Sleazenation October 1998 by Jonathan de Villiers
- Thread starter nunova
- Start date
MulletProof
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2004
- Messages
- 28,918
- Reaction score
- 8,029
^ where did the images go?! 😭.. I saw them earlier but they're all blue squares now.
I had never heard of this magazine and I feel like I've at least heard of most that made it to the 00s. It seems to add a lost chapter for the early work of some of the big names in the past couple of decades.
Thank you!
I had never heard of this magazine and I feel like I've at least heard of most that made it to the 00s. It seems to add a lost chapter for the early work of some of the big names in the past couple of decades.
Thank you!
nunova
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2025
- Messages
- 98
- Reaction score
- 145
^Seems I need to change the host, I used imgbb before without a problem but seems they now are just briefly hosting them just to remove them to sell more pro accounts.
Sleazenation was direct competition to Dazed and The Face, but also i-D (in lesser degree) and it ran just for 8 years, folded in 2004 but it retained some cult following around. Most people who talk about it just toss the name around and base everything on few scans around on the net, especially from time when Scott King was creaive director. It felt different than other three especially during earlier years and if they did "realism" in editorials they actually were getting elderly or just average people to pose compared to rest.
Sleazenation was direct competition to Dazed and The Face, but also i-D (in lesser degree) and it ran just for 8 years, folded in 2004 but it retained some cult following around. Most people who talk about it just toss the name around and base everything on few scans around on the net, especially from time when Scott King was creaive director. It felt different than other three especially during earlier years and if they did "realism" in editorials they actually were getting elderly or just average people to pose compared to rest.
callmejaeden
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2023
- Messages
- 960
- Reaction score
- 1,473
I have such a soft spot for these young adult/youth magazines of the 90s/00s. The British publications were the first and best, but the issues I have of Jalouse and Pavement from this time are also great. Russh also briefly flirted with the ideals of these magazines but came too late to be a successor and shifted its demographic target come GFC in 2008/2009.
Today somehow Dazed, The Face, and i-D remain. Even though I'm too young to have enjoyed these publications in their golden-era, The Face is the only mag out of the three that i'm interested in and seems to actually try to be tapped into youth culture. Dazed is lacking even though it tries, i-D is the worst out of the three. I specifically hunted down the relaunch issue when I went on holiday, I found it and left without it... to put it bluntly it's a very stupid vision of todays youth landscape, truly a joke. It felt very 'How do you do, fellow kids?', I doubt anyone under 35 works there. The digital presence of each publication is good, however, print seems to be left to languish for i-D.
However, demographics have changed and there is the question to be asked 'is there a need for these publications, today?' (I hate this question, commonly asked on TFS for some reason
)If you look at the readership demographics, over 50% of Australian Vogue's readers are under 30, 39% of French Vogues are within the 15 to 24 age range, I suspect most other mags have similar demographics (aside from US Vogue and the Euro Bazaars?).
Today somehow Dazed, The Face, and i-D remain. Even though I'm too young to have enjoyed these publications in their golden-era, The Face is the only mag out of the three that i'm interested in and seems to actually try to be tapped into youth culture. Dazed is lacking even though it tries, i-D is the worst out of the three. I specifically hunted down the relaunch issue when I went on holiday, I found it and left without it... to put it bluntly it's a very stupid vision of todays youth landscape, truly a joke. It felt very 'How do you do, fellow kids?', I doubt anyone under 35 works there. The digital presence of each publication is good, however, print seems to be left to languish for i-D.
However, demographics have changed and there is the question to be asked 'is there a need for these publications, today?' (I hate this question, commonly asked on TFS for some reason
)If you look at the readership demographics, over 50% of Australian Vogue's readers are under 30, 39% of French Vogues are within the 15 to 24 age range, I suspect most other mags have similar demographics (aside from US Vogue and the Euro Bazaars?).
nunova
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2025
- Messages
- 98
- Reaction score
- 145
^ Jalouse! I wish I got it when one French ebay seller still was willing to send it to my country. But yeah, the Brits invented and perfected it in few specific flavours, as i-D and The Face always felt different tbh. i-D and Dazed weren't doing things any different than The Face after 2001, but they managed to survive better despite being smaller and independent titles. The Face was closed because they weren't profitable for Emap anymore, which as more corporate media company didn't care about carrying it on further. It was only 5 years after they saved it from being out of print.
Early 2000s for British magazine market were pretty bad, many publications folded but it really started with Wagadon, the original publisher of The Face and Arena/AH+, going bankrupt over Frank (I wish it survived, but relaunched Nova is what Frank would be if it managed to survive to 2001) in mid 1999 and Emap buying titles gave them few more years of existence. This kind of style magazine took the massive hit especially after the turn of the millennium and at some point the around that time format stopped being as relevant, titles that stayed around reinvented themselves. Edward E was ahead the curve with maximalization of fashion content in late 1998 and it's why i-D still was around, until Vice's bankrupcy. Dazed later followed it with Formichetti joining as editor, who I feel influenced the magazine a lot since then. Sleazenation and The Face didn't, there was no need for more fashion in the second title as Pop existed...
