Muse #29 Spring 2012 : Kate Upton

[loladonna]

I think Sandra Dee had more "angles" in her face. Her face was longer and the light just embraced her.
Kate has a very small and round face. Almost childish. I don't find her feminine but childish or even teen-looking.

And I don't see this "trend" for angular faces as having just 10 years. 25 years minimum. And don't make me even start with Cathee Dahmen or Veruschka.

She has more of a Barbara Minty vibe for me... and even Barbara had some angles!

I think young Sandra Dee had quite the round baby face

rjmantiques.com

 

[Vladita]

Aymeline blew me away!

 

[cologne_rocks]

I wouldn't say that the negative response on this Kate is due to a lack of prominent bone structure, oversized t*ts or her physical presence in general. You know, she's beautiful.... In the most obvious, plain manner. But she simply can't model. With 4 years of experience in the business a model should be able to show different expressions and play with different types of body language... All that our beloved darling does is continuously giving the "seduce me" stare (and not even perfectly) coupled with an absolutely overstated body language. I just had a look at her book, there's not one shot that she works out perfectly in terms of expressions and body language (other than the bikini shots which certainly don't focus on expressions, anyways). The photographs in Muse aren't exactly bad, but Sebastian Faena made it very easy for Kate (who does the typical cliche poses again) photoshopping her beyond recognition.
VS girls like Candice or Marloes can easily photograph cheaply too, but they make it with more "spice" in their eyes and it's only a little part of their expressional versatility.... They are more cosmopolitan and inapproachable, somehow.
Kate may be good at selling magazines and I'm sure she isn't as stupid as she acts, but she can't sell vision and remains a lust object rather than a muse.

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

Yes, when I say presence, I don't mean you would ignore her down the street but I meant in her photos there nothing there but just a pretty girl. She isn't the only model who I have pointed this out about. Toni, Lais, Denisa, and many others just bring nothing to the camera and Toni after how many seasons is finally getting it.

People are so quick to take offence to someone that people dislike and defend her when clearly this girl's look is so dated and plain jane (her body is amazing though), but I could care less who was on the cover of MUSE it's $25 in the states so I don't believe i'll ever be purchasing it. This issue is quite lackluster with Izabel's ed looking like all of her recent eds, Kristina's is a wannabe Natasa V. or Hannelore ed, and I kind of only like Toni and Kendra's.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I think Sandra Dee had more "angles" in her face. Her face was longer and the light just embraced her.
Kate has a very small and round face. Almost childish. I don't find her feminine but childish or even teen-looking.

And I don't see this "trend" for angular faces as having just 10 years. 25 years minimum. And don't make me even start with Cathee Dahmen or Veruschka.

She has more of a Barbara Minty vibe for me... and even Barbara had some angles!

Or for that matter, Nefertiti. This is not about the angular face being a new ideal. It's been an ideal for a long time. But there have been parallel ideals as well - one of those being of the soft feminine face. Like that of Olive Thomas or Lillian Gish. And Sherilynn Fenn. I'd say that ideal has all but vanished the last 10-15 years....with a slight come back with Gemma et al some 7-5 years ago. And let me tell you - that had nothing to do with swimsuit trends.

 

[AD011620]

I have not even heard about Kate before... and let's face it her cover is the best and looks more like a finished work and not just another take... like the other two...
Her editorial is beautiful... whatever people say... what is this classist attitude? Who cares about classes?
Iza's editorial is more vulgar as far as I am concerned... nothing wrong with this either...
It is such a cliché that only t*tless or androgynous girls can do acceptable nudes...
Fashion should be a hub for exploring diversity, variety, etc... There should be something for everyone...

 

[loladonna]

I have not even heard about Kate before... and let's face it her cover is the best and looks more like a finished work and not just another take... like the other two...
Her editorial is beautiful... whatever people say... what is this classist attitude? Who cares about classes?
Iza's editorial is more vulgar as far as I am concerned... nothing wrong with this either...
It is such a cliché that only t*tless or androgynous girls can do acceptable nudes...
Fashion should be a hub for exploring diversity, variety, etc... There should be something for everyone...

Well said!

People espouse the high fashion ideology without realizing how they've been indoctrinated over the years to reject diverse types of beauty. The only reason you think certain models are "high fashion" versus others is because the industry keeps choosing those models to photograph. There is absolutely no reason why other body types and shapes can't be high fashion other than the industry not allowing them to be by excluding them.

 

[Prairie]

I swear they could use Andrej Pejic, and he would look the same.

