tigerrouge
don't look down
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 18,299
- Reaction score
- 8,104
In my part of the UK, the Mischa issue is still on the shelves! No sign of subscription copy either.
UK Vogue December 2006 : The 90th Anniversary Issue
- Thread starter susie_bubble
- Start date
susie_bubble
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2005
- Messages
- 4,001
- Reaction score
- 2
^^Well, the difference is the actual articles themselves.... a lot more substantial and weighty that past flimsy affairs.
Which makes sense...UK Vogue's strength is in it's interesting articles... I turn to other editions for great editorials....
Which makes sense...UK Vogue's strength is in it's interesting articles... I turn to other editions for great editorials....
i,m gonna go check my local newsagent now will let u know if i get it, hope u get urs soon!tigerrouge said:
can i ask i was gonna subscribe 2 vogue but i guess mite not be a great edition every month and rather have a choice 2 flip through it , r acatully this is part of the reason i love this site, if there is a sealed edition u cn see the editorals here first lol
but is it worth getting a subscription?i thought u get the edition before they hit the shops?
tigerrouge
don't look down
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 18,299
- Reaction score
- 8,104
I subscribe because it means I get it cheaper - I think it works out at around £2 for an issue. You can get some good offers for all Conde Nast magazines on those little flyers you get inside the magazine, especially at Christmas. But I doubt I'd subscribe if I were outside the UK - I'd go for the 'browse before buying' option, as a subscription would cost too much.
It's not guaranteed that you get the magazine before it hits the shops - around half the time, I'd say I do. But I'm nowhere near London, which might explain that.
I subscribe to UK Vogue, Glamour and Vanity Fair, with Glamour being the most reliable of all three magazines for arriving early.
It's not guaranteed that you get the magazine before it hits the shops - around half the time, I'd say I do. But I'm nowhere near London, which might explain that.
I subscribe to UK Vogue, Glamour and Vanity Fair, with Glamour being the most reliable of all three magazines for arriving early.
wow, thanx tigerrouge! yeah il check it out but as u say its not really worth my while getting it with shipping charges etc..
i m just back from my newsagent , they dont have it yet, so typical if i didnt want this issue so bad, it would be everywhere. guess i just gotta wait:-(
i m just back from my newsagent , they dont have it yet, so typical if i didnt want this issue so bad, it would be everywhere. guess i just gotta wait:-(
In Vogue....90 years of British Vogue
In 'Vogue' - for 90 years
Many happy returns to the glossiest of glossies. To mark the occasion the magazine's creative director Robin Derrick explains what's made its pages dazzle
Published: 06 November 2006
British Vogue was launched in 1916, when importing the American edition became too hazardous during the First World War, and the 90-year trajectory of the magazine is the trajectory of fashion itself.
Fashion, like Vogue, was once the exclusive territory of a small elite, but over the past nine decades it has become an international culture that, in the developed world, touches most of our lives. The Vogue brand has similarly gone on to form part of that language across the globe.
During its lifetime, British Vogue has seen two world wars, and the rise of telephony, photography, air travel, space travel, nuclear energy... feminism, punk rock, Princess Diana, the supermodel, the celebrity, sexual liberation, Aids, New Labour - you name it, Vogue had a take on it.
By trapping the fleeting concerns and obsessions of each generation, Vogue imagery often captured a zeitgeist more accurately than other, more worthy, attempts to do so. In 1947, Clifford Coffin took a series of fashion pictures for Vogue in the still bomb-damaged ruins of Grosvenor Square.
In the photographs, a woman in a ballgown stands in the collapsed hall of a grand house. The war is over, the end of the Empire is at hand. Britain faces huge debts it will take decades to repay. Yet the way the aristocratic model is pictured in the new season's gowns - displaying a mixture of optimism, ignorance and anachronistic self-importance - says more about England at the end of the Second World War than any other picture I know.
For the 90th birthday issue of Vogue, I undertook the first complete survey of the magazine's covers - which, with the usual 12 a year, plus two issues a month in the Fifties, Vogue pattern books and supplements - comes to a total of over 1,500 covers.
The first covers were mostly rather quaint illustrations (photographic covers appeared in the Thirties), often with a cover line in French or a view though a window to a ship on the horizon (a reference to the troops in France). But by 1918 some harsher realities had entered the world of Vogue. The cover from May of that year showed a romanticised field-hospital nurse with soldiers fighting in the trenches behind her, and carried one cover line, "Les blessés" ("The wounded"). One of my favourite covers was the October 1945 "Peace and Reconstruction" issue, simply showing a clear blue sky.
Along with royal coronations, deaths and jubilees, which perhaps you would expect, come other recurring obsessions - from cars and telephones to tennis and skiing. The prism through which Vogue views the world is undoubtedly a very particular one.
The magazine publishes images of women for women to look at, a mechanism that, being a man and the creative director of Vogue, I have always found fascinating. Women like to look at attractive images of women. Sometimes romantic, sometimes erotic, even if the meaning of those words has changed over the years. There is a shared joy a woman gets from looking at an attractive other.
Depictions of women in Vogue have been held up to close scrutiny of late, blamed for the rise of many evils, and yet they have remained remarkably consistent. In the Twenties, the then-illustrated, elongated silhouettes of the models seem remarkably similar to the tall, slim Twiggy of the Sixties, and similar again to the models in a photographic portfolio for the 2000 Millennium issue.
So what has changed? One thing you didn't see in Vogue until the Nineties was the "celebrity cover". There is something very basic that happens when we look at a photograph of a famous person which I believe operates in the same way as when we see pictures of our family - we know something of these people and their lives, or think we do. We feel a certain affection for them.
