Um, I must be offended!" attitude is weird. Especially when there are so many ACTUAL things to be offended about.

I also find it interesting that the Af-Am commenters seem to be a lot more reasoned with their reactions than the white commenters. Holy knee-jerk reaction, Batman.

Offensive in what way? The fists on the picks? The implication that the woman is wearing only the picks? I'm not offended but I have a positive cultural frame of reference associated with the image.

Hi Shelly and Ms. Fro -- I was going to type up what I think (as if anyone cares, at this point :)) -- but then I just decided to copy and paste from my comment on the nytimes.com about the story....so here you go:
To me, the issue is not with the photo, but what the cover of the magazine represents -- which is that literature must be segregated by race. An issue devoted to "Afro Picks!" implies to me, a white Jewish woman, that these books are not for me......I don't belong to this group.....when in fact,the truth of the matter is that I'm just as apt to like a book about an African American woman as I am an Indian man or a Jewish child. I don't want my books segregated by race. I'd be more comfortable if they devoted an issue to romance -- and then included all romance authors of every color (no need to even mention to me), or a self-help issue and just threw in all the authors of note, etc.

On the flip side, if I were a writer, I wouldn't want to find myself in any White Picks! issue either.

ALSO, -- Julia posted a comment there too...in which explains briefly what she meant, so you may want to check in there for more info: http://bit.ly/8NAsyr

I would like to ask Julia if she could articulate what it is that she finds 'offensive' about this photo.

Hey Ms. Fro....see below, and check out Julia's brief explanation in comments section: http://bit.ly/8NAsyr

I like the picture. (I'm a black woman.) But don't like it for the cover of a magazine about books/publishing. It would be a good picture for a hair magazine.

Rhonda, you have a point.

It seems like half the people who are offended by PW's cover are offended that PW would acknowledge African American authors as a category. While it would be wrong to ghettoize any minority group, acknowledging that a minority group exists and giving minority authors attention seems like a good thing. To not do so would to be like Stephen Colbert's character who claims to not be able to see race, even as he sanctimoniously spouts racist things.

As far as the image goes: don't confuse taste with truth. I, for one, think the image rocks both politically and formally.

So what is the world afraid of? Why does at every turn black hair and the instruments used to create its style and beauty become disturbing? Is this a generational thing? Is it a white thing? White fear? Black shame? What is it The image selected from one of the season's most handsome books is not out of context. A larger issue here is the perhaps the lack of knowledge of the artistry created by artists of African descent. PW's choice for the cover was a bold one. This African-American woman applauds Calvin Reid for the selection of Lauren Kelly's image.

Yellow text is clearly perjorative. How dare they?!

Julia, to answer your question: Yes.

Did you ask the model or the photographer if They thought what they were doing was wrong?

You pompous, educated-beyond-your-intelligence Fools are not Part of the Problem–You ARE The Problem!

I think it's creative.

great image, great tease line, beautiful woman, positive images in the hair picks, it pushes the edge a little in a positive direction, a throwback to the great Sixties, what?? are the haters scared of the Black Power fist??? i direct the Center on Blacks and the Media, and we have been centrally concerned about this kind of thing for years. no problem here. infact, my compliments.

This is way to literal for words. I had a good chuckle. Actually, on second look, I like the clenched fist. LOL, someone's really 'reached' for this one!

I promised to share the link when I wrote about this controversy. It's http://trueslant.com/aoscruggs/2009/12/15/i-am-...

Looks fine. Double entendre is a little obvious, but . . . well, there are a lot more serious issues out there. It's not insulting. It's not racist. Nor is it brilliant. The only thing that flabbergasts me is the outrage that this coverage is eliciting from the reporter and many of those whose comments I've read here.

as a person who has used and grew up in "pick" culture--i see nothing work with the image.
as a photographer--it could have been better executed. sorry.

This story reminded me of another story about Barack Obama and an Afro Pick, so I wrote about it here... http://gilbertking.wordpress.com/

Great post, Gilbert. agree with you 100%. (And I can't wait to read a draft of your book!)

Please, if we can't have punning fun with this term, what is the world coming to? I see no disrespect, but I'm white, so I could be out of touch. However, I'm a progressive and am sensitive to bigotry.

I'm blogging about this for my All American, my page at trueslant.com/aoscruggs.
Will someone post the reasons they find the photograph is so objectionable? Also, how do you feel about the fact that 1) the image was created by an African American photographer and 2) chosen by an African American scholar of photography and history?

Cheap and tasteless.

In addition to the offensive image - what is African-American publishing? Is there White American publishing? We already know Latino authors are also segregated from the mainstream publishing world - what will PW put on that cover? Tacos?

Actually, yes. There is White American publishing: e.g. chick lit. African American publishing e.g. urban romance.

Publishing, like magazines and cable television, relies on niches. That's been true for decades.

African American is not a genre - it is a culture. African American authors write chick lit, urban romance, literary fiction, commercial fiction, mystery, science fiction, non-fiction, etc. Include AA authors in a review of a genre not segregate them by color or culture. To do otherwise is segregation.

Thanks. I'll add the link to my post when I finish it.

Man, I must be way outta tune with what's PC.

I think this is a great image, Calvin. I'll take that 'one chuckle', thanks.

