Vogue US, Steven Meisel, Camilla Nickerson, Audrey Marnay
I don't really like Steven Meisel's work, I'm not sure why, I find him quite harsh as a photographer. I prefer - have always preferred - Arthur Elgort and Bruce Weber and Tim Walker and Paolo Roversi; fashion as fantasy and a world of play. But this is one of those Steven Meisel editorials that I can get behind. Probably because the subject matter is so fantastic. Who doesn't love those models-off-duty editorials which are so deliciously staged? Who doesn't love poking around downtown New York (although I have to say, that prim and proper red suit and black courts is pretty uptown to me)? It's actually less about Steven Meisel than it is about this particular time in Vogue US's long and diverse history. The 1990s were the heyday of Vogue America, the time where the models had names - "Seventeen-year-old Audrey gets off to a good start in a cream funnel-neck sweater" - and the clothes were straight up and down and no-nonsense and circulation was on a stratospheric rise. Celebrities were beaming from the covers, Irving Penn was shooting still life and Christy, Kate and Claudia were laughing on the pages like they were getting paid $10 000 a day to do it. I still buy Vogue US now because there is the promise of this time. Here and there are glimmers of models with personalities - Kate Upton, Lara Stone - and shoots that are no-nonsense, no worries, no hard feelings. Just pretty girls having a good time and looking great as they do it.
I think that is the real beauty of American Vogue. Unlike some of the other Vogues they don't take themselves too seriously and they don't view fashion as one big progressive S&M orgy. Sometimes it is just about something fun to wear. It might not be like that right now, but if you look hard enough you can see hints of it, here and there, and the promise that it will return to the glory days of Calvin Klein and Donna Karan and film photography and grainy shots and bright young things with clear skin and big eyes prancing around New York (or paris!) like they own it. It's so much more aspirational because it's almost, almost, almost within reach (which is kind of the point, no?). I don't care what anyone says, Anna Wintour runs a bloody tight ship. I love American Vogue. I'm just not too keen on Steven Meisel...
X
7 comments:
Completely agree. I wish I had saved my US Vogue issues from the 1990s instead of getting rid of them (moving across continents does have its cons!).
You know what's really great about this editorial? You could take any of these outfits and wear them today and you wouldn't look at all out of place. That's the thing about great design, it manages to reflect its era and yet, it has a 'forever' quality.
Despite how is actually downtownor uptown, I always like editorial with daily activity concept. The simplicity of the outfit stands out in the scene. By the way, you have interesting point of view, i just found your blog and I like it. Following you.
I agree. I've seen this editorial on several blogs that I read over the past week- which just goes to show how timeless it is. That's pretty amazing when you think that it's from the 90s and still seems so relevant. Audrey Marnay looks so fresh faced- such good beauty inspiration too.
Steven Meisel (Particularly newer Steven Meisel) can be harsh but I've always admired his ability to spot those faces that go onto become it girls. More than any other photographer he's just able to see that special spark.
I still have my archive of American Vogues- they're so entertaining and fun to look at. They really make me realize how much in a very short time NY has changed. As for AW I really admire what she does and feel like every young woman should have the opportunity to work with someone like that.
That first image, in the top left corner, is perfection.
http://thezerowinter.blogspot.com
I love the way you write x
I loooove the 90s power woman vibe to this whole shoot.
It's so unusual, looks gorgeous on you! Xx
Post a Comment