The Supermodel - Is it Time for a Rebirth?

[Squizree]

Call me nuts but the I get the feeling that the Supermodel era isn't even over. They sure don't model as often as they used to but they're still celebrities and are constantly in the media. Naomi, Kate and Claudia still do a fair amount of modelling. So does Linda. I know their fashion work is no where like it used to be but most of them are still super famous which is what made them SUPERmodels.

 

[TianSoFine]

I would say Natalia Vodianova is definitely on the road to becoming a supermodel, if she isn't one already. She still successfully keeps with modeling/fashion after all these years. She has good exposure from both high fashion and consistent commercial work. She must have also gotten a lot of exposure from appearing at the Vancouver 2010 closing ceremony.

 

[Chloe Parks]

I think all the models are starting to look too much alike...even though they have very different faces, it has a lot to do with the skinny frame and body that designers want today (blank slate). Naomi, Claudia, Kate, Christy, Helena, etc. all had different body types that people could relate to but they were still beauuutiful.

 

[agee]

I think others have said this before, but I think that there is a distinction between supermodel and a supermodel era. I think that we will always have one or two supermodels running around, but I am not sure if there will be enough supermodels being supermodels concurrently to form a "pack" and hence create an era.

I know that people hate her with the heat of a thousand suns, but Chanel Iman, along with Karlie Kloss and Lara Stone, are the ones that I see as being on the path to supermodeldom. I don't necessarily think all three will actually become supermodels, but they are in the queue.

I think that Coco Rocha has (had) what it takes, but she does not seem that interested in modeling being her primary profession.

I was going to assert that if a model who has been working for five plus years is not already in the supermodel queue, specifically, face recognition if not name recognition by a good chunk of the general public, then it ain't gonna happen, this would apply to Daria, Natalia, Liya and Raquel, but I'm starting to think that H&M is becoming like Victoria's Secret when it comes to presenting their products on models in such a way that people become interested in the model as well as the clothes. I am still mulling this over but, if I buy into it, then that puts Daria and perhaps Jon Kortajarena in the queue.

 

[Spiral1532]

Why is there even a need to perpetuate the term "supermodel"? The whole supermodel phenomenon was strictly a 1988-1992 thing. If you're a successful model today, that doesn't make you a supermodel. That just makes you a...successful model.

I think that a big misconception held by a lot of people here at TFS is that the knowledge that they have of certain models and designers is the same knowledge that the general public has. But in reality, other than fashion die-hards, no one else pays attention to the goings-on of the fashion scene. As someone in another thread succinctly put it, "nobody gives a rat's a** about fashion models."

And btw, the only supermodels that we see "running around" are the ones who are still occasionally working as models: Cindy, Linda, Naomi, Christy, Stephanie, Eva, Claudia, Kristen, etc.

 

[agee]

^ You don't consider Gisele Bundchen or Kate Moss supermodels? I agree with the point about successful models. I think that some consider achieving supermodel status as the only pinnacle in modeling and being a supermodel is a lot about being recognizable by the general public, which does not apply to a lot of very accomplished, very talented models. If I compared supermodels to actresses, they would match up with the Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullocks type actresses, but you still have models who are more comparable to Cate Blanchett or Kate Winslet, which is nothing to sneeze at, but I would not call them supermodels.

 

[Spiral1532]

^I think it was Christy or Claudia who said a few years ago that Gisele is the only model these days who comes close to being like what the supermodels were like.

 

[markese91]

I tried reading all of the posts... then my ADD kicked in and I decided to write my own before I got too distracted but this is what I think:

I believe that there have been like three "eras" of modeling that are being discussed here. I think that there was the era of the Supermodel followed by like a Post-Supermodel era and to be entirely honest I think that we are about to enter and have begun to transition into a neo-supermodel era.

The time of the great supermodels was drastically different from today. Models could make demands and designers made conscessions. Models were muses, and they were in a sense co-collaborators with the designers. The models had a face because the models had a voice. One only has to read Naomi Campbell's interview in INTERVIEW to see this. Models had enough voice to say if you don't book Naomi, we won't work for you. And what did designers do, they booked Naomi because they wanted those specific faces in their garments.

