laura brown - Jezebel

posts about #laurabrown more →
So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

ragincajun67
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Whoa! I did not realize that image was the actual magazine cover. I thought it was just a photo y'all threw together to illustrate the post about the Naomi Wolf essay.

This is actually kind of a watershed moment, maybe akin to when outsider or grafitti art was first shown in a museum or some other collision of the "street" and the "academy." Interesting.
Reply

ragincajun67 was starred ragincajun67 was unstarred

katie.scarlett.o'hara
06/09/09

@ragincajun67: I think it's pretty intersting too...Elle had an editorial a few months back where the model was supposed to look like Nicole/Lindsay/Mary Kate being followed by the paparazzi, Starbucks in hand and all.
Reply

Tart of Darkness
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
I think it says something about us as a culture that celebs sell magazines no matter how overexposed and boring they are. And Angelie Jolie tends to look more or less the same in most photographs to me, anyhow. I know she's the world's hottest babe, but I think there are probably enough photos of her in People alone for every man alive today to masturbate to for the next 30 years and not get tired of looking at her.

Meanwhile, back at the fashion magazines...
Reply

Tart of Darkness was starred Tart of Darkness was unstarred

stew
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
geez, I think it's fairly progressive and kewl for Bazaar to use this style of shot. It's, to me, MUCH more interesting than a studio shot with its careful lighting and ridic photoshop (not that this hasn't been p-shopped). But it's sort of guerilla/docu-style and I think that's a super interesting and brave choice.

And having models on the cover isn't protecting the brand. What preceded "stars" being on covers was supermodels being on covers, and supermodels were just famous models. BORING! We spent a good long time worshipping the same faces not because they were interesting to photographers and made for interesting shoots but because they were big names. WAY before that was the whole era of good, interesting covers... but that was back right before Evangelista and her ilk converted models from photography subjects and workhorses to celebs.

So celebrity as cover model is nothing new, it's just non-model celebrities you're complaining about.

After a while, we'll cycle through this trend, too, and get back to, hopefully, interesting artistic treatments of unknowns and explorations of covers as photographic statements. I personally find this to be that. So yay.
Reply

stew was starred stew was unstarred

katie.scarlett.o'hara
06/09/09

@stew: I like it too. And whether the fashion industry likes it or not, what people buy and wear is more determined by what they see on celebrities, and not necessarily in fashion magazines.
Reply

MizJenkins
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Meh, she's as attractive as any model. Not to mention, how many times have we seen fashion editorial in which some angsty, leggy moddle pretends to be followed and filmed by the paparazzi?

It's not like they used a shot of Angelina coming out of the Quik-E-mart barefoot and yanking a wedgie.

I understand if people think she's over-exposed but I think the cover itself is pretty non-offensive.
Reply

MizJenkins was starred MizJenkins was unstarred

AuntieBee
06/09/09

@MizJenkins: I wouldn't call it offensive. The word that springs to mind for me is 'lazy'.
Reply

AuntieBee was starred AuntieBee was unstarred

MizJenkins
06/09/09

@AuntieBee: I guess...but really it's somewhere between this:

and this:

I mean, I guess I see your point but why stage a shoot if you've already got the shot? We are in a recession...

Reply

MizJenkins was starred MizJenkins was unstarred

Rare Affinity
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Go on to ebay and you can buy the exact same fashions shown in the 1867 eddition of Harpers and Bazarr. I had to force myself NOT to buy one such Victorian piece, even with the argument that the final price was comparable to a high street evening dress. I cannot see what Angelina is wearing but I know I would have to wait at least another 140 years before that too would fall within my price range.
Reply

Rare Affinity was starred Rare Affinity was unstarred

swashbuckling
06/09/09

@Rare Affinity: I know this knowledge will probably cripple me financially, but what kind of keywords would bring up those fashions?
Reply

swashbuckling was starred swashbuckling was unstarred

Rare Affinity
06/09/09

@swashbuckling:
Answer:#
# Vintage >
# Women's Vintage Clothing >
#
Pre-1901 (Victorian & Older
You still have five hours left to bid for an 1870s eyelet bodice tunic or one day to bid for an 1850s wedding gown (perhaps too retro for those hip 1870s Harper and Bazzar gals). See you in the bankruptcy courts!
Reply

Rare Affinity was starred Rare Affinity was unstarred

rednrowdy
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
I think a woman who manifests curiosity about being compelling and straddling all different worlds would be Angelina Jolie.

i think that whoever made this statement doesn't know many women at all.
Reply

rednrowdy was starred rednrowdy was unstarred

SomeAuthorGirl
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
The convergence of "fashion" with "celebrity" is no doubt to blame. For good or for ill, though in my opinion for ill.

