The Supermodel - Is it Time for a Rebirth?

[tigerrouge]

I wish the world could be forced to make one resolution for 2011 - and that's to give the word "icon" a rest. The concept has been thrown around that much, it's become disposable and meaningless.

 

[LabelWhore4]

^^I agree on everything but Gisele. She is a very special case. She has been going for about 15 years and her career continues to hit new highs. I have no doubt that years from now she will be regarded in the same light as Dovima, Suzie Parker, Veruschka, Twiggy, Gia, Iman, Christy, Naomi, and Kate. Her career is the stuff of modeling legend. She is a Super in the truest since of the word!

 

[senorgemma]

Just to add to the 'celebrity model' bit, I've noticed that in some magazines where they talk about the style of celebrities (and I mean more mainstream magazines, not fashion fashion ones like Vogue) I sometimes see them talking about the style of Lara Stone, Natalia Vodianova and Anja Rubik, so maybe there is some hope?

 

[ad030817]

Models today are too angular & child like. This image is not appealing to the women (& their men) who read magazines therefore they are easily forgettable.
Compare Linda E circa 1991 & Miranda Kerr(2010) both 26yrs advertising for Jill Sander. There is no comparison as to who is the true supermodel.
source:frillr & shoppingblog

 

[annelein]

Models today are too angular & child like. This image is not appealing to the women (& their men) who read magazines therefore they are easily forgettable.
Compare Linda E circa 1991 & Miranda Kerr(2010) both 26yrs advertising for Jill Sander. There is no comparison as to who is the true supermodel.
source:frillr & shoppingblog

Wow, what a clear illustration of the shift in aesthetics!

In the recent campaign, the model (Miranda) practically fades into the background; only her hairline, a shadow of the arm and jaw shows - the image is basically framed between the dress and the glasses.

In the older campaign, it is ALL about the girl! You don't see any designer product except some fabric folds and the focus is completely on Linda's face, her facial expression and whats going on behind her eyes.

Jil Sander ca 1991 - if you want to know what that is - the answer is in the gaze of Linda Evangelista. Jil Sander 2010 is sleek glasses and a minimalistic yet laboured dress. Times change.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

When I saw Karlie Kloss strut out first during Prabal Gurung's fall show, I thought, "yes, she has the makings of a super model" - a great walk, personality, a nice figure, gorgeous but expressive face. Voila! More models like her and there could be a renaissance of models with personalities that ooze out on the catwalk. Karlie also was the second last walker in that show, in a full length black gown, and i barely noticed the last dress/model!

Fingers crossed.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

Models, we must remember, are not hangers, after all. They are human beings. So why not emphasize their differences, in looks, size, personality. To me, that would be more appealing to consumers. But that's just my take.

 

[WilhelmF]

Fantastic thread. Very eye-opener.

Wether we'll see a rebirth of supermodels... I don't know. Quite frankly, the term "supermodel" has died. That era already passed. I come from a generation that lived practically with the no-face, extremely waif, human hangers models. This is not their fault, I don't think it's anyone's fault. These times have become so hard for everybody. Just last season we saw this fierce competition on who brought the most iconic to the table. We saw Raquel getting Gucci exclusive, Lara getting Calvin Klein exclusive, Natasha Poly getting Givenchy exclusive, the super cast at Balenciaga (Gisele, Amber, Stella... that somehow felt not right because that cast seemed so forced).

I think first, the fashion industry needs to stop vomiting girls one season and dropping them the next one. Next, align in an image, a vision that speaks to this generation and then find someone that fits that vision and speaks to this generation and then perhaps have a so-called supermodel.

Let's take Kate Moss' example. My conception of her - and I might stir someone's feeling with this one, but this is my personal view of her - is that she didn't only make that heroin chic a hot thing in the industry, she spoke to that generation that lived under the grunge influence. Suddenly looking rock-star waify, undone, drug-indused was considered normal because those were the days... Not to mention, being Brit was so cool at that moment. You saw bands like Blur and Oasis dominating the charts, British designers like John Galliano and Alexander McQueen having their momentum... A whole socio-cultural movement happening at that time.

