The Supermodel - Is it Time for a Rebirth?

[Mr-Dale]

I've given this a lot of thought recently and it's highly plausible that the actual supermodel will never return. But there is something else going on in fashion and modeling right now at this very moment. There seems to be this epic shift in beauty standards. As we've seen the pre-teen waifs come and go, alien look-a-likes leaving the runways again and the 'intelectual beauty' practically disappearing from the scene, there is finally something new going on. Well, not new of course, cause history always repeats itself. Today we are whitnessing the return of the mature, strong, womanly model. Prada sent out a collection focusing in the female shapes (boobs!) and Vuitton soon followed. And as we all know, suddenly all those so called commercial models were filling up those particular runways and now the campaigns and magazines. Alessandra, Adriana, Miranda, Ana Beatriz, you name them, suddenly they are high fashion's biggest stars. And I blame the economy.
When there's an economic crisis, brands need to speak to their customers in a more direct manner simply to sell more in harsh times. Crazy conceptual beauties don't fit that aesthetic. In your face beauty is the answer. The resurgance of the 90's models in the past few years were announcing this already.
But seriously, and I really mean this, Lara Stone started a new future in the era of models and beauty. The entire fashion world is reacting. Wether it's Laetitia Casta opening Vuitton, Stella at CK or friggin Vanessa Hessler at Prada (LOVED that) the standards for beauty and the 'ideal woman' are changing. Even in the new girl generation it's noticable. Constance has boobs and sex appeal, Samantha G has boobs, is 20 years old and opened Prada (hello!) etc etc. And maybe this more in-your-face womanly beauty will result in a small rebirth of the supermodel. Cause with more relatable/desirable faces come more relatable/desirable names and eventually people.

 

[jeremydante]

in the age of cindy crawford, naomi campbell, linda evangelista & christy turlington- among many other iconic faces- we've seen the damaging effects of giving a supermodel too much power. though i love naomi for a number of reasons- she really became the stereotypical diva model b*tch that people thought of models. & this ego of hers was blown up by the industry- so after that the industry began to scale back & try to book girls that looked the same- much like robots. colorless, void of a voice & personality- in an attempt to push focus on what it should've been on in the first place- FASHION, its understandable that exposure & modeling has shifted.

that said, everything happens in cycles & i feel like fashion is going back into an age where they want female faces to define beauty for them. though dangerous, our fame obsessed public demands this- directly & indirectly. time will tell- will jessica stam ever be as widely known as cindy crawford? i doubt it. but maybe someone else down the line will. i think its important that we understand that these things cannot be calculated; cosmically they happen. thus stars are born.

 

[iluvjeisa]

^I don't think the stature of the supermodels was something that needed to be reduced in order to make place for fashion...no, I think that once it became clear how much more attention designers were getting when you hyped up the models the next step was simply to get that same boost with celebrities instead.

 

[softgrey]

i think that if we could FIND supermodels these days...
they would have been back already....

they arent out there...

there is no helena christensen hiding out there...
no nadia auerman...no cindy crawford... no linda evangelista...

i think we would all LOVE to have that back...
but no one can find it...


they were runway, editorial, and commercial...
everything all rolled into one...
they weren't just supermodels...they were practically superhuman...
larger than life...AMAZONS...
...

it's not easy to find that ...it just isn't...

 

[iluvjeisa]

I think they are. It's the attitude toward models that has changed - or so it seems to me. I would guess it had to change in order to get rid of the supermodels and now when they are wanted back again - the modeling industry seems to have changed so that it basically does not allow models to become women, especially not smart women.

I remember the story of how Norman Parkinson found Celia Hammond...the modeling agency she was at barely had her employed because she was on the large side...but he instantly saw her potential. He started using her for nearly all his British Bazaar features and she eventually was convinced to become more fit - though it wasn't extreme because the 60s were not as extreme as now.

Now a modeling agency wouldn't dream of having someone like that at their agency, I'm sure, certainly not show her to one of the biggest photographers...