As an aside, I would like to know the definition of "frug." There is a part of me that doesn't want to google it and spoil its mystery.
Reply

SomeAuthorGirl was starred SomeAuthorGirl was unstarred

Rare Affinity
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
If high fashion magazines are turning into low rent tabloid magazines, then a similar trend is happening in the UK with the traditional broadsheets turning into low rent tabloid newspapers, certainly in terms of their online content. They might like to mock Brangelina and reality television shows but they still write artciles about them so desperate are they to survive in a dwindling market and vicious circulation war.
Reply

Rare Affinity was starred Rare Affinity was unstarred

LaFemme
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Are people really curious about Angelina? I think the thread from a day or so ago would refute that assumption. If I buy Bazaar it is because I want to read about what is going on on the runways and find new ways to put together outfits, not read about some celebrity that is already everywhere.
Reply

LaFemme was starred LaFemme was unstarred

Mary McCarthyite
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
If Harper's put a photo of Angelina Jolie actually straddling the world, then they really might sell some magazines.
Reply

Mary McCarthyite was starred Mary McCarthyite was unstarred

returnofthemac
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Yesterday there was an article on the interwebs refering to this cover and the article within; They didn't interview Angie, they have a woman dissecting why all women "desire" and "covet" Angie even if only in their sub-concious.

hmmm not so much....
Reply

returnofthemac was starred returnofthemac was unstarred

Mary McCarthyite
06/09/09

@returnofthemac: Yeah, and then Jez dissected it: [jezebel.com]
Reply

Mary McCarthyite was starred Mary McCarthyite was unstarred

gherkinfiend
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
I stopped subscribing to or buying high fashion magazines once they started moving away from fashion to gossipy crap like this.

I used to work as make up artist and bought them to keep up with trends and for inspiration. No point now!
Reply

gherkinfiend was starred gherkinfiend was unstarred

lalaland13
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
I got a subscription to HB for $3. And well...it's probably worth about that much. God, I'm such a magazine whore.
Reply

lalaland13 was starred lalaland13 was unstarred

BabyJane
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
Am I to assume that a fashion spread featuring Kate Gosselin is next?
Reply

BabyJane was starred BabyJane was unstarred

hortense
06/09/09

@BabyJane: Kate + 8 Great Ways To Style Your Asymmetrical Hairdo For Fall!
Reply

hortense was starred hortense was unstarred

BabyJane
06/09/09

@hortense: It would be impossible to pass that issue up!
Reply

BabyJane was starred BabyJane was unstarred

Tart of Darkness
06/09/09

@hortense: Asymmetrical Hairdo goeth before the Fall.
Reply

Tart of Darkness was starred Tart of Darkness was unstarred

hortense
06/09/09

In reply to So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?
That really is an USWeekly-esque cover and I think it really does devalue the brand, if only because it renders the magazine indistinguishable from your standard checkout fare. Like you said, Dodai, fashion magazines should be about fashion, not about the Brangelina Triangle.
Reply

hortense was starred hortense was unstarred

greengrey
06/09/09

@hortense: It's really a shame that "fashion" magazines are hardly fashion magazines anymore.

Though I do really like Lucky/Allure. They don't seem to be as gossip-y or celebrity obsessed as the others.
Reply

greengrey was starred greengrey was unstarred

tscheese
06/09/09

@greengrey (is not a star!): I kind of don't mind Lucky and Allure because they're great airport reads and they don't make any pretentions about what they are.

Allure: Well, okay, we're not trying to save the planet or broker peace in the Middle East or make you feel bad about your carbon footprint...SO HAVE A LIPSTICK

Lucky: "IT PRITTY. BAI IT."

No muss, no fuss, no weird half-assed journalismism.
Reply

tscheese was starred tscheese was unstarred

hortense
06/09/09

@tscheese: I've always considered Lucky to be more of a shopping magazine than a fashion magazine (and I think they refer to themselves as such, no?).
Reply

hortense was starred hortense was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#laurabrown

Jezebel

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel

So Bazaar: Are High-Fashion Magazines Turning Into Low-Rent Tabloids?

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment