Tell Anna Wintour How To Improve / Revamp US Vogue

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

Liz Tilberis passed away in 1999 from ovarian cancer.

Tragic ,and now I feel completely stupid for not knowing she had passed away.She could have done wonders for Vogue.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

I hope I can live to see the day when Anna isn't the editor in chief.Then again she could very well find a way to run it robotically for centuries or be cryogenitcally frozen ,so who knows.

 

[SHSH]

i would lol but that is probably true. but you know what celebrities really do sell they have had good sales in sacrificing fashion.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

about the first statement... maybe we should analyse if that is due to her real talent to sell copies of the magazine, or is it because globalization is making every successful company even more successful...
about the second... that's exactly what they said about Vreeland and her predecessor (whose name i cant recall right now)... and all of a sudden, BOTH GONE!

there might still be some hope for you detractors of nuclear wintour!

Thanks to her Barbara Walter's special, PETA, her haircut/sunglasses combo and The Devil Wears Prada, Anna Wintour is a brand within herself at this point; she is the world's first true celebrity magazine editrix. Carine isn't quite there yet, but she's close as well.

I know haters gone hate, but Anna Wintour has created the only fashion magazine that has real fashoin street cred, can be embraced by twentysomethings and eightysomethings alike, and transcends class and geography.


Innovation is still present in American magazines; just see V, W, and Nylon. If you aren't into the whole whitebread, old-money, Kennedy worshipping American magazine, skip Vanity Fair, Vogue, and Town and Country for more substantial fare. Ah, the beauty of diversity!

 

[tigerrouge]

Thanks to her Barbara Walter's special, PETA, her haircut/sunglasses combo and The Devil Wears Prada, Anna Wintour is a brand within herself at this point; she is the world's first true celebrity magazine editrix

Surely Diana Vreeland got there first - several decades ago. And how soon we modern women forget the cultural influence of Helen Gurley Brown, who used to have quite a media presence over the 32 years she was editor at US Cosmo.

If we assess Anna Wintour as an iconic figure in the history of magazine editing and image-making, then truly we live in an age when everything has already been achieved, and it's simply enough to count numbers.

 

[LUXXX]

Thanks to her Barbara Walter's special, PETA, her haircut/sunglasses combo and The Devil Wears Prada, Anna Wintour is a brand within herself at this point; she is the world's first true celebrity magazine editrix. Carine isn't quite there yet, but she's close as well.

I know haters gone hate, but Anna Wintour has created the only fashion magazine that has real fashoin street cred, can be embraced by twentysomethings and eightysomethings alike, and transcends class and geography.

I agree...and I think you hit it right on the head. I mean Anna is up there with other iconic figures like Diana Vreeland at this point...Visionaire did a whole issue on Vreeland's memos and people gobbled it up. I'm sure they would do the same for the Wintour Files. US Vogue still remains the most desired cover for American starlets and the hardest to get, it's an exclusive club.

I would like to see her use more innovative photographers though...like Mert & Marcus. I only remember one great edit with Angela Lindvall and then never again!

 

[tigerrouge]

And one with Natalia Vodianova as a starlet, I think that was M&M as well. I think the magazine suffers from the loss of photographers like Helmut Newton, who would shoot an edit here and there, a few pages that would provide a counterpoint to the more staid editorials. They'd be risque, but US Vogue would get away with running them, because of his respected stature in the fashion world.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

Didn't Vogue used to have nudity at some points in the 60's and such? I really at this point having seen so many editorials am not even bothered by the presence of it in fashion.Besides, there is nothing wrong with portraying the human body in it's most vulnerable form, as long as it's done tastefully.

I agree ,I wish Helmet was still alive and able to work.It's a shame that Irving Penn only gets about two photos in every few issues ,why should he not be able to do full editorials?

I've never liked Anna, and I probably never will.She could do so much more with Vogue and still maintain its status.

 

[chanels]

Didn't Vogue used to have nudity at some points in the 60's and such? I really at this point having seen so many editorials am not even bothered by the presence of it in fashion.Besides, there is nothing wrong with portraying the human body in it's most vulnerable form, as long as it's done tastefully.

For tFsers, I think we're completely used to nudity in edgy editorials from Vogue Paris and Italia and not really giving it a second thought when we see it. But remember, Anna's audience is a lot more conservative that say, Carine's.

 

[iluvjeisa]

A couple of things:

1) Diana Vreeland was an icon because of the effect her presence had on the artistic value of Vogue and because of her odd personality - which wasn't just clever and flawless - but, in addition, excentric, controversial and almost unintelligible. She was an editor who was also - by her work - an artist - as much as the greatest movie directors. It was not the emperor's clothes with her - it wasn't neurosis and a desire for control. It was a quirky quest for pleasure (or the promise of it - allure). She was fired because of her excesses. Vogue did not sell so well during her reign but it did attain the role as the fashion/beauty bible - because of her uncompromising sense for art and beauty.

No. Anna Wintour is very different from Vreeland and she will never be regarded in the same way, simply because her magazine is overall artistically weak.