 

[iperlchen]

^ I think you hit the nail on the head. The industry favors youthful models over women. They're not so interested in seeing their adulthood unfold, maybe it doesn't sell as well?
Models who make it their profession also have a very different take on the job as opposed to the girl who's still in school or trying her luck for a while to make $$$. An example how even an established model can lose a job: Kim Noorda preferred not to have her eyebrows bleached at Bottega Veneta last season, she was sent home and they called in another girl. Probably lesser known though I don't know who.
I think internet is also a big factor, if not the biggest?, in the change of the industry's landscape. Many, many agencies are constantly fueling the industry's turnover rate with their latest finds. And since the industry favors youthful models you can expect to see 16-year-old models replacing each other as part of the routine.
There's such a big gap between the old supers and the current regulars of the industry like Lara, Daria, Natasha and Raquel. Only a very select few seem to be able to withstand the test of time and trends. Besides those two groups it's a big ocean you have to try not to get lost in.

 

[misscheriedior]

I agree with a lot of the points made in this thread, and I also want to say that I think a big contributing reason to why there are no 'supermodels' anymore is because a huge gap has formed between what fashion-interested people think make a great model and what the general public think make a great model.
Back when the Supermodels were in full force I think that everyone was sort of in agreeance with WHY the top models were top models. The beauty in Christy, for example, was not hard to see for everyone from the average housewife to a fashion photographer.
Nowadays, with the emergence and popularity of 'alienesque' 'statuesque' and whatever other trends have made themselves popular, there is a bigger gap between what is considered 'beautiful' by everyone. I know many people who think todays models are 'ugly' and it's not just girls like Lindsey Wixson they are talking about - they say it about Sasha, Lara and Freja as well. And yet, these are some of the girls who are getting the most work in the industry right now.
As well as that, I also think that there are so many negative connotations that come with the world 'fashion model' now, people think 'photoshopped' 'anorexic' 'bulimic' 'drug addict' whether they are applicable or not.
And lastly, this has already been touched on in the thread, but i feel that girls these days aren't sticking around long enough for anyone to find out if they could be supermodel material. And the ones who ARE sticking around long enough go nameless to a lot of people who don't follow fashion/modeling. Add on to that the fact that in most cast cases designers don't want girls to show personality on the runway, and prefer them to simply just be a clothes hanger, there is little to no hope for the models of today to become supermodels, at least on in the way we have seen before.

 

[Tigertonio]

^Some great points. Thanks.

I also want to add that it's a whole different game today with the emergence of the internet and its rapid saturation effect. People today have shorter attention spans, a high level of impatience, and want something fresh and new at a rapid pace. Sort of like a mass deviated form of ADD. All that said, when a new book of fashion is written several years from now, the post-super era standouts of today will be included, although the public-at-large won't likely know their names.

 

[TianSoFine]

I think today's society isn't too concerned about model names, but would definitely recognize many faces. The top models of the current time aren't household names, but a lot of people would recognize them if you showed them a picture. If you walk into a mall, you can see Sasha Pivovarova everywhere (Gap, H&M, department stores, etc.). When I just started getting interested in fashion, I heard Daria Werbowy's name but didn't know who she was. When I saw a photo, I recognized her right away as the girl in all those beauty ads.

 

[AD011620]

I don't think you know who Daria or Sasha are if you are not at least remotely interested in models... not only fashion... bcos there're millions of Fashion customers and not many of them will even know who Natalia Vodianova is... and I think after Gisele she is the most recognisable model... or even Angela Lindvall or Karen Elson...
I think it helps when models have a lot of coverage in fashion magazines... and not only Vogue... some people think that being on the cover of Vogue makes you a supermodel but that's not true... in the 90's models used to be on ELLE, Marie Claire, Cosmopolitan (even though it is not a fashion mag), Glamour, etc... so all kinds of readers could read about them...they were more accessible
Now models are only on Vogues (hardly any on the covers of US Vogue) or Bazaar... the rest belongs to celebrities... they are also on some other fashion magazine but very specific ones with a very specific set of readers...
Being featured in the adverts helps but at the end of the day our memories do not contain as many visual information... it is more what we read and hear...