Plus I like exclamation marks!! ;)

maybe someone should have played india.arie's 'i am not my hair' for the editorial decisionmakers? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7rSv5NvAK8

the hysteria seems to be that african american representation in publishing is so ghettoized that anytime there is a spotlight that is culturally wobbly, it makes people want to scream because it seems to be so one-shot.
maybe if that underlying problem was acknowledged and addressed in a meaningful way, there might be less freakouts over a comb.

there is no apostrophe in Publishers Weekly and actually, no, the pun doesn't bother me. Maybe a better placement so the address block was better placed...

Thanks for the correction Ruth. I just fixed. The pun aside.... what about the issue of segregating literature like that? The entire industry has this knee jerk "put everything in a box" mentality that DRIVES ME CRAZY. My hackles go up every time I hear it suggested we pub this or that book in Black History month so we can get on the Af Am tables. I want to run to the other side of the calendar as fast as I can. If I were a writer, I think I would have a problem with an industry that wanted to put me onto the Jewish Women's table at the bookstore.

yes Its all my fault. I certainly regret offending anyone. However, why is a sweet and iconic image of an Afro constructed out of afro picks disparaging and pejorative? I love this image and while clearly I guess I should have forseen a possible controversy, I just didn't. Afro picks and afros are a part of my life (pictures will surface of me with one sticking out of massive afro, you watch) and they invoke the 1970s, one of the mostly cheerfully lampooned periods of black representations and Afro Americana in recent memory. Sorry if I offended, but Afro picks rock.

Calvin, YOU rock! Has anyone else noticed that black people still wear Afros and still use afro-picks?

Calvin, You need to post one of those pictures right now with a Lighten Up caption :) Fault schmault. We still love you.

I like it! It's clever and cute. Yes, I'm African American.

It's quirky and even bizarre, but not disturbing in a moral sense.

This just further widens the segregated shelves. It's a shame. As a Black writer writing multi-cultural romance and finding it so hard to break in and find a spot on the shelves this is upsetting.

Are these people insane? In what context is this tasteful? Apparently there are no minorities working at PW or they just don't give a damn.

It's a model with combs painfully arranged in her hair. So? Models seem to like harming themselves (don't eat, stupid footwear, tight clothes, lots of slap....) Can't see the relevance of this particular cover though. Or am I missing something?

Well, now we understand. They were just being lazy, too lazy to make a cover for the magazine. As others have noted, it's unfortunate that the pic is out of context from the cover of its book. Also, why choose this ONE cover to represent African American authors?! No single cover can represent all of our work. From the supernatural to sci-fi to historical to contemporary--our work is just as diverse as our peers. This cover choice is lazy and lame.

@anotherstatistic it was. calvin reid, the senior editor, is a black man. mr. reid is tweeting about the image choice now--@publisherswkly

i really don't even see the relevance in it--it's marginal (haha) at best. the image, out of context, is problematic. while it may be appropriate for a book on historical african american images for deborah willis' book, it's a problematic characterization of contemporary writing by african americans.

Per Calvin Reid at Publishers Weekly (who edited the feature and, with the creative director, chose the cover image and tagline): "The image is from the book 'Posing Beauty: African American Images from the 1890s to the Present' by Deborah Willis (Norton). The image is called Pickin’ by photographer Lauren Kelly. Ms. Willis is chair of the photo dept. at NYU, a MacArthur Fellow & a scholar of black photography and representation."

When I saw the afro pick picture I thought it was great

Hi Oggi! Hope you're doing well and still swingin' with the beautiful photography. -Nathalie

While I'm sure that's all true, pairing it with that double entendre? At most it's 'one chuckle clever,' and certainly far more likely to illicit groans.

Where things really seem to go wrong is that the reader or viewer has no frame of reference, specifically the one presented in your comment. There had to have been a better way to present that image.

I read an editorial once by a black author who hated the fact that he was always listed as a black author. His books were only shelved in the AFAM sections. He felt this led to his books not having the chance to be widely accepted in the marketplace. It's a shame that segregation takes place in the publishing/bookselling industry.

You're probably referring to Percival Everett. His brilliant ERASURE is an appropriate and timely title to read given this cover.

everett's erasure is one of my favorite books. and i said the same thing--someone needs to sliiiiide a copy of that novel to the good folks at publisher's weekly. i think it's necessary.

Oh no they didn't...

The image is from a book submitted for the feature. Trying to get more info, but art director is gone for the day.

is this real? *praying it wasn't a black person who came up with the idea*

I could not believe the date on the cover. Holy hell.

as a black writer, i'm just trying not to cry ...

WTF? reeeeely? no, i mean it.

Could have been better executed. I have no issues with the concept.

The black medusa. Only she kills people with black power instead of snakes... I'm reaching for some relevance here....

First, it is simply aesthetically offensive. I don't what art director worth their weight approve something so ugly. All those Afro picks is overkill. Secondly, it makes no sense as far as marketing the issue. It would make more sense to show a collage of popular Afr-Am book covers or authors. Third, it could be considered racist only because the image is anachronistic and irrelevant.

This picture is ridiculous and the title is painfully literal. If they wanted to highlight African American authors (i.e. Afro picks), they could've gotten a little more creative with the cover. I'm bored. YAWN!

no, you're not the only one. not only is it portraying "black" writing as tribalistic and single-minded, i think it's more than a couple decades too late to even be close to accurate.

I would have loved to been in the pitch session for this cover design.

Anything to sell a product, no depths too low.

You have got to be kidding me!

The placement of the address label is quite disturbing.

Really?! (re: placement of address label) I think you're reaching now. However, the use of that background color is clearly inflammatory.