 

[kokobombon]

^except one is a curvaceous woman with big breasts and the other is a lanky boy, right?

 

[Prairie]

^except one is a curvaceous woman with big breasts and the other is a lanky boy, right?

Nobody cares, right? At least, in the world of fashion.

I just meant that I was a bit confused when I saw the cover cause I thought it was Andrej.

 

[tarsha]

Ginta Lapina by Benjamin Lennox

Laura Neiva, Eloisa Fontes, Marina Nerry, Renata Sozzi, Luana Aquino, Layla Motta, Luiza Rosas, Priscila Uchoa by David Mushegain

musemagazine.it

 

[hfgl]

The Izabel ed still has me laughing. So unsexy. I have found myself having a crush on Kate Upton, and i ain't ashamed to say so. I hope to see her in Vogue soon. That's right i said it.

 

[masquerade]

I hate that "high fashion" has come to mean very little trace of actual femininity and that the first response to seeing a woman with naturally large breasts is that she is "vulgar" somehow. Kate's SI cover was tacky due to the pose and too-small swimwear. Her cover here is actually nice and restrained.

I cannot express how much I agree with this. So much of the attacks on Kate seem to be about body shaming and sl*t shaming.

And I think it is very interesting to see the Izabel editorial in the same magazine as Kate's. When you look at fashion editorials from the past few years, they have become extremely vulgar and sexual. Vogue Paris, V Magazine, and Love/Pop under Katie Grand come to mind first. And Izabel's editorial certainly fits that mold. Somehow, that brand of sexuality is ok but Kate's isn't.

I actually like Kate's editorial. Its soft and its feminine, but there is a voyeuristic quality as well.

 

[tigerrouge]

I certainly welcome the sight of bodies like Kate's in fashion magazines, as long as they're mostly being used to provide inspiration on how to dress that shape - because I don't need any lessons on how to go topless or take my clothes off. What bothers me is not the model, it's when a fashion magazine shows a lack of imagination when using a girl.

 

[*ana*]

^Agree completely. And the Marilyn-ish look is so cliché. Why not bring this type of beauty to modern times? I had no idea who this girl was, and unless someone decides to make something interesting with her I can't say I'm intrigued.

 

[kokobombon]

^^that´s why I said that we could focus our critique on Faena and the stylist´s work, not Kate´s body. Faena´s editorial work is often trashy looking, no matter the model... even people arguing Kate vs Candice can´t deny that Candice looked every bit a Playboy model in her V´s Sky Bunny editorial.

 

[Deleted member 130879]

Well... I hate Kate's and Izabel's ed. It's possible to make a beautiful sexual editorial with a good part of fashion and artistic imagination... without having to use "in your face" approaches and "Victoria's Secret" kind of models.
Just remember the V magazine editorial with Lara Stone, Daria, Naomi and Kristen naked... or even the one with Lara Stone all dressed in latex.

But I'm a Victoria's Secret hater, anyway...

But to be sincere... I dislike every single editorial posted here.

 

[ParisFashionMuse]

maybe for the cover of playboy but not muse!

 

[Yonni]

People defending Kate's cover and editorial because, for them, this represents "feminity" clearly "reject diverse types of beauty" themselves. This girl is not more feminine than other women, and this editorial does not represent feminity better than Aymeline's does. I know this is how a lot of people picture women and feminity : "softness", baby face, big breast, seductive poses, Marylin Monroe, etc... Not that I dislike this but this is an old cliché, so not exactly THE truth.

Because high-fashion has been a way for women to emancipate from this image, I understand one can be offended by this since they obviously choose this girl because of her image and controversy which are actually the opposite of what women are looking for in high-fashion. It could have been revelant if Muse wanted to say : "Look, this girl looks like the typical Playboy model, Barbie... You think she's also brainless and can only stand here and seduce men ? Let us show you someone can look and act like a cliché but actually not be one"... But as expected, they made a boring editorial. She went from the sl*t cliché to the "feminine woman" cliché. "Look, someone can go from a cliché to another one !" Great.

A girl known for her works in men magazines portraying this image of feminity is actually really "not high-fashion". Maybe the message is : "Since everyone hates clichés, it is super original to be cliché". The same could go with Izabel's ed if it was the first time she worked in high fashion because of a controversy.

I have nothing against Kate, what she's done and her big breast, nothing against Playboy and Marilyn Monroe, the ed himself is neither good nor bad. I just think the whole thing is just a fail. Muse failed, let's give the girl another chance.

 

[tentalicious]

Thanks God there's another cover with Toni & Kendra... bad but still better than Kate's one.