 

[AD011620]

The problem is that people forget about models so easily... but they still remember the names of supermodels even though they have not been involved in the business actively for more than a decade... but people still know who Claudia, Cindy, Naomi or Linda are... they still know who Stephanie Seymour or Christy Turlington or Helena or Nadja are... well Kate has been around all the time... so she is probably the most famous model of the moment... I don’t know maybe I am overstating here but there only few models whose name may come up while talking about them... it is Gisele, Heidi Klum, Adriana Lima, Mila Jovovich or Tyra Banks... and these are the highest paid models... obviously for reason...

 

[AD011620]

P.S. I forgot about Laetitia Casta

P.S. Elle McPherson from the 90's models

 

[AD011620]

Oh Gosh I should really shut up;-) but one more observation...

I think they are trying to push too many models into a supermodel league... Natasha, Daria, Freja, Sasha, Lara, Abbey, MariaCarla, Anja, Eniko, Lily, Jessica, Dree, Miranda, Iselin, Catherine, etc.

If we all remember, the supermodel build up happened step by step... first we had Linda, Naomi, Tatjana, Christy, Cindy, Stephanie, Yasmeen then we had Claudia, Helena, Eva H, Karen, Carla, Nikki... and then Shalom, Nadja, Amber, Kate and re-birth of Kristen McMennamy... basically every 3 years a new group of supermodels was born and ppl had enough time to get used to them and remember their names...

 

[TianSoFine]

I don't think you know who Daria or Sasha are if you are not at least remotely interested in models... not only fashion... bcos there're millions of Fashion customers and not many of them will even know who Natalia Vodianova is... and I think after Gisele she is the most recognisable model... or even Angela Lindvall or Karen Elson...

What I mean is that if you show someone a photo, it would probably look familiar to them (but not necessarily no who they are). I don't think Karen Elson is more recognizable than someone like Sasha, which I can say from personal experience (my friends, myself from earlier, etc.). I'm not saying that people like Sasha and Daria are currently supermodels, but I do think they're on the road to becoming supermodels and their faces are quite recognizable.

If your expectation for a supermodel is that someone not even remotely interested in models would know their name, then even Gisele Bundchen wouldn't be a supermodel by that definition. Most people I know either told me that they've never heard of her before or that they might have heard her name once from somewhere, but have no clue who she is. If you show them a picture of her, however, they're much more likely to recognize her.

 

[LabelWhore4]

^Highly doubtful about Gisele. She is married to TOM BRADY and previously dated Leo Dicaprio. The average person (especially in the US) generally knows her by name for sure.... For her relationship history alone.

 

[AD011620]

What I mean is that if you show someone a photo, it would probably look familiar to them (but not necessarily no who they are). I don't think Karen Elson is more recognizable than someone like Sasha, which I can say from personal experience (my friends, myself from earlier, etc.). I'm not saying that people like Sasha and Daria are currently supermodels, but I do think they're on the road to becoming supermodels and their faces are quite recognizable.

If your expectation for a supermodel is that someone not even remotely interested in models would know their name, then even Gisele Bundchen wouldn't be a supermodel by that definition. Most people I know either told me that they've never heard of her before or that they might have heard her name once from somewhere, but have no clue who she is. If you show them a picture of her, however, they're much more likely to recognize her.

Partly agree with what you said... there's no difference when it comes to recognising Karen Elson, Daria or Sasha... of course ppl can recognise their faces but it is highly unlikely they will know their names or even be interested in knowing unless they really like them... e.g. boy crash or smth...

I don't agree re-Gisele... I think she is commonly recognised (maybe not as much as Cindy, Naomi, Claudia or Kate)... and even if they don't remember her name you always have this kind of situation like 'hold on what is her name...'' or ''isn't she this Brazilian supermodel...'' or ''is it not Gisele...'' or they just know her name... this is what is important about the 90's supermodels... they had very strong appearances and were quite different from each other... this is what new or relatively new generation of models are lacking...

You only see them on the covers of Vogues or doing adverts which is not enough...

