Magazines
July 5th 2009 03:40
I was reading this Marie Claire for this month (August issue, with Cameron Diaz on the cover) and came across this, in the letter from the editor:
"On a practical note, clothes photograph better on sample size models."
...
Really?
I suppose designer sample sizes might photograph better on sample sized models, considering most designer clothing is tiny and most high fashion models are tiny. But all clothes in general? I mean, seriously?
I used to read Cosmopolitan and Cleo when I was younger. I don't read them anymore, as I feel I'm out of their age bracket, and I got annoyed with the constant sex tips that were rehashed every month. But the one thing I really enjoyed about both magazines was their use of everyday women. Short, tall, skinny, fat, black, white and everything in between -- there seemed to be some diversity in body shapes, sizes and ethnicities within the pages of these magazines.
I do enjoy reading Marie Claire -- I like the mix of fashion and serious issues and most of the editorials please me on a visual level. But I have to say, the excuse that fashion is aspirational and people prefer to see clothing on sample sized models is a load of horseshit to me.
You know what I want to see? Awesome clothing on a body shape like mine. That's aspirational to me. I'd like to imagine what I'd look like in the clothing featured within the pages of a magazine, and the easiest way for me to do this is for there to be a model with a similar shape, modelling the clothing featured.
I know it's not entirely the fault of the magazine industry, nor is it entirely the fault of the clothing industry. But seriously? Something has gotta give. Something has to change.
I will keep buying the magazines, because I am easily distracted by shiny, pretty things that I'd have to mortgage a house to afford. I like to look at and enjoy beautiful things. But I will also keep pushing for change within the pages of these magazines.
"On a practical note, clothes photograph better on sample size models."
...
Really?
I suppose designer sample sizes might photograph better on sample sized models, considering most designer clothing is tiny and most high fashion models are tiny. But all clothes in general? I mean, seriously?
I used to read Cosmopolitan and Cleo when I was younger. I don't read them anymore, as I feel I'm out of their age bracket, and I got annoyed with the constant sex tips that were rehashed every month. But the one thing I really enjoyed about both magazines was their use of everyday women. Short, tall, skinny, fat, black, white and everything in between -- there seemed to be some diversity in body shapes, sizes and ethnicities within the pages of these magazines.
I do enjoy reading Marie Claire -- I like the mix of fashion and serious issues and most of the editorials please me on a visual level. But I have to say, the excuse that fashion is aspirational and people prefer to see clothing on sample sized models is a load of horseshit to me.
You know what I want to see? Awesome clothing on a body shape like mine. That's aspirational to me. I'd like to imagine what I'd look like in the clothing featured within the pages of a magazine, and the easiest way for me to do this is for there to be a model with a similar shape, modelling the clothing featured.
I know it's not entirely the fault of the magazine industry, nor is it entirely the fault of the clothing industry. But seriously? Something has gotta give. Something has to change.
I will keep buying the magazines, because I am easily distracted by shiny, pretty things that I'd have to mortgage a house to afford. I like to look at and enjoy beautiful things. But I will also keep pushing for change within the pages of these magazines.
| 69 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Kath
When I see clothes that fit a body like mine, I really want to buy them. When I see them on another tall, uber-thin girl with all her "flaws" airbrushed out, I want to buy vodka.
I wish fashion mags would understand that.
Comment by lilacsigil
Comment by Sonya
No More Mumus
lilacsigil: I've seen that argument before as well. I think Too Fat for Fashion wrote something on fashion illustration and the use of very tall and thin sketches. I don't get it! I want to see what the clothes look like on women, not girls. I am not a teenager anymore, I don't want to look like one either. I get that most fashion in mags is a fantasy thing, but I guess I'd like some reality in my fashions, as well as my features.
Comment by lilacsigil
I think it was Too Fat for Fashion (or maybe Big Fat Blog?) that said not even fashion models look like fashion models, so it's not even the fantasy of being thin, it's completely bizarre.
Comment by Sonya
No More Mumus
I know it was definitely one of them that said that, because that quote is sounding very familiar.
Comment by Sonya
No More Mumus
Comment by Frances
I love buying fash mags, but I'm at the point where I can't fit into anything featured in their pages.
Comment by Sonya
No More Mumus
Me too. It's very frustrating.