But, as things happen in this industry, once one sector becomes too strong, or begins to get too much power(this has happened to stylists before as well), we pull them back in. So following that, we entered Post-Supermodel. This was the time of the nameless faceless model. Designers booked whomever they pleased and if one model wouldn't do something, well one only had to click through Myspace to find another face who would. These girls always aspired to be models because they had grown up during the time of the supermodel so they had idolized and imitated them for all of their lives. Very much like how the phenom of the cover celebrity was explained in The September Issue. So, the model, had been reeled back in.

Well, with the economic situation in combination with the proliferation of fashion blogs and the internet, designers have begun to favor specific models again. For the Summer/Spring 2011 runway season, according to The Imagist and various other sources, brands like Proenza Schouler began to ask for girls with an edge. Alexander Wang wanted someone with a story behind her. They didn't want a cast of all 16 year old Lindsey Wixson's... instead they wanted models like Omayhra. They wanted a model with a face that we would remember, someone with a look and a presence could envoke the feeling of their brand. Furthermore, to combat this idea of fly-by-night designers, they wanted someone who was going to seem to build some sort of legacy, to allow consumers to see some sort of past through the model.

Designers and brands are thirsting more than ever to differentiate themself from others and so they are throwing around words like "classic" and "iconic". You hear Prabal Gurung saying that he doesn't want to be "trendy" and instead he wants to design for the "real woman". I think all of this signals that we're entering into a time of the Neo Supermodel and frankly... I love it

 

[agee]

^I think it was Christy or Claudia who said a few years ago that Gisele is the only model these days who comes close to being like what the supermodels were like.

In my personal affections, I would take Stephanie Seymour or Helena Christensen over Kate Moss any day, but I can't see deeming those two supermodels (well you did not name Helena, I did), along with Eva and Kristen, and then say Kate and Gisele aren't? If the standard is the Trinity, I would still disagree, but its debatable, but once you expand beyond the Trinity, Gisele and Kate more than fit the bill.

 

[Spiral1532]

In my personal affections, I would take Stephanie Seymour or Helena Christensen over Kate Moss any day, but I can't see deeming those two supermodels (well you did not name Helena, I did), along with Eva and Kristen, and then say Kate and Gisele aren't? If the standard is the Trinity, I would still disagree, but its debatable, but once you expand beyond the Trinity, Gisele and Kate more than fit the bill.

Helena and Stephanie are undoubtedly supermodels, as are Eva and Kristen. The big difference between them and Kate & Gisele is that Kate & Gisele weren't even a factor in the supermodel era. Kate didn't start to receive major bookings and whatnot until 1993, a moment in which public fascination with models was already waning. Not only was she not a factor in the supermodel era, but no one considered her a supermodel in circa 1993. And to be honest, I don't think she's known outside of a fashion context to this day here in the US. She might be considered the greatest thing since sliced bread in the UK, because that's where she's from. But here in the US it's a whole other ballpark. And here it's commercial work that provides a model with exposure and recognition. I don't live in Middle America, I live in Miami, and yet I haven't heard anything about Kate in the media since that scandal a few years ago involving a picture which seemed to show her using a certain drug. Whereas during the last few weeks, someone like Heidi Klum was in the news. And of course, Gisele is a product of the 21st century. She'd been a model since the 90s, but the public didn't become familiar with her until she started dating Leo DiCaprio and became the face of Victoria's Secret.

It all boils down to what I said in post #48 about the time period of the supermodel phenomenon. When Linda landed on the cover of Vogue Italia last year, someone here at TFS quipped that "she's not relevant, why is she on the cover?"
She was on the cover because she's a bonafide icon. The fact that she's still working nowadays simply shows that she's still working. She had actually retired from modeling in 1998, and chose to make a comeback in 2001. She was at the top of her game when it actually mattered. Nowadays, like I mentioned, no one other than fashion die-hards actually cares about the fashion scene.

