Not Just Your Average Clothes Hanger

tealady

Active Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2002
Messages
6,269
Reaction score
0
Has anyone else seen this article? What do you think??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Oct23.html

washingtonpost.com
Not Just Your Average Clothes Hanger


By Robin Givhan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 24, 2003; Page C01


After four weeks of designers in New York and Europe all sending their spring offerings down the runway on the backs of a small posse of models, the women start to look as familiar as the interior of one's own handbag. Designers as disparate as Tom Ford -- who can transform a pinafore into something with lascivious connotations -- and Chanel's Karl Lagerfeld -- who caters to a more reserved, socially mobile clientele -- all use the same models.

Fashion's minor leagues may be overrun with spindly young hopefuls, but the big time is dominated by a few dozen women who are known by their first names and who have an admirable capacity for maintaining an expression of louche disengagement even when they are dressed in John Galliano's ready-to-wear equivalent of a Bo Peep costume.

After seeing these young women prance hither and yon in more than 100 shows, one develops an uncomfortable relationship with them that is utterly superficial but based on the most intimate details. There is something patently wrong in knowing that a certain model has stretch marks across her buttocks when you're unable to recall her full name. And it is distressing when one realizes that another young woman -- a stranger but for the 20-odd times she has wandered past nearly naked -- has been victimized by a particularly aggressive bikini wax. Shouldn't we at least have been introduced?

The best model, by contemporary standards, is the one who makes the audience notice the clothes while refraining from drawing attention to herself. And so, inordinate emphasis is placed on the walk, the imperturbable gaze and the ability to embody mood and atmosphere. The result has been a steady crop of models who, at least on the runway, exude the personality and magnetism of a somnambulist.

It makes one long for the high-stepping days of Naomi Campbell and, before her, Pat Cleveland. No one wants to reignite the vulgar model obsession that infected the late '80s and early '90s, when modeling fees skyrocketed, fans wept at Naomi sightings and models were dubbed "super" just for showing up to work. Still, a bit more personality on the runways would relieve the monotony of one dispirited blonde followed by another disaffected brunette.

Of the few memorable models today, Karen Elson enjoyed a particularly busy runway season. With her alabaster skin, flame-colored hair and cherubic figure, she has the sort of postwar visage that brought to life clothes inspired by the 1950s. The model Karolina Kurkova, a leggy blonde with a brazenly seductive strut, is regularly called up when a designer is looking to signify sophisticated strong sexuality or just needs a good pair of pouty lips. And Gisele Bundchen, who is best known for her steamy Victoria's Secret ads, has developed an image as the industry's sex kitten -- for when a designer would like to toy with the sort of sexuality that comes with a pole and a lap dance.

The industry likes to refer to Ethiopian model Liya Kebede as a nontraditional beauty, mostly because the power brokers can't shake their knee-jerk tendency to put all models of color into the category of "unusual." But Kebede embodies a classic beauty defined by high cheekbones, an exquisite jaw line and a timeless quality. She is stunning, but once one has an opportunity to study her bone structure in three or four or 40 shows, the truth is that she's not particularly compelling on the runway. At least, not the way models used to be.

After more than a decade in front of the cameras, Campbell still cuts an astonishing figure on the runway. To see her walk along in even the most banal frock, with her hips swiveling from side to side and a look of self-satisfaction on her face, one almost has the sense of being threatened, of being pushed up against a wall, of getting a left hook -- and then a right -- directly to the jaw. LOOK AT ME!

Cleveland continues to perform the runway antics that became her signature -- prancing, dancing, laughing and treating a fashion show as if it was an opportunity for theatrics and fun. She didn't need outrageous clothing or an elaborate set to ignite her playfulness: A simple silk charmeuse evening gown could inspire her to spin madly on the runway. Her energy at the Stephen Burrows show in New York even inspired the younger women on the runway to smile. And what do you know? The clothes looked even more appealing.

