fashionista modernity. The founding
principles of its editors, writers and above
all photographers over the past 100 years
have won the respect of even Britain’s
arbiters of culture.
London’s National Portrait Gallery, no
less, is celebrating the magazine’s century
of style, in a major retrospective exhibition
of work produced for British Vogue.
Current editor Alexandra Shulman,
who was appointed in 1992, has no doubts
about the enormous impact Vogue has had
on popular culture. She say it has shaped
popular perceptions of what beauty is.
But Shulman is also well aware of the
widening controversy over the obsession of
fashion designers – and magazines – with
stick-thin models. But she believes the fashionista moguls are open to change.
Shulman has recently launched the
Health Initiative, a six-point pact between
the editors of the 19 international editions,
‘‘
It was also
ok for Jerry Hall’s
buttocks to peep out
aimed at encouraging a healthier approach
to body image within the industry.
The aim is to encourage designers to
“consider the consequences of unrealistically
small sample sizes of their clothing, which
encourage the use of extremely thin models”.
So, is the industry finally taking
acknowledging they’re selling not only
clothes, but also a cultural image of some
idealized version of body beauty?
We’re not taking responsibility for it,”
Shulman says firmly. “We’re saying we
realise we’re in a powerful position and we
can do something about it.”
And in defence of Vogue, Shulman
points out that over the years the magazine
has featured a wide variety of women as
cover girl. They include ultra-slim supermodel Kate Moss, in a Versace dress that
was as skimpy as it was tight-fitting.
But there have been many who were
not professional models – people like
film stars and singers. “There’s Scarlett
Johansson in vintage Prada – you see ‘real
people’, as opposed to models who don’t fit
sample-size clothes,” says Shulman.
And she’s been campaigning since
2009 for larger sample sizes, even writing
a forceful letter to major international designers complaining that their tiny designs
were forcing editors to shoot clothes on
models with “no breasts or hips”.
But Vogue too, it seems, is still willing
to buy into some ideal body image.
Witness the photo of Adele – the world’s
richest female singer – published on the
magazine’s cover last October.
“How typical of Vogue, they shoot
Adele and only show a head shot,” says
fashion journalist Liz Jones. “ It’s true –
bloggers were disgusted that they hid her
size-16 body.”
Liz, who had a lengthy career writing
about fashion, has been collecting issues of
the magazine since 1977. She remembers
every single cover, all used as a barometer
against which to judge herself.
She always came up inadequate
compared to the cover girls. Just as other
women must have done over 100 years of
the magazine’s airbrushed beauty. “I wasted my life emulating women who don’t
really exist,” she recalls ruefully.
No doubt the ideal beauty that Vogue
has portrayed over 100 years has altered
significantly. But this shift in emphasis
is noticeably missing from the National Portrait Gallery exhibition. Barbara
Goalen, the Kate Moss of her day, resembles an old woman by today’s standards.
However, back in the Fifties, Barbara
Goalen was considered the ‘it girl’. It was
also ok back then for Jerry Hall’s buttocks
to peep out from her C&A costume. But no
such imperfections would be allowed today.
As far as Shulman is concerned, those
who criticise what the magazine stands for
are wrong. “I see no reason why it is in any
way negative to portray a world that allows
people to dream and indulge,” she says.
“The Vogue filter is optimistic and
inclined towards beauty, elegance and high
style, but that is the point of us.
“We allow people to indulge in a
world that is not necessarily their own but
something they enjoy looking at.” n
23