The Official Men's Magazine Thread

[LUXXX]

She looks like a ******...

 

[tigerrouge]

...it seems to have, because here are two different covers for the May 2008 issue of UK Esquire with Keith Richards. I've seen the 'white background' one on sale in shops, but I like the cover image of him smoking.

Both images from ebay.co.uk, sellers 11wingers and mark90blue.

 

[hfgl]

^...yes,she would even without the shaving bit.

 

[Diamond Star]

Ridiculous woman, ridiculous cover.

 

[iluvjeisa]

In the context of its own history, it's great to see a magazine revisiting covers and updating them for a new audience.

But in the context of today's newsstand, it's using a star who doesn't have a background in exploring interesting topics via their appearance - Ms Simpson is no Madonna. No-one is going to start debating the changing social role of women via this shot of Jessica, which was the idea behind the original. And that dismissive reaction is due to the public profile of this particular celebrity. So I do wonder, what is the purpose in magazine reinterpreting the archive image using her?

If the magazine is trying to challenge perceptions of celebrity or bimbo-ism, that message isn't coming through very loudly.

With Jessica doing this, it looks more like she's shaving off the remnants of a b*kk*ke fest than anything else.

 

[Party_Vixen]

Plain and simple: this cover sucks (sorry for my lack of a better word).

tigerrouge I can't help but agree with everything you've said! Very well put .

 

[Luxx]

With Jessica doing this, it looks more like she's shaving off the remnants of a b*kk*ke fest than anything else.

Oh my word

SCANDALOUS!

I agree that the 1965 version is better. One of the trappings of celebrity is that any image of a celebrity becomes innately connected to the celebrity's image and their public persona. The 60s version is an ironic image of a woman doing something that is traditionally male - this version is Jessica Simpson. The humor is lost beneath our own knowledge of her career / life / image, etc. It doesn't really matter who the celebrity is - if this were Sienna Miller or Reese Witherspoon or whoever it would still register as being awry moreso than witty. Granted, it doesn't help that Ms. Simpson is one of the more disreputable public figures of the moment.

There is also something to be said about the use of pastiche in this - Esquire is rehashing its history and though the magazine's past has had some truly incredible and visionary covers (particularly those created under the direction of George Lois) you have to wonder why they aren't delving into new imagery. It says something about the current state of the publishing industry that they're resting on their laurels so to speak when it comes to covers instead of pushing the boundaries of what is relevant and inventive now.

I suspect Esquire will be re-doing many of the other famous George Lois-era covers, the images are so iconic now...I don't see how they can ever be done proper justice. They'd really be better off creating something new but publishing is generally not an arena wherein creativity is rewarded...

 

[KhaoticKharma]

I have an earnest question here; not trying to be smart, I'm just curious.


What is the difference between Jessica Simpson and Daria Werbowy being on the cover of a magazine? I can assure you that there are people in the world who find Jessica eight thousand times more beautiful than Daria, and, naturally, vice versa. Models don't do anything substantial that will change the world or shake the foundations of mankind; they just look pretty, and the same can obviously be said about Ms. Simpson.

 

[cutxpaste]

omg

 

[Deleted member 1957]

its an interesting cover which she pulls off well

 

[tigerrouge]

What is the difference between Jessica Simpson and Daria Werbowy being on the cover of a magazine?

Public profile. Jessica has been quite happy to build up and profit from an image of being some brainless bimbo. So people scorn her for embodying those qualities (and making money from it).

Meanwhile, her singing career has stalled, her acting roles seem to be on a par with Paris's, and her romantic misadventures combine to give a sense of loss. So she's scorned for seemingly becoming a failure after initial success, and possibly still in search for fame by any means. Because she's not riding a wave of success, to appear on a magazine cover suddenly takes on the impression of desperation to reclaim lost status. It could all be false, but this is the profile that people have put together in their minds.

Daria, like so many models, her job is to be a blank cypher for all sorts of fantasies, depending on the storyline in the cover shot or editorial. She can't be pinned down to a stereotype. I wouldn't go as far as to say she's respected more, being a blank canvas, but she's certainly harder to scorn.

That would my take on why each woman elicits different reactions.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I have an earnest question here; not trying to be smart, I'm just curious.


What is the difference between Jessica Simpson and Daria Werbowy being on the cover of a magazine? I can assure you that there are people in the world who find Jessica eight thousand times more beautiful than Daria, and, naturally, vice versa. Models don't do anything substantial that will change the world or shake the foundations of mankind; they just look pretty, and the same can obviously be said about Ms. Simpson.

Hahha, yeah, and about George Clooney too....or whatever celeb you can think of. The more they think they have something to say, the less they actually have.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

Ahhh, I get you tigerrouge. I really do. You give a great argument.


I'm much, much shallower than most when it comes to magazine covers; I just like seeing good looking covers, they don't even have to have 'good looking' people. Just something interesting to look at and gives a decent representation of the content.

 

[Fabulyss]

She looks like a ******...

My sentiments exactly!

 

[bismarck]

I have to disagree that Jessica Simpson can't pull of funny covers. Her look is so classic and ingrained in our society, the busty-blonde-bimbo-bombshell, that it can supercede a floundering career and an embarrassing public persona. Like her GQ cover back in 2005 I think is plenty witty, the classic American blonde ideal juxtaposed with certain contradictions about America (I can't entirely explain what I think when I see this image, so I'm sure the actual image itself will make up for my lack of eloquence). I like this new Esquire cover a lot actually, it's funny to me.

source: http://www.mtv.com/news/photos/s/simpson_jessica_gq_050705/flip-a.jpg

 

[Annu]

This cover is really bad.

 

[mikel]

It doesn't work at all! But I like the lay out of the text though.

 

[min-SH]

J. Simpson

gb.cri.cn

 

[mikel]

With Jessica doing this, it looks more like she's shaving off the remnants of a b*kk*ke fest than anything else.

Gross, although you're kind of right I'm afraid. The inside pics look okay though.

 

[cordeeelia]

poor jessica. a very unlucky girl with a big heart.