American Vogue - Passé?

[KoV]

As someone who's lived in New York for only some of the time I've been reading Vogue, I don't think it's essential, or really impacts my enjoyment of it. Rarely does Vogue shed light on something New York-specific that I didn't already know about and convince me to go experience it. I think it's more about the cultural experience of being the kind of woman who is ideal for Vogue (in a general sort of a way) and so the people who are that woman probably aren't learning anything new from those articles, it's just cementing those things as fashionable. For example, if you go to see some great exhibit or eat at a new restaurant and then read about it in Vogue, it makes you feel like you're on the ball. And if you're not one of those woman and you're living in a small town, well I think if you're reading Vogue there's a good chance you'll find those articles interesting because they help capture the zeitgeist of a specific culture of well-to-do Metropolitan women who dress well, eat well, see everything interesting, etc. It's fun to do those things, but it's also fun to read about them and dream about being someone who does those things. I think Vogue is kind of old fashion in that way, actually, and I like that about them. It kind of provides context (as I think another poster said) to that world. Because you can't just wear beautiful clothes, you need to have a life to match it.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ But is the life Vogue describes really a beautiful life? I read other magazines that I think do a much better job of that.

Perhaps my real problem is I don't think I need a magazine to tell me how life should be lived.

 

[KoV]

Well I certainly don't live a Vogue lifestyle, but I think it's something many women aspire to. And to me it always seemed appropriate for a magazine like Vogue to have a certain outlook, to promote certain designers, to promote a certain lifestyle. It all seems a part of the brand. I think when you read Vogue you know what you're getting and based on their sales, I think people seem to like what they're getting.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ Wal-mart has a lot of customers too (and I am not one of them). Maybe it's not that Wal-mart [Vogue] is everything they want it to be, but that it's all they've got?

I agree that Vogue should have a perspective and a brand. I don't know if I think it's their job to 'promote a certain lifestyle' ... I just find it all a bit narrow-minded.

 

[KoV]

Well I don't think they do promote it to an obnoxious extent or to a point where they exclude others, but that's just how I see it. I understand your point.

 

[LabelWhore4]

^ Wal-mart has a lot of customers too (and I am not one of them). Maybe it's not that Wal-mart [Vogue] is everything they want it to be, but that it's all they've got?

I agree that Vogue should have a perspective and a brand. I don't know if I think it's their job to 'promote a certain lifestyle' ... I just find it all a bit narrow-minded.

Vogue doesn't need to be and can't be just fashion anymore. The internet took care of that. People don't need to be formally introduced to collections anymore because they can see them right after the shows if they're interested. They are buying Vogue not only for their suggestions on key pieces of the season, but also where to be seen in them. They are providing articles that women of a certain moneyed set, on both coasts, would read and relate to. So yes, they do need to promote a certain lifestyle just like the brands that advertise in their magazine. Like I've said many times before, Vogue is business first, fashion second.

Also, some say that they are too NYC-centric. That is plainly untrue to anyone who actually reads the articles. They focus on American markets that support the luxury clothing industry. I've seen articles on boutiques, salons, spas, restaurants, and country clubs in cities like Chicago, LA, Houston, Miami, Seattle, Boston, DC, Charlotte, and San Francisco on a regular basis (aka every issue). They are NYC based so of course that is their main playground. The same can be said of all the major Vogues. So, as an American reader I think our Vogue is right on track and imo the best of all. I mean, its not supposed to be relatable to 98% of the readers but its most certainly aspirational. I Wintour!

 

[wild roses]

Not to mention Vogue has never been solely about fashion. I found this when persuring Reading Jackie (about Jackie O's editing career "Vogue in the 1940s and 50s was a more serious magazine than it is today. It published all the heavyweights of writing, fine art, and photography worlds."

And, indeed, if you pull out photography books on the old high society society socialites-the ones that celebrate their lifestyles--you'll see pics of their home and the interior design within, and see where the pictures first appeared, it will say "photographer, fashion magazine." And usually that magazine is Vogue or Harper's Bazaar's.

I also would love to know where this "Vogue is NYC-centric" idea is coming from. I've yet to see an issue that only Manhattan-centric. Take the current issue. Jeffrey S.'s food article is about Southern food and small towns, a reporter talks about being at a spa in Brazil, Olivia Wilde's bag is profiled for how it helps out Haiti (and her love the of the culture there), Kate Upton talks about her Florida upbringing and how it influences her style, the perfume article is about the creator's world travel's and how it has influenced the scents. Previous issues have covered locations like China, California, Colorado, etc.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Vogue doesn't need to be and can't be just fashion anymore. The internet took care of that. People don't need to be formally introduced to collections anymore because they can see them right after the shows if they're interested. They are buying Vogue not only for their suggestions on key pieces of the season, but also where to be seen in them. They are providing articles that women of a certain moneyed set, on both coasts, would read and relate to. So yes, they do need to promote a certain lifestyle just like the brands that advertise in their magazine. Like I've said many times before, Vogue is business first, fashion second.