 

[AD011620]

There is a special meaning attached to the word 'super' ... they were super because they did equally well in all areas of fashion and managed to get a recognition beyond the fashion world and attract general public interest but remained unique and exclusive. This is as simple as that... it is not only the 'supermodel era' that matters.
Nowadays people specifically interested in fashion care about models. There might be some exceptions, of course. Some people obsessed with fashion don’t care about models. I have friends who spend thousands every year on their clothes but they may struggle with model names. Models do not attract general public interest; it goes straight to the movie industry, music, sports and politics. Possibly fashion follows them. Supermodel phenomenon was destroyed by fashion professionals themselves which was a big big big mistake but at that point it looked like a logical way out for some designers who refused to use supermodels who became bigger than all their collections...
How could anyone possibly not consider Kate as a super?! She is tooootally overated at the moment but I think we should give a credit to her incredible work. At the moment I feel irritated every time I see her because she’s lost this little element that made her so special... she became a mass production in the UK, sadly.
Gisele is a phenomenal model... she happened to be in the right place at the right time...
Eva is one of my favourite models ever... but I think she was more of a European Supermodel although she did huge campaigns...
Claudia, Cindy, Linda, Naomi, Christy, Stephanie, Kristen, Helena, Tatjana, etc will remain relevant as long as people remember them because they embodied fashion, they made it exciting, lovable and if they keep doing this job it is because they decided so... People still use these names even during very simple conversations like e.g. who does she think she is Claudia Schiffer? Or Cindy Crafword...
The only supermodel after Gisele for me is Natalia Vodianova and she is the one that people know more or less about but again not as much as supers...

 

[agee]

Helena and Stephanie are undoubtedly supermodels, as are Eva and Kristen. The big difference between them and Kate & Gisele is that Kate & Gisele weren't even a factor in the supermodel era. Kate didn't start to receive major bookings and whatnot until 1993, a moment in which public fascination with models was already waning. Not only was she not a factor in the supermodel era, but no one considered her a supermodel in circa 1993. And to be honest, I don't think she's known outside of a fashion context to this day here in the US. She might be considered the greatest thing since sliced bread in the UK, because that's where she's from. But here in the US it's a whole other ballpark. And here it's commercial work that provides a model with exposure and recognition. I don't live in Middle America, I live in Miami, and yet I haven't heard anything about Kate in the media since that scandal a few years ago involving a picture which seemed to show her using a certain drug. Whereas during the last few weeks, someone like Heidi Klum was in the news. And of course, Gisele is a product of the 21st century. She'd been a model since the 90s, but the public didn't become familiar with her until she started dating Leo DiCaprio and became the face of Victoria's Secret.

It all boils down to what I said in post #48 about the time period of the supermodel phenomenon. When Linda landed on the cover of Vogue Italia last year, someone here at TFS quipped that "she's not relevant, why is she on the cover?"
She was on the cover because she's a bonafide icon. The fact that she's still working nowadays simply shows that she's still working. She had actually retired from modeling in 1998, and chose to make a comeback in 2001. She was at the top of her game when it actually mattered. Nowadays, like I mentioned, no one other than fashion die-hards actually cares about the fashion scene.

It seems like you are saying that to be a supermodel you have to have been at your peak during the supermodel era, I have a different point of view. As I said previously, the reason why that period of time is referred to as an era is because there were several supermodels being supermodels concurrently and not just one or two, but there can be a supermodel being born right this second.

Kate Moss during her hey day was as recognizable in the US and elsewhere as the 90s supers were during theirs and probably more, save Cindy Crawford. She was the Calvin Klein girl (and Calvin Klein jeans and underwear are commercial products) and she dated Johnny Depp, that parallels Claudia being the Guess girl and dating magician guy.

Everything you are saying about Linda applies to Kate Moss, Kate can go and live on Mars for five years and when she returns she will be on the cover of Vogue Paris, and would probably have been on the cover of ten British Vogues during her absence. Conversely what you are saying about Kate applies to the supers, once their hey day ended so did their recognizability outside of their home countries unless they were caught up in a scandal like Naomi. Although they probably also maintain recognizability among the people who were really into them, so there is probably a niche of people who will always recognize Claudia as the Guess Girl and Kate as the Calvin Klein Girl.

 

[Sam12]

Miranda Kerr is the closest to the definition of a supermodel in this day and age.
I had high hopes for Doutzen, but I just don't see it anymore.
In the future I expect great things from Rosie Huntington Whiteley, she is certainly on the right path.