Personality is what allows a model to own a runway over time. It's ultimately what keeps onlookers interested. Linda Evangelista was also on the runways this season. When she stepped out at the Lanvin show in Paris, the audience applauded and cheered with the kind of enthusiasm that sports fans give to a veteran who trots onto the field to prove he's still got the old fire in the belly. Evangelista's appearance, however, served to show how much the industry has changed in only a few years. By the standards of any reasonable human being, Evangelista is beautiful. Tall, thin and a true looker. But even on the post-waif fashion runway, she looks oversize, like a moose among scraggly beanpoles.

Evangelista was never much of a walker. Her allure was her look, her ability to transform herself into a redheaded vamp, a blond bombshell or an elegant brunette. On the runway, she tiptoes along, staring blankly into the middle distance, unblinking for the cameras. Not the bombshell or the vamp, just the big girl in stilettos.



© 2003 The Washington Post Company
 
uhm soem things in this article where intersting and i agreed with hwoever i felt the general aditude was ignorant and agressive


The best model, by contemporary standards, is the one who makes the audience notice the clothes while refraining from drawing attention to herself. And so, inordinate emphasis is placed on the walk, the imperturbable gaze and the ability to embody mood and atmosphere.

Is this not exactly the point of a model ? to embodie the clotehs or teh atmospher almost as a manifestation:rolleyes:

Evangelista's appearance, however, served to show how much the industry has changed in only a few years. By the standards of any reasonable human being, Evangelista is beautiful. Tall, thin and a true looker. But even on the post-waif fashion runway, she looks oversize, like a moose among scraggly beanpoles.

first of all she is at least 10 years or more odler than most of the girls who walk now, so of corse she would not be as thin as they are, how ever she is still very thin compared to your average women, sayings he looked oversized is just plane stupid :wacko:
 
I agree to an extent. If you look at enough runway shows, the models end up looking miserable and bored. They don't display the energy and charisma that used to be a part of the shows. While I'm sure the girls are fun to be around when not onstage, they current trend toward disengagement doesn't seem to benefit anybody. When the models look lke they're enjoying the show and the clothes and the performance, I think it sells the product a lot better than when they just look annoyed. Maybe that's part of the reason Pat Cleveland was so refreshing to see: she was having an infectious good time.
 
Good God, Episternum, but I perfectly agree with you.

I don't mind if there are some shows that have models that are compeletely blank and look cold and disinterested in everything going on around them. Maybe some ultra-modern, ultra-serious clothes benefit from that sort of treatment.

But isn't fashion supposed to be fun, as well? Why this attitude of deadly serious anxiety hovering all over the shows? Why can't there be a couple of fashion shows that have models that actually do more than shuffle around in exquisite clothes, like immaculately-made-up zombies?

Wouldn't Versace shows be even sexier if the models vamped it up in their mini-skirts by pouting and winking at the audience? Wouldn't Chanel shows be even more subversive and modern if the models actually gave the trademark coy smiles and condescending sniffs of the monied class?

Why does sour, bitchy blankness in models suddenly become an industry standard?

(Obligatory Intro: Hi everybody! I'm new! Nice to meet you! Okay... my time of infectious enthusiasm is over.)
 
Welcome, mariagoner! :flower:

Me? I'm bored with bored models. :unsure:
 
I have mixed feelings about this article ... sometime's the writer's got a hit ...sometimes there are misses
 
Originally posted by blumarine@Oct 30th, 2003 - 11:22 pm
I have mixed feelings about this article ... sometime's the writer's got a hit ...sometimes there are misses
What did you think were the hits and misses of the articles?

(Psst... thanks for the hi, tealady!)
 
Originally posted by mariagoner@Oct 31st, 2003 - 12:00 am
(Psst... thanks for the hi, tealady!)
(Psst... you're welcome.) :wink:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
210,544
Messages
15,118,565
Members
84,208
Latest member
bellbell
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"