This message has been deleted.
-
lavashop — 16 years ago(December 24, 2009 03:48 PM)
And fashion is entertainment. To be enjoyed.
If Anna hadn't done it first, subsequent new magazines like Style would have done it already too.
So she really had foresight in that regard.
Look, it's a pendulum.
It will swing one way and then the other. Don't worry.
The models will come back. -
Noir-It-All — 16 years ago(March 13, 2010 03:24 PM)
The Supermodels of the early '90's became bigger than the clothes. So, how could actresses and celebrities be bad for clothes? Also, many actresses started out as models.
Another point. Anna Wintour was the editor of House and Garden before becoming the editor of Vogue. Wintour's changes had a negative effect on the magazine (which I enjoyed) was criticized for featuring the homes of celebrities. "She put so much fashion in photo spreads that it became known as House & Garment, and enough celebrities that it was referred to as Vanity Chair, within the industry.
However, under her editorship of Vogue starting in 1989, the magazine renewed its focus on fashion and returned to the prominence it had held under Vreeland.
My point is, focusing on celebrities must have become more acceptable, even essential over the last 20 years. What was ahead of her time has become part of our time.
"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne -
lavashop — 16 years ago(December 24, 2009 03:45 PM)
No, sorry.
This, you would have to blame the new batch of models.
They are so without wit nor glamour.
They keep trying to push models on the covers but they lack personality and a backstory.
Only Giselle was any good and she came out close to a decade ago.
No one new is even remotely interesting.