They mostly exist still due to the cult following and still being seen as vanguard of alt magazine circuit despite having content sometimes as boring and as bland as in Vogue currently. The old issues are why and it brings attention to them still after these years, especially i-D (though I feel everyone around I talked to only cares about 2000s i-D, personally I find 90s were more interesting period for it).
Relaunched The Face always felt as least relevant from all of them for me and I wonder what kind of zoomer actually reads them, their online edition is pretty sparse. They manage to have best quality of writing around when compared to other two, though early on during relaunch i-D had finally some decent-ish writing (earlier only good features were either interviews or fashion writing, others were often painfully bad and lost all sense halfway through it, it was also notorious for bad fact checking (especially during 80s and early 90s) and typos and lot of errors), but editorials are so painfully edgy that they manage to be sometimes more edgier than whole Dazed's legacy and themselves under Katie Grand in early 00s. Dazed became quite hysterical in past 10 years and it feels more... like Vice's digital content these times. New i-D is consistently terrible and quickly I realized that Kushner money actually did ruin it even worse, as at beginning it wasn't as that terrible. I thought it being bought from Vice will led to new, solid era for magazine. Now the new written content, the digital editorials I saw (so boring, and their stack manage to be even more unreadable as it was during it's peak... The amount of blatant sponsored content, executed worse than advertorials they happened to run once in a while between late 80s and 90s, is huge and them doing Pinterest trend slop... seriously, I can't.
I noticed that readership of Vogue, especially regional titles got way younger too. In Poland it's incredibly visible, I barely know anyone over 35 caring about it as much. Elle retained it's bit younger demographic that flocked to it before V PL launched, as the local titles started caring only about women over 35 years of age and outright gutted out any meaningful editorial fashion content for few collages (when 15-20 years ago they all managed to have around 50-90% of original fashion content every year) and more psychology.
Early 2000s for British magazine market were pretty bad, many publications folded but it really started with Wagadon, the original publisher of The Face and Arena/AH+, going bankrupt over Frank (I wish it survived, but relaunched Nova is what Frank would be if it managed to survive to 2001) in mid 1999 and Emap buying titles gave them few more years of existence. This kind of style magazine took the massive hit especially after the turn of the millennium and at some point the around that time format stopped being as relevant, titles that stayed around reinvented themselves. Edward E was ahead the curve with maximalization of fashion content in late 1998 and it's why i-D still was around, until Vice's bankrupcy. Dazed later followed it with Formichetti joining as editor, who I feel influenced the magazine a lot since then. Sleazenation and The Face didn't, there was no need for more fashion in the second title as Pop existed...
They mostly exist still due to the cult following and still being seen as vanguard of alt magazine circuit despite having content sometimes as boring and as bland as in Vogue currently. The old issues are why and it brings attention to them still after these years, especially i-D (though I feel everyone around I talked to only cares about 2000s i-D, personally I find 90s were more interesting period for it).
Relaunched The Face always felt as least relevant from all of them for me and I wonder what kind of zoomer actually reads them, their online edition is pretty sparse. They manage to have best quality of writing around when compared to other two, though early on during relaunch i-D had finally some decent-ish writing (earlier only good features were either interviews or fashion writing, others were often painfully bad and lost all sense halfway through it, it was also notorious for bad fact checking (especially during 80s and early 90s) and typos and lot of errors), but editorials are so painfully edgy that they manage to be sometimes more edgier than whole Dazed's legacy and themselves under Katie Grand in early 00s. Dazed became quite hysterical in past 10 years and it feels more... like Vice's digital content these times. New i-D is consistently terrible and quickly I realized that Kushner money actually did ruin it even worse, as at beginning it wasn't as that terrible. I thought it being bought from Vice will led to new, solid era for magazine. Now the new written content, the digital editorials I saw (so boring, and their stack manage to be even more unreadable as it was during it's peak... The amount of blatant sponsored content, executed worse than advertorials they happened to run once in a while between late 80s and 90s, is huge and them doing Pinterest trend slop... seriously, I can't.
I noticed that readership of Vogue, especially regional titles got way younger too. In Poland it's incredibly visible, I barely know anyone over 35 caring about it as much. Elle retained it's bit younger demographic that flocked to it before V PL launched, as the local titles started caring only about women over 35 years of age and outright gutted out any meaningful editorial fashion content for few collages (when 15-20 years ago they all managed to have around 50-90% of original fashion content every year) and more psychology.
Similar Threads