There are others with potential but the above are the ones I can see for now.

 

[Echoes]

Miranda Kerr is the closest to the definition of a supermodel in this day and age.

Not even close. No where near close in the same context as the big names.

I mean ... I think the keyword here is "perrsonality" ...

In my eyes, a supermodel was someone who could stride the catwalk, do the cover of Vogue Italia, marry a film star, shoot a swimsuit calendar and sell Pepsi to millions. These days, such a distance has opened up between the look demanded by the runways and magazines, and the look that sells to a mass market outside of fashion, that it's hard to imagine a crop of girls who would be able to 'do it all'.

Agreed. The term transcends the runway.

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...

Yes, and people still sigh when they see them. There is a famous episode of "Third Rock From The Sun" with several top names of the era that gets me every time I see it.

I know that people hate her with the heat of a thousand suns, but Chanel Iman, along with Karlie Kloss and Lara Stone, are the ones that I see as being on the path to supermodeldom.

I think that Coco Rocha has (had) what it takes, but she does not seem that interested in modeling being her primary profession.

I disagree on the first three, they just don't have 'it'. I do agree on Coco though. If she wanted to she could take the world. She has the talent and magic.

^ You don't consider Gisele Bundchen or Kate Moss supermodels?

No. I really don't.


In addition to the names mentioned, there was Angie Everhart that was enormously well-known in her time. And of course Janice Dickinson and Kathy Ireland.

You didn't have to know anything about fashion or modeling or celebrities. The paparazzi celebrity-makers didn't exist back then, but EVERYBODY knew these girls. They were everywhere, seemingly at the same time. They were in print ads in mainstream media, catalogs, magazines, on television in ads and interviews, personal appearances at parades or community events, nightclubs, sporting events, music videos, on calendars, some did movies or TV shows, etc.

Grandma and Grandpa knew them. 'Linda' meant Linda Evangalista. 'Naomi' could only be followed by Cambpell. Iman was another. Twiggy. Yasmeen Ghauri was a one of a kind face and figure that is still unequaled today.

I don't know where the next one will come from. I've looked at many threads on this board and I have yet to see one who has the charisma to pull it off. Hillary Rhoda, maybe someday, but not yet.

The VS girls are has-beens, over exposed in limited fields. Yes, they have a lot of fans and fansites, but they don't approach 'Super' status.

The true Supers were almost goddesses despite the scandals that surrounded them. Some of them are still widely remembered 15, 20, 25 years after they last worked. Some are coming back like Linda and Stephanie and Elle. Why? Because they can't be replaced.

10 years from now, no one will remember Daria or Lara or Cyntia, but they'll still remember Cindy and Stephanie and Janice and Angie and Linda.

 

[Sam12]

Not even close. No where near close in the same context as the big names.
.

What big names are you referring to?? If you are talking about the 90's supermodels, well times have changed. Of course she is nowhere near that level but thats mainly because the word supermodel doesn't exactly have as much merit as it did in the 90's. But she is definitely a supermodel of this current era. She is the one after Gisele.

 

[tigerrouge]

This is the kind of dangerous talk that'll provoke Janice Dickinson into doing something else to prove that not only was she the first supermodel, but also now the only person entitled to bestow the term on anyone.

 

[AD011620]

I think one thing we should consider as well is 'followings'. Let's face it many models may have some fans but not big followings... I think supers have huge followings... look at Ebay, their stuff always sells and people don't hesitate to pay money for their new stuff either...and if you ever tried to sell anything on Ebay you will agree...you can sell stuff with Yasmeen or Helena from the 90's easily from £15 to £50 and that's lot of money for just an old copy of a magazine...
I still disagree regarding Kate and Gisele... I think they definitely Supermodels... Gisele is a mega star... and even though she is not my favourite models, i admire her talent, and she does not do L>A>Z>Y... let's just exclude VS stuff though...

 

[AD011620]

P.S. In terms of work and achievements in the fashion world we can find many more models who could be called Supermodels but when it comes to fame and popularity we may struggle...