I'm tired of models who are considered faceless, with almost no rights in this industry. Teenagers forced to keep zombie, emotionless faces at runways. Newcomers getting newcomer-y editorials in magazines and then dropped by the following newcomer. I want someone stability, I want someone that speaks to me, not an insipid face...

Oh-kay. Those were my two cents

 

[brooksie]

Unless the celebs drop the fashion ball again (as they did in the late 80s-early 90s)....nah, the supermodel factory is CLOSED. The ones that were made back then are the ones we've got. The celebs are now much more entrenched in the fashion world than they were even before the supermodel era.

The great irony here is that the supermodels of yore are still/back working and getting plumb jobs. These women in their late 30s-mid 40s are very much in competition w/ these young ones and many times doing just as well if not better. It's a shame that almost none of these young models will get the chance to have a career like Linda or even Jerry Hall, but celebs have made them redundant.

 

[congacon]

the term supermodel (or the original five) is way overrated. not everything about them is super quintessential bigger or more relevant than everything else after or before that era. yes they were big but not in every sense......

 

[Street_a_Licious]

only if the new 'supermodels' look anything remotely like the old ones, bodywise at least.

 

[congacon]

only if the new 'supermodels' look anything remotely like the old ones, bodywise at least.

well, if u think about victoria's secret models ull find tonnes of models with gorgeous bodies. eg, isabelle fontana, adriana, and so many more. daria got a killer body, same goes for giselle. so to me, bodies is definitely not the issue here.

i think we should look forward and think forward rather than looking back at the supermodel's era. sure models these days dont get as much attention as before but quality wise there are so many exceptional talented models like daria werbowy, raquel zimmerman, karen elson.

 

[Junee]

Here's my take on the Supermodel Issue:
To be a Supermodel like everyone else is saying you have to have 1. World Recognition as being MODEL(Hi Fashion, Commercial etc)
the second part is you must possess the ability to transcend the different model markets. If we all remember it was the Supers that started walking the runway shows, appearing in commercial ads, fronting beauty campaigns, representing household and family products, and appearing on Countless Magazine covers and billboards. Since that era has passed what can the current girls do to establish themselves as bonafied supers? I think they're doing it....Lets be honest here....The VS girls are the more famous of todays Top Models. So with that being said its the VS girls thats gonna help usher in the new era of the Supermodel. Think about it; Adriana, Miranda, Allesandra, Chanel, Rosie, Candice etc are the new girls thats transcending the model markets of today. All of them are getting High Fashion coverage as well as Commercial appeal. The average citizen can Identify these girls due to the commercial success. Where as Natasha, Sasha, Raquel etc are the lesser known model to the general public. So if we're looking for an exact duplication of what the Big Six did then we'll never see the supermodel era get back to that. But its a new kind of revolution where the Commercial Model just may very well be the Ideal of the New Supermodel because they're doing exactly what the Supers of the 80' and early 90's did. Now regarding High Fashion Models like Jac, Sasha, Arizona, Karlie, Jourdan they will continue to be Exceptional Top Models and even may reach Celebrity status at some point but in order to push the envelope thay have to make a Gigantic contribution to the world of Modeling like the Supers before them did.
So many valid viewpoints expressed here and all of them so far are good ones. I feel that we're in the wake of a New Era for the Supermodel and its because we still have Naomi, Linda, Christy, Claudia, Shalom, Kristen etc to satisfy the crowd that appreciated them when they ruled and now we also have Chanel, Candice, Allesandra, Adriana, Rosie the new supermodel to allow the new generation to see what defines a Supermodel in this day and age. We also have the Silent Supers IMO like; Karlie, Jourdan, Natasha, Joan, Constance, Liu, Jac, etc that are bridging the gap between the VS girls and the supers of yesteryear. Now just to be clear I'm not saying the VS girls are better than the Hi Fashion girls they're just creating a new movement that I feel is igniting a Supermodel revolution.
And BTW: Generally The VS girls walk 10 times better than the average Hi Fashion Girls....with the exception of MariaCarla, Natasha, Kasia, Carmen etc.
And anybody that feels that Kate and Gisele arent Supers are delusional!!!!!! It was Naomi that said after Gisele there aren't any more Supermodels.....