2) American Vogue had some, but not much, nudity in the 60s, more so in the 70s and plenty in the 80s. But in the beginning of the 90s, Allure took over the beauty part. Somewhere between those two chairs - art was almost completely removed from the magazine. But it is true, even in 2001/2 Helmut Newton did have a few stories that raised the level of the magazine as well. And that's of course another lamentable question - where did all the wild photographers go? Is it possible that Teller and Richardson, the two talented but ridiculously self-indulgent nasties, should be at Vogue and be whipped there to produce images that just barely meet the rigorous standards of Wintour?

I keep getting back to that there is some sort of structural problem at work here. It is fully possible to make edgy and fantastic images that pass under the radar of the mainstream (as Helmut Newton, Bourdin, Wangenheim and Bob Richardson did). Why aren't the mechanisms to do this in place?


Why is this important to me, why don't I just go to W? Because W sort of sucks - it's too self-indulgent. Why don't I enjoy some real art instead? Because art is mostly BS these days...I love - above everything else - the narrow little artistic space where art, beauty, edge and extravagant budgets meet.

 

[LUXXX]

And one with Natalia Vodianova as a starlet, I think that was M&M as well. I think the magazine suffers from the loss of photographers like Helmut Newton, who would shoot an edit here and there, a few pages that would provide a counterpoint to the more staid editorials. They'd be risque, but US Vogue would get away with running them, because of his respected stature in the fashion world.

Yeah a little edge here and there would be nice to back in Vogue.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

We live in a place and time in which nudity in Vogue is just not going to happen; everything and everyone is too politically correct, not to mention the focus of the majority of Vogue issues are actress, not models, who have to be much more aware of their image.

When it comes down to it, Vogue has bills to pay and is, above all else, a business. Those bills are paid by the young professionals and established heiresses and widows who can drop thousands of gs on Louis Vuitton bags and Prada heels, not the hip young moderns with eyes for innovation who struggle to pay rent after buying a dress and flats from Urban Outfitters.

Comparing American magazines to European ones is like comparing American and European movies; obviously, the more carefree and laid back European additude is not one that is felt stateside, it doesn't translate. For a nation built on freedoms, we are still a country ruled by almost Puritan beliefs and attitudes.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

I couldn't have said it better myself Khaotic.Why can't we have a new generation Bob Richardson or Helmet types that could give us images that shake up things?

 

[iluvjeisa]

Comparing American magazines to European ones is like comparing American and European movies; obviously, the more carefree and laid back European additude is not one that is felt stateside, it doesn't translate. For a nation built on freedoms, we are still a country ruled by almost Puritan beliefs and attitudes.

I think it's more a matter of - have become. We've talked about it over and over - American Vogue used to be far more exciting than it is now. That it's a business isn't enough reason for it to be sub par - there are extraordinary people who can excel at both art and commerce - which is what I would expect from any magazine of relevance.

Btw, I wouldn't say all of Europe is necessarily laid back at all - there is a great deal of intellectual/artistic competition rather than monetary matters.

American pop culture is caught between greed first, morality second and wishy-washy idealism third. You combine profit, delicate sensibilities and idiot-proof idealism as a requirement for pop culture and you're better off going through the archives, exploring other cultures or otherwise entertaining yourself.

That's a systemic explanation for the decline of American pop culture - but for Vogue there are probably some personnel issues involved - the retirement of Alexander Lieberman, the Editorial Director of all American and European CN publications (1962-1994), may be one of the primary reasons for the decay since, IMO, he disappeared around the time that Vogue nose-dived. He was an artist, obviously with a keen eye for what makes a good image and what does not, something we have ample evidence that the current staff lacks.

 

[L0VE]

Where the f$^* is my magazine!

 

[chanels]

Where the f$^* is my magazine!

Vogue US? That's another thing Anna has to do. Make sure subscribers get their's BEFORE retailers get them

 

[L0VE]

^ Yes =(. It's still not here. I'm about to go buy it at the store. I never noticed how long it took to come until the whole thing with the new cover and it was all over TV and I'm like umm where is mine? And I live like 45 minutes away from NY too.

 

[chanels]

^ Yes =(. It's still not here. I'm about to go buy it at the store. I never noticed how long it took to come until the whole thing with the new cover and it was all over TV and I'm like umm where is mine? And I live like 45 minutes away from NY too.

You should definitely go and email them at the subscribers page on style.com. I emailed them for the March issue (I didn't receive until the 15th!) and they quickly apologized, sent my April issue the first week after the cover was announced, and extended my subscription.

That said, with Anna's attitude, I'd like to see her storm into the subscriptions office and give them a piece of their mind. I don't understand why it takes so long for issues to come.

 

[L0VE]

^ Oh good idea, thank you =).

 

[KhaoticKharma]

I think it's more a matter of - have become. We've talked about it over and over - American Vogue used to be far more exciting than it is now. That it's a business isn't enough reason for it to be sub par - there are extraordinary people who can excel at both art and commerce - which is what I would expect from any magazine of relevance.

That brings up another interesting idea... I don't think of Vogue as being relevant at all, really. Vogue has always presented a sort of Brooks Brother WASP lifestyle, a lifestyle that has (for the most part) remained the same for the last two hundred years.

But it's this very timelessness that makes Vogue such a mainstay in American culture. Even Harper's Bazaar and Cosmo are in stark contrast now to what they were years ago. Vogue will always, on some level, stay the same.