Style Icon - No way!

[taperjeangirl]

When reading magazines I always want to tear my hair out when certain people are refered to as a "Style Icon" "Trend Setter" when they are either styled or just channel somebody elses style.

The following IMO come under this catergory,

Sienna Miller (very bad style since the stylist went)

Misha Barton = Zoe

Nicole Richie = Zoe

Victoria Beckhan - Follower not setter

Oh and Lohan!

Does this annoy anybody else or am I the only one?!

 

[chibi]

i know, i hate it especially in hollywood where their looks are because of THEIR money & stylist. you hardly go wrong when u're rich enough to buy all the clothes from the best designers in the world...
and i'm so sick of zoe's barbies like nicole, mischa and lohan's being praised bla bla bla... well.
and not to mention sienna, everyone said her a style queen, hobo queen bla bla bla... she's nothing but a kate moss wannabe to me. she dresses too much, she puts too much effort to look chic.
and VB, OMG, don't even started me on this. she's sooo boring!!!
my only style queen is kate moss, she's effortlessly chic.

 

[taperjeangirl]

I know that is what annoys me, the idea that money equals style it's absurd. Sienna Miller was looked great when she drew inspiration from Moss. When people started to realise she then had to start making her look more original which is where it went wrong.

I find that "Style Icons" dress just for the paps which in my opinion is not what style is about.

 

[soso]

A style icon is someone who brings something of new in the fashion world : for me Jackie Kennedy or Audrey Hepburn for the past were style icons and now, Kate Moss and sometimes Mk and A Olsen. They invent and innovate but do not copy the others. The rest (Nicole Richie, Lohan or Victoria Beckam) follow just the tendencies imposed by fashion.

 

[taperjeangirl]

Also Anita Pallenberg and Briggite Bardot. For the present I like Lou Doullins style. The people I have mentioned do not need a stylist or to pour over every page of Vogue to look stylish hence they are the real Icons.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

When reading magazines I always want to tear my hair out when certain people are refered to as a "Style Icon" "Trend Setter" when they are either styled or just channel somebody elses style.

The following IMO come under this catergory,

Sienna Miller (very bad style since the stylist went)

Misha Barton = Zoe

Nicole Richie = Zoe

Victoria Beckhan - Follower not setter

Oh and Lohan!

Does this annoy anybody else or am I the only one?!

But you cant say that!Style Icon is not just the person that sets the trends,the celebs you metnioned are style icons because there are a lot of girls and women who consider them as their style icons so i think this thread is unecessary and just to creat negative energy.
I mean everyone decides for themselfs who is their fashion icon and ispiration!

 

[taperjeangirl]

I can say that as I stated it is my own personal view. The thread is not to create "bad energy".

My view as I stated was that magazines refer to people as Nicole Richie et al as "Style Icons" and I feel that people who are styled are wrongly given that label.

This is a forum in which people are allowed the express their own opinion.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

I can say that as I stated it is my own personal view. The thread is not to create "bad energy".

My view as I stated was that magazines refer to people as Nicole Richie et al as "Style Icons" and I feel that people who are styled are wrongly given that label.

This is a forum in which people are allowed the express their own opinion.

Yes of course its just the way you put it as it is a fact its not!
I think Sienna Miller and Victoria Beckham are style icons and i love their style!
And i am not the only one!

 

[softgrey]

well- the people who love those people have many threads to discuss how much they love them..

*one thread for the people who don't like them...
so they don't bother the threads where the people that do hang out..
that seems like a fair trade off...


everyone is entitled to their opinion...
as long as it is expressed in a thoughtful manner!...

 

[taperjeangirl]

No but I am not a sheep and I only state fact when I have fact to back it up.

I used to like Siennas style she IMO she used to look good. But my view is that as soon as she had to create a sense of her own style it all went a bit pear shaped and hit and miss.

Lots of people probably do like the styled look and thats their tastes which for the individual is great. My whole arguement is that without Zoe and her dads millions would Nicole Richie be able to put together a decent outfit?

 

[Miss Dalloway]

No but I am not a sheep and I only state fact when I have fact to back it up.

I used to like Siennas style she IMO she used to look good. But my view is that as soon as she had to create a sense of her own style it all went a bit pear shaped and hit and miss.

Lots of people probably do like the styled look and thats their tastes which for the individual is great. My whole arguement is that without Zoe and her dads millions would Nicole Richie be able to put together a decent outfit?

I actually know what you mean just look at pre Zoe Nicole and look at her style now yes i think its all Zoe but i reckon she learned a thing or two and would still be able to put together a decent outfit but we cant know for sure!
But you cant denie the fact that her style is loved and copied by millions of girls around the world!The million dolar question is:is that a good thing?
Maybe not but it makes her a style icon for those people!

 

[taperjeangirl]

But does she deserve the same title as say Audrey Hepburn?

 

[Miss Dalloway]

But does she deserve the same title as say Audrey Hepburn?

You see thats an excellent point!
I think the title should have been what is a Style Icon?
Seriously i mean we have bunch of names here but what makes a Style Icon i think its beyond the clothes!
And its up to individual persons tastes not the ones named by the papers and stuff,like you wrote it makes you pull out your hair when you read Victoria etc. are style icons!
But who can say that they are not?
I seriously think it should be up to the individuals because some people preffer Sienna over Kate and vice versa so its all relative!

