US Harper's Bazaar July 2009 : Angelina Jolie / Doutzen Kroes by Terry Richardson

[CocoW]

Originally Posted by mikel

Thanks for scanning. Both girls look very nice.


You can read the article on the HB site. A link was posted on the first page of this thread

Thank you I didn't see it there

[Kanna]

OMG, Doutzen's ed is boring as hell.. Bazaar has been so boring recently.

[Flashbang]

posted?

The July 2009 cover of Harper's Bazaar has become quite the controversary. The newstand cover features a paparazzi picture of Angelina Jolie, from a red carpet last December, pulled from a photo service, and there is no interview with the actress inside. The subscriber's cover, on the other hand, is a portrait of Doutzen Kroes taken by Terry Richardson, with an accompanying editorial inside.

Glenda Bailey writes in her editor's letter: "For a magazine, the best accessory is a beautiful woman on the cover. This month, we have two." Her readers seem to disagree — the Angelina cover has caused an uproar. As Fashionista puts it: "Bazaar is meant to be one of our venerable American fashion magazines. And this reeks of tabloids more than fashion." A chorus of comparisons to Grazia, InTouch Weekly, and US Weekly from various fashion outlets chime in.


Granted, Steven Meisel did a paparazzi-shot cover of Nicole Richie for Vogue Italia in October 2006, but it was a cultural satire; The Bazaar cover seems "an obvious sales ploy," according to Fashionista, and has people wondering why they didn't have Angelina sit for a shoot — is money really so tight that a studio shoot couldn't be done and no actress could be found to do the honors?


In Glenda Bailey's editor's letter, she applauds Doutzen — "a model whose face is definitely one to watch. It would be no surprise to me if she became one of the top models of our time" — which leaves many wondering, with the Doutzen cover produced in true Bazaar spirit, why it wasn't used for the newstand, too.

fashionologie

[mikel]

^thanks for posting. I was wondering what Glenda would say in the editor's letter.

[Label Basher]

Originally Posted by WerbowyStegner

Angelina looks STUNNING . and guys dont you think your getting dramatic about .. a magazine cover o.o'

That's what we do here. EVERY SINGLE ISSUE

[retailqueen]

The editorial is lazy a shell; so I'm not buying the whole Angie is inspiring (which I don't even agree with ). IMo it's the recession and maybe it was cheaper to use a rehashed picture than to call Angie for a proper photoshoot?

[clo]

Thanks, fer19dog for scanning Maryna and Yulia's ed. I've just given you karma for that.
Despite being a simple studio shot with a white background, I actually like it. Both girls look great in it.

[BerlinRocks]

i'm not sure the whole problem really stands in the suscribers/newsstands covers ...
but mostly in the "evaluation" of paparazzi shots ... what sort of things are they ?! rubbish ? kitsch ? ..... art ?

i remember W published Richard Prince candids portraits ... It was already a sort of 'controversy', but not that much as they were signed Richard Prince - was it Richard Prince, by the way ?

i remember Meisel already worked on this subject (not only with Nicole Richie red carpet but also with Hollywood issue) ... though Meisel placed the subject as a social satire, I always thought he also considered the photography and photographer role as an artist or simply an 'amateur' (basically anybody can become a paparazzi, while it's supposed tougher to be an 'artist-photographer') ...

I don't know if HB really thought about all these things ... But that questions fashion photography ...

on another note ... Don't the Fashion Labels take soooo much attention to celebs on redcarpert because it's 'free' publicity in the tabloids ??? why a shot couldn't be considered a fashion shot for a fashion magazine ?


thanks to tigerrouge for scanning this Diana cover ! Love it !

[fer19dog]

US Harper's Bazaar July 09
"Fashion Takes Flight"
Model: Heidi Mount
Ph: peter Lindbergh



scanned by me

[Carla-A]

It's the second time that Peter Lindbergh photographs Heidi, and I think their collaboration is quite interesting. I don't really like that girl, her face is pretty odd, but here, I say "why not ?". Really like the third photo.

[Alien Sex Friend]

^I think shes a copy of Stam,thats the reason why Lindbergh loves her- he adores jessica

[lucy92]

i think any angelina fan is going to buy the magazine only to throw it down in disgust. it has no new information about angelina. its just a hagiographic essay.

its already on the newsstand here. i flipped through it and the whole magazine is rather meager.

5 years ago, jane magazine put angelina on its cover (and there was no story on her inside) as she had won a poll about cover stars. that feels more honest than this HB misstep.

[iluvjeisa]

Well, the Lindbergh story is high quality - that's nice to see. Thank you fer19dog

[Harumi]

HB keep putting out statements to justify their f*ckery.

Harper's Bazaar's official stance on their July 2009 cover fiasco? "In a recent Bazaar.com poll," explains a Bazaar spokesperson, "Our readers told us they are completely fascinated by Angelina Jolie. For us, it's about giving readers what they want, when they want it, so we contacted Naomi Wolf to explain the Angelina phenomenon. Her conclusion — that women not only want to be Angelina, but sleep with her, too — got all of us talking, and we decided to publish it immediately as our newsstand cover story for July. Harper's Bazaar innovated the two-cover concept in 2001, so for our subscribers, who desire a more fashion-forward image, we've got the next great supermodel, Doutzen Kroes, shot for us by Terry Richardson. Either way, the reader wins."

Amazing!

So based on some online poll nobody heard off they decided that women really, really wanted to shag Angelina so the only possible action was to buy a pap shot and get an 'intellectual' to write a fangirl article about that obscure object of desire because that's what HB readers want. RIGH NOW.

I find it amazing that they don't even pretend it's some kind of edgy concept or try and blame budget cut. They just outward admit they just wanted to cash in as quickly as possible on the current media obsession. They just give a big middle finger to their reader without a care in the world.
Whoever said a Jon & Kate cover is next was probably actually right.

PS: thank god the contents are rubbish.

[iluvjeisa]

^Yeah, this would only be acceptable if they also produced some artwork with what the women wanted to do while in bed with Angelina.