We have to understand that as the threat of economic uncertainty and a lcak of understanding concerning health care issues we are placing ourselves to resemble the medival times as a sense of lawlessness embarks the nation.

Nothing is safe any more. Could be the expression that is being emphasized as a lack of hygine and self preservation seems to be the innovative new moderized urban american look. 

I have to admit, I find the patronizing tone of posts like this from those who advocate for the homeless disappointing. Here is an opportunity to engage the public at large in dialogue about the issue of homelessness (and not the first arisen from the fashion industry either), but instead that opportunity is squandered by condescension and self-righteousness. I mean, really? Homelessness being perceived as "en vogue" is offensive and negative, a slap in the face? I would think that perception of homelessness is leaps and bounds better than the one that leads to "bum fight" videos.

Perhaps you're not one of the people who think of fashion as a form of self-expression, and that self-expression plays a pivotal role in mental well-being, but there are MILLIONS of others who do. To be so dismissive and derisive of something that is important to so many only makes them tune out whatever message you're sharing. Thus, you effectively end up preaching to the choir. How is that going to help foster change? It's not.

And in the case of Steven Meisel, the photographer who shot the Vogue cover, he often deals with social justice issues in his work. He wants to shock people, to open their minds, to get a dialogue going, and he uses the platform he's been given to do that: fashion photography. It's unfortunate that, in this instance at least, many of the people who are best equipped to help engage and expand that dialogue are choosing not to do so. Imagine how much further your message could have gotten if you had dispensed with all the condemnation and instead focused on the question of "why is homelessness capturing the public's attention in this way?"

These are all great points, and I thank you all for your thoughtful comments. 

I admit that do not closely follow the works of either photographers whose work is featured above, so I'm not familiar with their intentions or history of dealing with these topics. My reactions were composed after reading other reactions around the web.

I think it's wrong to so quickly dismiss the reactions of homeless advocates, chiding us for not being more open-minded. Understand that when you deal with people everyday who have lost everything -- material possessions, hope, pride, etc. -- it's pretty devastating. Then to see what essentially look like caricatures on the cover of a fashion magazine of real people you deal with everyday, or a picture snapped of a homeless man only because of the clothing he's wearing, the knee-jerk reactions you're reading might be a bit more understandable. 

Perhaps this is a teachable moment that I missed. But do you really believe that images in a fashion magazine or on a fashion blog will disturb people enough to care? What about the stories that, almost daily, grace the pages of newspapers and magazines about real people's plights? Shouldn't that have the same effect? What about the people we see on the streets everyday? I don't see how models dressed as stereotypical homeless people opens an opportunity for *new* dialogue. Homelessness and poverty surround us everywhere we go, yet many people will continue to flip through the pages of those magazines without giving the plight of real homeless people a second thought. 

Perhaps I was wrong to discount a man's self expression and instead focus on his need for housing. Thing is, I'm one of the millions who believes wholeheartedly that self-expression is a key part to one's happiness. And the vast majority of the homeless people I've come across can't even think about self-expression until they have regular access to food, a safe place to sleep, and restored dignity (Maslow agrees). But you're right - this sweeping generalization certainly isn't true for everyone.

Ultimately, I really hope the sentiments expressed above are correct. I hope people who see images like these become disturbed enough to become further engaged in the topic.

Well, I myself have been homeless -- not chronic living on the street homeless, but homeless all the same, so I understand the constant focus on survival issues faced. But you know what? There where times when I spent my last few dollars on the latest issue of Vogue because it was an escape from that constant worry that made me feel better. You know what else made me feel better? Dressing cute, because it's something that has always been important to me and I knew that if I "let myself go" I'd just sink (deeper) into despair. The shallow vanity of youth? Maybe. But it helped me preserve a state of mental well-being, as much as is posible in such a situation. So no, I honestly don't understand these kinds of knee-jerk reactions.

That said, I think it's great that there are such passionate advocates like yourself. But yes, I do think you missed a teachable moment -- it seems many are so focused on who they are advocating for, they've forgotten who they are advocating TO. If the purpose is to change the perceptions and minds of regular, everyday people (and that should be part of it or else what's the point?), then you have to reach them at the level they're at now. And, unfortunately, where that's at is being immune to the homeless and poverty that surrounds them everyday. Maybe they "should" think one way or another, but they don't. If you want to reach them you kind of have to look beyond shoulds, or no one will hear you. So yes, I absolutely think images of models dressed like homeless people on the cover of a major fashion magazine opens an opportunity for dialogue, because that is an image that people will SEE. And clearly, it has sparked conversation, since there have been numerous reactions around the web, as you yourself stated.

But again, that said, I don't think it's enough to get people to necessarily "care" or become engaged in the topic. And that's where the opportunity is missed: people are paying attention to the issue right now, in this moment. But instead of grasping that and approaching them on their level and saying look here, this is what homelessness is really about and pointing them in the direction of information that will engage those who attempted to look deeper, all I've read are people railing against the pretentious fashion industry for being so "offensive." As I said before, that just makes people tune you out, and those who would be inclined to dig deeper just move on. It sucks that it works that way, but it does and if you want to change anything (and I think you really do!), then you have to keep that in mind.

*The following is not meant to be a deep discussion on the merits or drawbacks of the article or the subject of homelessness as fashion, merely an observation*

All I can think of when I see those Vogue shots is Zoolander and that they've either lost their mind or there's an evil plot afoot and they're trying to get rid of a model.

I think it's pretty clear from the comments that follow the original post on the Sartorialist are not about a increased "awareness" of homelessness, but an opportunity to not-so-subtly affirm dichotomies of deserving and "undeserving" homeless, and to congratulate each other for their moral sensitivity. This is par for course in much documentary photography, and shelves and shelves of photo criticism has been directed at the question of whether picturing oppression for the consumption of a privileged audience actually produces social change. It should also be noted that the Sartorialist did not talk to this man at any point, nor ask his consent, which he usually does of his subjects. I actually wrote a long post about this image as the fashion and politics blog Threadbared: http://threadbared.blogspot.com/2009/09/tramp-chic-and-photograph.html.

Speaking as a formerly homeless man...

I think there are two problems that need to be addressed.

1 : The general public's perception/misconception that if your homeless...Its because your a lazy bum.

2 : All too often there are and will be those in the media as well as elsewhere that will seek to profit at the expense of the homeless.

In my opinion, its because of those 2 reasons, in part, that the problem of homelessness will continue to exist and its also those 2 factors that makes it all the harder to solve.

Also, because of reason # 2, I tend to be very suspisious of the intentions of the fashion world when they market homelessness as a fashion choice rather than a situation resulting from circumstances beyond the controll of those who are homeless.