 

[Whitelinen]

Yes...the title "icon" is not the same as being "trendy and hip". You really think Nicole Richie or Sienna Miller will be copied in say, 5,10 or 50 years time? No, because they were not invidual. They might have a great style, but it's not new. The fact that they are styled by stylists is not the thing that disables someone from becoming an icon, but the fact that these women are styled copying someone else. Even Audrey Hepburn had stylists or people helping her, but she is an icon because that particular style is most remembered as her style. Now, most of today's celebrities/wannabe icons, no matter how greatly dressed, aren't original, or the ones that you mention to describe a look because fashion of today takes most of it's inspiration from old/vintage/retro/you name it things. Fashion is not "new" anymore, it is quite recycled. I'm not saying this hasn't happened in the past decades too, but in those times there were also "new" things. That's why most of those "icon" titles belong to people before the it-girls of today. Even Kate Moss is partly just a follower (she is an icon on her own right too, yes, but she owes a great deal to the older icons) these days, minus of course the 90s, because she is a 90's fashion icon on her own right. But the Nineties are long gone, baby.

We won't be having many new icons if fashion is not going to start to discover brand new things, not just take cool retro things and add a modern twist. I say that the 2000's will be a very dry season to get new style icons.

Then again there's this thing about people, who "are their own person" and exciting characters style-wise, like Chloe Sevigny or Sofia Coppola (just examples), but their style still is a reminiscent of the old icons. What should these kind of people be called? Or are they just the same?

I hope this didn't sound too complicated. English is not my first language so there also might be some strange phrasing...let me know if you don't get what I'm saying.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

Yes...the title "icon" is not the same as being "trendy and hip". You really think Nicole Richie or Sienna Miller will be copied in say, 5,10 or 50 years time? No, because they were not invidual. They might have a great style, but it's not new. The fact that they are styled by stylists is not the thing that disables someone from becoming an icon, but the fact that these women are styled copying someone else. Even Audrey Hepburn had stylists or people helping her, but she is an icon because that particular style is most remembered as her style. Now, most of today's celebrities/wannabe icons, no matter how greatly dressed, aren't original, or the ones that you mention to describe a look because fashion of today takes most of it's inspiration from old/vintage/retro/you name it things. Fashion is not "new" anymore, it is quite recycled. I'm not saying this hasn't happened in the past decades too, but in those times there were also "new" things. That's why most of those "icon" titles belong to people before the it-girls of today. Even Kate Moss is partly just a follower (she is an icon on her own right too, yes, but she owes a great deal to the older icons).

We won't be having many new icons if fashion is not going to start discover brand new things, not just take cool retro things and add a modern twist. I say that the 2000's will be a very dry season to get new style icons.

Then again there's this thing about people, who "are their own person" and exciting characters style-wise, like Chloe Sevigny or Sofia Coppola, but their style still is a reminiscent of the old icons. What should these kind of people be called? Or are they just mass?

I hope this didn't sound too complicated. English is not my first language so there also might be some strange phrasing...let me know if you don't get what I'm saying.

Well said exactly what i meant but you wrote it bettre and your english is perfect!
I agree with everything but you touched on the subject of originality!
And other before you wrote about others that they are followers or copying?But how can we say that?I think its ridicilous to point fingers when it comes to fashion,there is no such thing as stealing someones look because they definately didnt come up with it in the first place. Thats what fashions all about though, re-inventing a certain look...even if you saw it on someone else.
I also agree that 2000 will be a dry season to get new style icons but hopefully we will!

 

[Whitelinen]

Hopefully

I'm not saying it's stupid to copy someone else, as you said, re-inventing a certain look is fashion and style, but it is not iconical. To be an icon you have to be the "biggest" sporting the look, no matter if you did copy it from someone else. But if the look you have is from decades ago, you cannot become the icon of that look. Even though icons may not invent the thing purely by themselves, it has to be fresh enough. Today's fashion and style is not that.

 

[taperjeangirl]

White Linen are you joking me your English is 100% perfect!! Better then my mothers and she has lived in England for over 40 years!

Sadly society is obbsessed with celebrity culture drivel like "Heat" "OK" etc These publications recognise style by "must haves" and if a celebrity has the new 70 year waiting list bag then they are on the fashion "pulse" People with true style like Coppola who you mentioned do not even get recognised.

When the above celebrity culture dies down (which sadly it never will) we will never have a true "Icon". Sadly Kate Moss is the last of a dying breed.

 

[Whitelinen]

Thanks

Yep, no new icons in sight. The celebrity culture is taking over powerfully.

But hey, even though these people are called style icons now, in a couple years of time no one will remember them. They'll disappear. Or end up in the "worst dressed of the 00's" list...

I wonder if the 00's will be described as "the decade when nothing happened" in the future? Or then, if we are negative, "the decade when it was not that dead yet".

 

[MJCouture]

I really don't think anyone in young hollywood is a style icon, with the exception of maybe Ashley Olsen, but I still think she is too young to be an icon. I'm really curious to see how she dresses into her twenties and thirties, then I think we can really decide. People call Nicole Richie and Lindsay icons, and beside the fact that they have a stylist who has shapped their style 100%, they also do not break ANY barriers in fashion. They wear skinny jeans and boho tunics because it is the moment fashion is having now, not because they have an organic attraction or attachment to that look. Designers are inspired by real icons, I can't imagine anyone creating a collection based off of the way that some of those girls dress. That being said, I do think that sometimes they do dress well or "cute," but they are by no stretch of the word iconic.

 

[Whitelinen]

What exactly do you think makes Ashley Olsen different from the other girls in Hollywood?