"Did she fling her arms in the air, too, Vogue? Because limb amputation sounds almost as painful as reading that sentence!) "
*snerk* ILU just for this, Jenna.
Something that I will never understand from an intellectual standpoint is how designers, photographers, editors and stylists who have been working since the 80s/90s, maybe even before, can look at a woman built like Lara and dismiss her as being too big, when a mere 15 years ago, they were using women of her size routinely. The super-skinny craze is relatively new. So are these people so fickle, shallow and near-sighted that they are unaware of their own hypocrasy, or are they just plain stupid? Cindy Crafford, Linda Evangelista, Claudia Schiffer et al. were never as small as most models today, and actually, they were much older as well.
The fetishization of extreme skinniness and youth is, in my opinion, one of the more unsavory hallmarks of the aughts. And it isn't even limited to the fashion world. Actresses have drastically lost weight over the decade, musicians have been pressured to maintain a certain body-type, and the list goes on.
@Tchotchke: For me, it proves herd mentality exists everywhere.
And frankly, these designers are just fucking LAZY. I've said before that the clothes should fit the person, not the other way around.
The "person-fits-the-clothes" mentality is demeaning and unrealistic, and it allows designers the deluded luxury of believing their commodities are artistic first, and functional a distant second.
Yeesh. If we keep going in this same direction, in ten years we'll have 0.0001% of the population wearing nothing but Prada and Chanel, and the remaining 99.9999% in Old Navy.
One more thing to add that I would be more impressed by diversity of proportions. Skinny or "plus sized" the models always have near perfect proportions. It'd be interesting to see a model with no tits and an ample ass, absolutely no waist whatsoever or super broad shoulders.
@Penny: I saw a model with no tits and an ample ass once in Sassy in the late 1980's/ early 1990's. Seriously. I still remember everything about it because it was so unusual (and awesomely reassuring to a teen girl) to see a model with that shape featured in a multi-page spread.
How sad is that? It's like seeing an endangered species.
@Penny: You know, you'd be surprised how many models do have odd proportions. You can all have the same measurements — 34"-24"-24", if we're talking straight-size models — and be put together in a remarkably varied number of ways. I knew really broad-shouldered models, long-waisted models, models with narrow but deep rib cages, models with short legs and long torsos.
Not all of them did runway — for those jobs, the standards were refined down to the last quarter-inch, because of the structural constraints in the samples and the turnaround time of the whole production — but I was always surprised by everyone's physical quirks.
The odd thing is that most of the time, magazines don't want to show that. The short-legged girls are told only to pose with their toes extended, leg out towards the camera, so that the line of the leg reads as long. The stylist doesn't put the girl with the swimmer's body in the halter neck top, because it makes her shoulders look too broad. So many of the decisions that get made in fashion tend toward the flattening of whatever physical differences do survive the threshing machine of having to size down to the same set of measurements. I always thought that was dumb.
She's 5'7"??? I had no idea! Now that makes me feel a bit better about my own body (sorry, I've always idolized models, hate on if you must).
It is interesting how measurements vary so little and still result in a different looking shape.
I have always maintained that Stone is curvy, because she has...curves. There are larger women who don't have curves, and skinny women who do. It's not weight-related, in my mind.
Although I do understand that "curvy" in fashion is code for "fatter than usual," which stinks.
@Penny: Thank you. I too am very literal about the word "curves" and so many people use it the other way. I made the mistake of calling a girlfriend curvy and everyone jumped on me, "What are you talking about! She's so tiny, are you blind!" like i had mortally insulted her.
@Pantra: My ex (who is a very nice guy) once described me as "curvy" and I had to explain to him that that's code for "fat," and please don't describe me that way to people who don't already know what I look like. I don't know why I cared, in retrospect, but I'm probably saving his future girlfriends from being insulted on accident!
@Irin: i thot that was odd, too, and i didn't get it either. but apparently anna W appreciated sienna M's astounding performance as edie sedgwick in 2006 movie 'factory girl' and realized
her immense potential as
an actor and fashion person
both.
All this Jane and Sassy talk in the comments has made me think of that parody Daria did of Jane Pratt. I'm having a crap of a time finding it online, unfortunately. It was pretty damn funny.
Drew Barrymore and her relentless avalanche of twee "I'm relatable" bullshit always seems desperate to me. Which is a shame because she's one of the few people actually working on raising the profile of women in Hollywood so really I should be one of her allies.
@PaigeTurner: I foresee a young Suri Cruise making appearances towards the end of the decade. That child is gorgeous and will no doubt find her way into acting or modeling in some capacity.
12/18/09
*snerk* ILU just for this, Jenna.
12/18/09
[4.bp.blogspot.com]
WHAT!?@
12/18/09
12/18/09
The fetishization of extreme skinniness and youth is, in my opinion, one of the more unsavory hallmarks of the aughts. And it isn't even limited to the fashion world. Actresses have drastically lost weight over the decade, musicians have been pressured to maintain a certain body-type, and the list goes on.
12/18/09
And frankly, these designers are just fucking LAZY. I've said before that the clothes should fit the person, not the other way around.
The "person-fits-the-clothes" mentality is demeaning and unrealistic, and it allows designers the deluded luxury of believing their commodities are artistic first, and functional a distant second.
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
How sad is that? It's like seeing an endangered species.
12/18/09
Not all of them did runway — for those jobs, the standards were refined down to the last quarter-inch, because of the structural constraints in the samples and the turnaround time of the whole production — but I was always surprised by everyone's physical quirks.
The odd thing is that most of the time, magazines don't want to show that. The short-legged girls are told only to pose with their toes extended, leg out towards the camera, so that the line of the leg reads as long. The stylist doesn't put the girl with the swimmer's body in the halter neck top, because it makes her shoulders look too broad. So many of the decisions that get made in fashion tend toward the flattening of whatever physical differences do survive the threshing machine of having to size down to the same set of measurements. I always thought that was dumb.
12/18/09
[jessicahart.net]
12/18/09
It is interesting how measurements vary so little and still result in a different looking shape.
I have always maintained that Stone is curvy, because she has...curves. There are larger women who don't have curves, and skinny women who do. It's not weight-related, in my mind.
Although I do understand that "curvy" in fashion is code for "fatter than usual," which stinks.
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/17/09
Also, that W cover of Paltrow looks NOTHING like her.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
her immense potential as
an actor and fashion person
both.
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
But I just can't.
12/17/09
Really surprised by Renee Z.'s total. Does she have a secret cult following?
Any guesses for the next decade's top cover models?
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09
12/17/09