Also, some say that they are too NYC-centric. That is plainly untrue to anyone who actually reads the articles. They focus on American markets that support the luxury clothing industry. I've seen articles on boutiques, salons, spas, restaurants, and country clubs in cities like Chicago, LA, Houston, Miami, Seattle, Boston, DC, Charlotte, and San Francisco on a regular basis (aka every issue). They are NYC based so of course that is their main playground. The same can be said of all the major Vogues. So, as an American reader I think our Vogue is right on track and imo the best of all. I mean, its not supposed to be relatable to 98% of the readers but its most certainly aspirational. I Wintour!

Incorrect. I read just about every word of the magazine when I subscribed to it. It is absolutely New York-centric. I am not saying they mention and cover no other locations. But the clear implication is that NYC is the center of the universe. (I believe this is not strictly true.)

I read the other major US fashion magazines, and IMO they avoid these flaws with no problem. Somehow Vogue has a certain arrogant self-consciousness that the other magazines manage to avoid completely.

Newsflash ... Vogue, you are not all that.

I support their right to appeal to the shallowest common denominator ... just not with my money.

 

[PROPERMENTAL]

Waking up this conversation because it irks me every time I see youtube suggest that video of Anna saying 'to be in VOGUE has to mean something'
Ok ok, I get it, it's about business with Anna - we all get it, loud and clear: it's about business! Labels buy the add-space that keep the magazine afloat (and by doing that they also buy the magazines view on that label/designer, thus the fashion critic stops to exist; in which we already are in a weird place with creativity and art because paintings, plays, music and movies continue being critiqued) But what does VOGUE become then? A fancy ad-catalog? (Let's not kid ourselves I bought the September issue for 5 years, it so is an ad-catalog.)
To be fair, it is if nothing, truly reflective of America today. America is commercial, America is celebrities, Americas clothing design is not new or creative, so yes it's very much in conversation with USA today. But I wish that to be in VOGUE would actually have to mean something other than being Paris Hilton's assistant, doing a sextape and having relations with Kanye. Seriously Anna, seriously? This will put you on the cover?
But the whole new 'Anna Wintour Costume Center' reminds me of the stepping down project of another famous editor in chief (Vreeland), so maybe something is sizzling underneath the surface...
Conversation?

 

[AshaAndriana]

I have had a strong dislike for American Vogue for years because of their lack of individuality and creativity. Vogue used to mean a lot for a lot of people but threw the years I have seen the brand diminish when it comes to showing how artistic clothing can be. To me Anna is far past her prime and it would be greatly appreciated if Vogue could shake things up a bit. When I read Vogue as opposed to Elle, Marie Claire, V, Nylon, etc i am not inspired or intrigued by any means. Anna putting Kim on the cover just shows how much things at that publication needs to change. Because of the way the fashion industry is now, we don't need exclusivity we need inspiration.

 

[arlekindearrabal]

Waking up this conversation because it irks me every time I see youtube suggest that video of Anna saying 'to be in VOGUE has to mean something'
Ok ok, I get it, it's about business with Anna - we all get it, loud and clear: it's about business! Labels buy the add-space that keep the magazine afloat (and by doing that they also buy the magazines view on that label/designer, thus the fashion critic stops to exist; in which we already are in a weird place with creativity and art because paintings, plays, music and movies continue being critiqued) But what does VOGUE become then? A fancy ad-catalog? (Let's not kid ourselves I bought the September issue for 5 years, it so is an ad-catalog.)
To be fair, it is if nothing, truly reflective of America today. America is commercial, America is celebrities, Americas clothing design is not new or creative, so yes it's very much in conversation with USA today. But I wish that to be in VOGUE would actually have to mean something other than being Paris Hilton's assistant, doing a sextape and having relations with Kanye. Seriously Anna, seriously? This will put you on the cover?
But the whole new 'Anna Wintour Costume Center' reminds me of the stepping down project of another famous editor in chief (Vreeland), so maybe something is sizzling underneath the surface...
Conversation?

Completely agree. Also, Wintour's recent promotion to Editorial Director for the whole of Conde Nast. I think it's too much, coupled with the editorship of Vogue, for one person, no matter how hard-working. I would love to see someone like Tonne Goodman give it a go as EIC.