by Aki Pagratis

Vogue Italia’s new stirring 24-page spread titled, "Water & Oil," has caused quite a fuss in recent days. As you can see from the pictures attached to this article, famed fashion photographer, Steven Meisel, managed to create an powerful artistic message that shines a new light on the gulf oil disaster. The session was shot in Los Angeles and depicts model Kristen McMenamy dressed in a tar drenched black dress, sprawled over a rocky shore like a dying crow. But many readers are now wondering, is this valid expression by artistic genius, or a shallow publicity stunt by elite fashionistas?

"The message is to be careful about nature," Vogue Italia’s Editor-in-Chief, Franca Sozzani, told the Associated Press. "Just to take care more about nature. ... I understand that it could be shocking to see and to look in this way these images."

Was that the intended message? Many critics are skeptical.

“I see nothing at all ironic about highlighting the destruction of working-class people’s livelihoods with obscenely expensive clothes designed primarily to enhance the status of elite fashion designers and the rich people who can wear them,” notes Sociological Images blogger Lisa Wade. She argues that although the BP well may have ceased leaking oil into the Gulf, pain is still being felt by those in the area who have lost their jobs, uprooted their families, and witnessed the destruction of marine wildlife.

Taylor Combs agrees. “Creating beauty and glamour out of tragedy seems quite fucked up to us, not to mention wasteful and hypocritical, seeing as thousands of dollars of luxury clothing was flown in, and then subsequently ruined for the shoot,” he writes in an article published in refinery29.com. “Glamorizing this recent ecological and social disaster for the sake of ‘fashion’ reduces the tragic event to nothing more than attention-grabbing newsstand fodder.”

Kathleen Nowak Tucci, the eco-designer who made the seaweed-style necklace worn by McMenamy on the cover (and several other shots) told New York Magazine she did not find the spread offensive. "I thought it was disturbing and thought-provoking and utterly fascinating in its interpretation of the struggle for survival," she said via email. "It is controversial and interpretative, which is indicative of great artistic expression."

Sozzani said the shoot reflects the magazine's effort to "find an idea that comes from real life.There is nothing political. There is nothing social. It's only visually. We gave a message but in a visual way."

What do you think? Was this spread needlessly and selfishly highlighting the destruction of working-class people’s livelihoods? Was it wasteful and hypocritical? Or, was it, as Tucci says, fascinating in its interpretation of the struggle for survival?

See the whole spread here : http://www.vogue.it/en/magazine/cover-story/2010/08/water--oil