 

[Spiral1532]

It seems like you are saying that to be a supermodel you have to have been at your peak during the supermodel era, I have a different point of view. As I said previously, the reason why that period of time is referred to as an era is because there were several supermodels being supermodels concurrently and not just one or two, but there can be a supermodel being born right this second.

I do wonder what your personal definition of a supermodel is, given that you wouldn't consider Stephanie and Helena supermodels.
I'd like to point out that during the early 90s, Stephanie was in a relationship with Axl Rose (from the band Guns N' Roses) and she appeared in a couple of the band's videos (she even wore a Versace bridal gown in one of the videos). And Helena appeared in the famous "Wicked Game" video (which aired on tv during the same period in 1990 as George Michael's "Freedom" video). For the members of the public who weren't already familiar with Helena, that video served as their introduction to her. What better way for a model to gain additional exposure in the public eye than by appearing in popular videos put out by popular musicians?

Kate Moss during her hey day was as recognizable in the US and elsewhere as the 90s supers were during theirs and probably more, save Cindy Crawford. She was the Calvin Klein girl (and Calvin Klein jeans and underwear are commercial products) and she dated Johnny Depp, that parallels Claudia being the Guess girl and dating magician guy.

When I think of Kate Moss' heyday, I think of the waif model period of the mid-90s, and I'm pretty sure that when people who followed fashion in the 90s hear the name Kate Moss, the word "waif" comes to mind. The waif model trend didn't really serve much purpose, and some of the models from that period (including Kate) became associated with the whole "heroin chic" thing. Also, there was a particular year (either 1995 or 1996, I can't remember exactly) when Amber and Shalom were considered the top models of the moment. They even jointly hosted MTV's House of Style show, succeeding Cindy Crawford.
And Kate was never "the" Calvin Klein girl. Firstly, she wasn't the only female model to appear in Calvin Klein ads during the circa 1993 period. There was another female model in the ads (who even appeared in a couple of the ads alongside Kate), but her name escapes me at the moment. And secondly and most importantly, Christy Turlington was thee Calvin Klein girl, as she had a $12 million contract with the label, which began in the late 80s and spanned several years. Regardless, those Kate ads never had the type of public impact that Claudia Schiffer's Guess ads had. Can you say, Brigitte Bardot lookalike?
Also, ever heard of the Fashion Cafe??? It was a venture of restaurant chains jointly owned by Christy, Claudia, Naomi, and Elle, akin to the likes of Hard Rock Cafe and Planet Hollywood. The Fashion Cafe chain was established sometime in 1994 or 1995. So to assume that Kate Moss surpassed that type of public recognition is just absurd.

Everything you are saying about Linda applies to Kate Moss, Kate can go and live on Mars for five years and when she returns she will be on the cover of Vogue Paris, and would probably have been on the cover of ten British Vogues during her absence. Conversely what you are saying about Kate applies to the supers, once their hey day ended so did their recognizability outside of their home countries unless they were caught up in a scandal like Naomi. Although they probably also maintain recognizability among the people who were really into them, so there is probably a niche of people who will always recognize Claudia as the Guess Girl and Kate as the Calvin Klein Girl.

For all I care, Kate Moss could land on the cover of British(!) Vogue every month of next year starting with January, yet the only people who would actually care to know about it would be a)people in the UK and b)her fans. A no-name model like Natasha Poly could also disappear for five years, and then come back, and guess what? She too would be on the cover of Vogue Paris upon her comeback. That doesn't prove nor indicate anything.

And if you wanna claim that the supers' recognizability ended outside of their home countries after their heyday, then how do you explain the fact that Linda Evangelista was the model who was chosen to appear on the cover of American Vogue in 2006, after the magazine had featured only non-models on its cover for over a year? Linda isn't American, she's Canadian. Why would Vogue take a chance like that, unless she's somebody who's recognizable to the celebrity-worshipping American public?

 

[markese91]

I heard Miranda Kerr... that would be a no. I don't think she's a supermodel.

And I'm surprised that Karlie's name is being left out... I really am baffled by how you're picking models... she's walking all the major shows.... last year she was liked the most photographed model in Vogue... she's booking campaigns... what are you qualifying as models.