2008 Vogue covers.
US Vogue reduces me to tears.
Because:
A) the latest/December issue featuring Jennifer Aniston on the cover.
B) news of Gossip Girl's Blake Lively nabbing the February cover.
C) flipping through the magazine makes me feel like a 40 year old auntie.
Though I (along with many others) havefully half accepted the fact that US Vogue puts Hollywood actresses on the covers in order to sell sell sell (to the celebrity obsessed culture/society, of course), the latest issue of the fashion magazine featuring Jennifer Aniston, many has argued, resembles too much like a tabloid. The caption on the cover reads: "What Angelina Did Was Very Uncool". Us Weekly, anyone? The quote honestly could not sound any more uninspiring. And honestly, if people still care about Aniston's feelings towards Brangelina (or vice versa), they are seriously sad. For heaven's sake, the story would've done great a few years ago. But now? BO-RING. Aniston probably just needs the media attention anyways.
And now, Blake Lively. I have nothing against the girl. Honest. She's young. She's quite pretty. Famous (mostly) thanks to Gossip Girl. I'm neutral towards the girl because I don't watch GG. And her acting's probably mediocre at best anyways so why/how in the world this girl nabbed the February cover of Vogue is just beyond me (probabaly has her publicist to thank for. Or Wintour.) So if Blake is a young, pretty, rising Hollywood star, what's the problem? What exactly are people saying? The problem is that she's a B-List star (at best), has yet to make a huge impact, isn't in the same league as the usual cover stars, basically, has not appealed to the 30 somethings yet. I say, give her 5 -10 years (or Oscar nomination) then maybe she's deserving of a Vogue cover. Because if Blake Lively can get a Vogue cover, what next? Miley Cyrus? I think I just died (and not in a good way) at the idea.
Honestly, was Kate Winslet/ Cate Blanchett not available? Or perhaps Vogue is trying to sell to a younger crowd by putting Blake Lively on the cover. After all, the country's going through a recession. And those tweens/teens will buy just about anything. Just look at the success/phenomenon of High School Musical and Hannah Montana. Whatever sells right?
The continuous (and increasingly irritating) downward spiral/downgrade of the (once) highly coveted fashion magazine once graced by models is causing fashion fans to question the credibility of the magazine and praise the Euro counterparts/publications. But honestly why? A different, possibly more open market/audience = better covers. better editorials. better content. period. (Exception to the recent Vogue Italia reject which was picked up by W)
People say the editorials by the Euro counterparts (esp. French and Italian Vogue) are edgy, risque, refreshing etc. And American Vogue? Boring, bland, dull. I say that French and Italian Vogue has better casting, better styling. They actually use models besides and/or who are not Caroline Trentini/Raquel Zimmermann/Natalia Vodianova while American Vogue has featured Trentini (usually jumping) one too many times. Are other models dead? Or are they not commercial enough? Couldn't Wintour get Hilary Rhoda/Doutzen Kroes or some other chick like that? Even Naomi Campbell (or any super) will be pretty exciting at this point.
Just look at these two simple editorials:
US Vogue
Vogue Paris
Which one do you prefer? How come such a simple editorial by VP exceeds US Vogue by such an extent?
Ugh. This is why I wish I lived in Europe or could buy French and Italian Vogue (but Numero would have to do at the mo') at a reasonable price. So what if I don't understand what the texts says. The editorials inside are absolutely brill as fuck.
US Vogue reduces me to tears.
Because:
A) the latest/December issue featuring Jennifer Aniston on the cover.
B) news of Gossip Girl's Blake Lively nabbing the February cover.
C) flipping through the magazine makes me feel like a 40 year old auntie.
Though I (along with many others) have
And now, Blake Lively. I have nothing against the girl. Honest. She's young. She's quite pretty. Famous (mostly) thanks to Gossip Girl. I'm neutral towards the girl because I don't watch GG. And her acting's probably mediocre at best anyways so why/how in the world this girl nabbed the February cover of Vogue is just beyond me (probabaly has her publicist to thank for. Or Wintour.) So if Blake is a young, pretty, rising Hollywood star, what's the problem? What exactly are people saying? The problem is that she's a B-List star (at best), has yet to make a huge impact, isn't in the same league as the usual cover stars, basically, has not appealed to the 30 somethings yet. I say, give her 5 -10 years (or Oscar nomination) then maybe she's deserving of a Vogue cover. Because if Blake Lively can get a Vogue cover, what next? Miley Cyrus? I think I just died (and not in a good way) at the idea.
Honestly, was Kate Winslet/ Cate Blanchett not available? Or perhaps Vogue is trying to sell to a younger crowd by putting Blake Lively on the cover. After all, the country's going through a recession. And those tweens/teens will buy just about anything. Just look at the success/phenomenon of High School Musical and Hannah Montana. Whatever sells right?
The continuous (and increasingly irritating) downward spiral/downgrade of the (once) highly coveted fashion magazine once graced by models is causing fashion fans to question the credibility of the magazine and praise the Euro counterparts/publications. But honestly why? A different, possibly more open market/audience = better covers. better editorials. better content. period. (Exception to the recent Vogue Italia reject which was picked up by W)
People say the editorials by the Euro counterparts (esp. French and Italian Vogue) are edgy, risque, refreshing etc. And American Vogue? Boring, bland, dull. I say that French and Italian Vogue has better casting, better styling. They actually use models besides and/or who are not Caroline Trentini/Raquel Zimmermann/Natalia Vodianova while American Vogue has featured Trentini (usually jumping) one too many times. Are other models dead? Or are they not commercial enough? Couldn't Wintour get Hilary Rhoda/Doutzen Kroes or some other chick like that? Even Naomi Campbell (or any super) will be pretty exciting at this point.
Just look at these two simple editorials:
US Vogue
Vogue Paris
And though perhaps models are no longer relevant today, will putting a model on the cover of US Vogue really decrease sales of that particular issue? Do people really mind who they see on the cover? Why does it matter? Sure, covers are important as they give you an impression of the content so you have some expectation of the issue. But aren't they, the magazines, mostly available for browsing anyways? So why is it that other countries' Vogues can feature models on the cover? How can they survive?
One thing's probably for sure, it'll take a while before Anna Wintour (if she's still at reign) allows even just four of (the twelve) covers to feature model(s).