 

[agee]

My question is that if we live in a culture that would celebritize Snookie and other reality TV personalities, then why hasn't a model captured the public's imagination in recent years? Is it that the models lack the right kind of "it" factor or is it that they are not being put on the right path?

 

[blueorchid]

I think it's probably because models aren't everywhere like they used to be in the supermodel era. Whereas Snooki and other reality "stars" are all over the place. I can't turn around without hearing something about Snooki or someone from the Real Housewives. Models aren't really as noticeable as they were.

Also, don't the majority of people watch those trashy reality shows to feel better about themselves and mock them? Maybe the reverse effect would be true if models were in their place. I wonder if that has anything to do with it. It's easier to feel superior when you compare yourself to Snooki or someone on Teen Mom.

 

[congacon]

i dont think being famous is the most important factor in determining supermodels. before supermodel u have to be a great model first. substance over form, just bc u r on victoria's secret that doesnt mean u r automatically labelled as supermodel. to me that is just silly.

calling chanel or candice as supermodels is a slap to the face for the profession. they have accomplished next to nothing. u call giselle or kate moss as supermodels bc they were on countless numbers of prestigious magazines, blue chip campaigns one after another and then commercial ads. they are well rounded. chanel and candice or miranda...........common. victoria's secret turns their models into celebrities but not supermodels.

to be honest, lots of models just want to do their jobs and go home unrecognized by people so they can have just a normal line. so supermodels or not no big deal

 

[Junee]

i dont think being famous is the most important factor in determining supermodels. before supermodel u have to be a great model first. substance over form, just bc u r on victoria's secret that doesnt mean u r automatically labelled as supermodel. to me that is just silly.
calling chanel or candice as supermodels is a slap to the face for the profession. they have accomplished next to nothing. u call giselle or kate moss as supermodels bc they were on countless numbers of prestigious magazines, blue chip campaigns one after another and then commercial ads. they are well rounded. chanel and candice or miranda...........common. victoria's secret turns their models into celebrities but not supermodels. to be honest, lots of models just want to do their jobs and go home unrecognized by people so they can have just a normal line. so supermodels or not no big deal

Why is it a slap in the face to the Modeling profession to call Candice, Chanel etc Supermodels. They are indeed top models that are garnering public attention for being virtually everywhere at the present moment. They're recognizable by their commercial success and they still partake in High Fashion shows, edits, covers and etc. They even delve into TV appearances too. We need to stop basing our opinion on what a Supermodel is by what was done 2 decades ago. History shouldnt and most likely wont be repeated so with that being said we have to find a new ideal of what defines a Supermodel in these strange times.
Modeling itself is a profession that the general public isnt interested in anymore, besides us Modelizers. The VS girls IMO are the current crop of girls that help bring attention to the Modeling profession as like the girls of yesteryear did.
Today we live in a Celebrity Obsessed culture and thats why Snooki is more popular than Karlie, MariaCarla, & Sessilee and thats a fact. Of course IMO Top models are more important but today we live in a reality TV world

 

[candlebougie]

The only models that will be remembered and achieve "supermodel"-status outside of the industry are girls that are able to capture the imagination of a broad public - and with so much competition by other celebrities (unlike 20 years ago) that works best with high-profile jobs like VS, a relationship with a celebrity, or some other aspect that makes them unique.

Even hard working girls like Jac, Frida, Natasha etc will never get a lot of public attention because for 95% of the population they are just random nameless faces in magazines.

Girls like Candice have a much bigger chance to be remembered as supermodels.

 

[Eterna]

I do not know if Candice has the personality needed to be remembered in 10 years, doesn’t look like she need fame very much.
To me that is a feature of the current supermodels: want, need and will do what ever it takes to be famous. Usually is selling a piece of their privacy.

I totally agree with congacon, it is disrespectful to call "supermodels" to models who have done pretty much nothing when you compare with a real supermodel (Gisele, Claudia, Christy,...).

 

[Squizree]

I hope the supermodel era never comes back. The 90s supers were tacky, arrogant, obnoxious and overexposed. Some still are....ahem....Naomi....ahem. And I think the fashion industry is VERY careful about keeping it from happening. A lot of today's models have the potential to become the next Naomi or Claudia but I think they're deliberately denied that path, in the fear of absolutely degrading or cheapening or the fashion industry's image.