The big thing about 90's supermodels was that they could do totally commercial stuff, pret-a-porter or even Haute Couture equally well... but let's not forget that not many would remember them only bcos of their work for Pret-a-Porter or Haute Couture... they were mainly remembered bcos of their strong, mature, sexy looks... dating.... commercial and cosmetic contracts... Playboy [that Lara Stone is so picky about], Max, GQ, Arena, Esquire covers... Vanity Fair covers... except from Linda she did less commercial stuff but was known for other things like Chameleon, marrying Casablancas then dating McLachlan, Fabien Bartez, etc... let's not forget about diva attitudes as well that so many of them had... or take Kate Moss... dating Johnny Depp, then going gaga when he left her... than all this drug scandals which would normally ruin someone elses career but in her case gave it a bust... or take Naomi all these scandals and fashion labels don't even hesistate to hire her... which I personally would... and many more...

so the difference is that they were Stars not just models... I am not saying that they were better models but they had better Star qualities...

So after Supers you had Stella Tennant mainly bcos she was so different from others... later Esther Canadas had a big chance of becoming a very big name... mainly bcos of her amazing walk, big lips, DKNY contract and marriage with Mark V but was quickly thrown away... of course Laetitia Casta whose modeling went down but she reinvented herself into an actress... Heidi Klum... Mila Jovovich mainly bcos of her acting career... and that's it... I might have left some names out...

 

[Spiral1532]

Gisele Bundchen is quite possibly thee most famous model in the world. Perhaps even more famous than Cindy Crawford. Gisele has had 3 high-profile relationships with famous men, which have helped make her a household name among people who don't follow fashion.

In North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia, etc.....Gisele is known everywhere.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

I really don't think the world needs Supermodels again... and I don't think we'll ever get them.

The main reason? When I hear supermodel, I think Diva with a capital D. Making demands of designers, commanding an exorbitant fee for a few hours of work, raising hell and generally walking around as though she owns the world. When the Supermodels got out of hand, actresses (and some actors) picked up where they left off- having rocky, high profile relationships, wearing glamorous designer duds and becoming just as much a personality as a talent. You could say, in a way, the late nineties until now are similar to the Golden Age of Hollywood: it even shows in trends- being busty and voluptuous (like a film star) is back "in," much in the same way that in the era of the supermodel, there were even Playboy pinups with real, small chests, because being leggy, lean, and athletic was in... but I digress.

I forsee a shunning of film stars in the future, too, at least of the Lindsay Lohan variety. Opulence is on it's way out; there's a revival of living a more Helmut Lang/Calvin Klein minimalist life. That, combined with the popularity of the Mad Men curvy look , makes for two very different silhouette with one major commonality- both are based in neatness and structure, no messy opulence. To go with that, I think we'll be seeing a mixture of models and actresses, with bloggers and other internet stars thrown into the mix. Ladies like Lara Stone and Christina Hendricks both personify that fifties housewife busting at the seems look; why shouldn't both be on the cover of magazines or in editorials modeling that look? If the lithe yet strong frames of Joan Smalls and Keira Knightley both illustrate modernism well, then they should both be cast in advertisements that call for that.

After just escaping two extremes- over the top celebrities with larger than life personalities and armies of nameless, faceless, disappearing Slavic blonde models- I don't think another "extreme" (ie that of tall, lean Amazonian divas) is what the world wants or needs.

 

[tigerrouge]

As an aside, I've said this before... this notion that the supermodels got out of hand or somehow were ruining fashion - someone is going to be pulling the strings and reaping the profits to be made from modelling, and I'd rather it was the models themselves. In my eyes, it isn't an improvement to see girls remain powerless while people behind the scenes get to make all the decisions and rake in the money. Successful, self-directed and demanding supermodels were ruining that set-up, and because they were public figures, it was easy to paint them as egotistical monsters, leaving the real fiends to continue to operate under the radar.

 

[iluvjeisa]

When many top editors behave that way, I really don't see why the best of their field should not be allowed to snap at people and ask them to bring stuff. Why not, I mean, why should they be servants?