Quote:
Originally Posted by Alien Sex Friend
You seriously think what another try to provoke or shock audience has a big idea under it? even contemporary art doesnt, and fashion is very deutero comparing even to art.in fact, it`s just another `variation` of nude covers in s/s 2010 to sell the magazine. yes it sounds corny as hell, but sex and scandal sell well
|
if you read my response (or lack of) to your post ASF you'd see that it wasn't meant to be taken seriously (sorry if there was a misunderstanding there). And if you read my previous posts, you'd see that I was one of those arguing that the cover image is all about visuals and totally superficial.
We're a fashion discussion forum though, so I don't see why we can't analyze images with the understanding that in the vernacular world they do have a lot of meaning, whether there's an intention by those creating it or not. We see hundreds of images daily and I'd say for the average person
at least a quarter of those images are product of the fashion world. I think it's important to be able to understand all types of images filtered into everyday society because they really do have that much of an impact on the way we live and think.
Yeah, you said it already-by speculating we've already given it most of it's power. But with it just being published and being exposed to the world, it has power on its on. (I may not make much sense at this point because it's totally a more broad subject i'm touching on, but yes I believe that these magazine EIC have a responsibility-and when you filter out more waste into public, it's up to those receiving it to decide what to do with it-you can dismiss it, ignore it or embrace it for what it could potentially mean-but don't think you aren't subject to it).
i hope that makes some sense, because it did in my head when i was typing it