The crossover point came with the "supermodel", the charmed faces who graced the cover of Vogue, month after month, so much so that they became household names: Linda Evangelista, Cindy Crawford, Christy Turlington, Claudia Schiffer, Naomi Campbell, Helena Christensen et al. They were famous, the magazine-buying public knew who they were and they sold magazines. Best of all, you could book them on a shoot and they would turn up (usually). As time moved on, in an effort to find replacements for this lucrative set, the model agencies threw girl after girl on to the catwalk, each toppling the previous one before anyone had ever the chance to catch her name.
In order to maintain its visibility, Vogue has had to photograph the famous for its covers. Nicole Kidman, Liz Hurley, Gwyneth Paltrow, Sarah Jessica Parker, Keira Knightley, etc - how we wish the list was longer.
Then there is Kate Moss. Since 1993 she has graced a total of 23 Vogue covers. Her longevity adds to her iconic status. The English have always loved her, but not so the rest of the industry. I remember the editor of French Vogue asking me why we were still using her - only to ask her to edit a special issue of that magazine two years later. My favourite Kate cover is the gold issue (December 2001) where Kate appears only in silhouette on a gold background. In the 90th birthday issue of Vogue, Kate is photographed in "The clothes that changed our lives" - items such as "the bra", "denim" and "tights" - an icon in the iconic women's clothes that were invented during the lifetime of the magazine. Source THE INDEPENDENT
In 'Vogue' - for 90 years
Many happy returns to the glossiest of glossies. To mark the occasion the magazine's creative director Robin Derrick explains what's made its pages dazzle
Published: 06 November 2006
British Vogue was launched in 1916, when importing the American edition became too hazardous during the First World War, and the 90-year trajectory of the magazine is the trajectory of fashion itself.
Fashion, like Vogue, was once the exclusive territory of a small elite, but over the past nine decades it has become an international culture that, in the developed world, touches most of our lives. The Vogue brand has similarly gone on to form part of that language across the globe.
During its lifetime, British Vogue has seen two world wars, and the rise of telephony, photography, air travel, space travel, nuclear energy... feminism, punk rock, Princess Diana, the supermodel, the celebrity, sexual liberation, Aids, New Labour - you name it, Vogue had a take on it.
By trapping the fleeting concerns and obsessions of each generation, Vogue imagery often captured a zeitgeist more accurately than other, more worthy, attempts to do so. In 1947, Clifford Coffin took a series of fashion pictures for Vogue in the still bomb-damaged ruins of Grosvenor Square.
In the photographs, a woman in a ballgown stands in the collapsed hall of a grand house. The war is over, the end of the Empire is at hand. Britain faces huge debts it will take decades to repay. Yet the way the aristocratic model is pictured in the new season's gowns - displaying a mixture of optimism, ignorance and anachronistic self-importance - says more about England at the end of the Second World War than any other picture I know.
For the 90th birthday issue of Vogue, I undertook the first complete survey of the magazine's covers - which, with the usual 12 a year, plus two issues a month in the Fifties, Vogue pattern books and supplements - comes to a total of over 1,500 covers.
The first covers were mostly rather quaint illustrations (photographic covers appeared in the Thirties), often with a cover line in French or a view though a window to a ship on the horizon (a reference to the troops in France). But by 1918 some harsher realities had entered the world of Vogue. The cover from May of that year showed a romanticised field-hospital nurse with soldiers fighting in the trenches behind her, and carried one cover line, "Les blessés" ("The wounded"). One of my favourite covers was the October 1945 "Peace and Reconstruction" issue, simply showing a clear blue sky.
Along with royal coronations, deaths and jubilees, which perhaps you would expect, come other recurring obsessions - from cars and telephones to tennis and skiing. The prism through which Vogue views the world is undoubtedly a very particular one.
The magazine publishes images of women for women to look at, a mechanism that, being a man and the creative director of Vogue, I have always found fascinating. Women like to look at attractive images of women. Sometimes romantic, sometimes erotic, even if the meaning of those words has changed over the years. There is a shared joy a woman gets from looking at an attractive other.
Depictions of women in Vogue have been held up to close scrutiny of late, blamed for the rise of many evils, and yet they have remained remarkably consistent. In the Twenties, the then-illustrated, elongated silhouettes of the models seem remarkably similar to the tall, slim Twiggy of the Sixties, and similar again to the models in a photographic portfolio for the 2000 Millennium issue.
So what has changed? One thing you didn't see in Vogue until the Nineties was the "celebrity cover". There is something very basic that happens when we look at a photograph of a famous person which I believe operates in the same way as when we see pictures of our family - we know something of these people and their lives, or think we do. We feel a certain affection for them.
The crossover point came with the "supermodel", the charmed faces who graced the cover of Vogue, month after month, so much so that they became household names: Linda Evangelista, Cindy Crawford, Christy Turlington, Claudia Schiffer, Naomi Campbell, Helena Christensen et al. They were famous, the magazine-buying public knew who they were and they sold magazines. Best of all, you could book them on a shoot and they would turn up (usually). As time moved on, in an effort to find replacements for this lucrative set, the model agencies threw girl after girl on to the catwalk, each toppling the previous one before anyone had ever the chance to catch her name.
In order to maintain its visibility, Vogue has had to photograph the famous for its covers. Nicole Kidman, Liz Hurley, Gwyneth Paltrow, Sarah Jessica Parker, Keira Knightley, etc - how we wish the list was longer.
Then there is Kate Moss. Since 1993 she has graced a total of 23 Vogue covers. Her longevity adds to her iconic status. The English have always loved her, but not so the rest of the industry. I remember the editor of French Vogue asking me why we were still using her - only to ask her to edit a special issue of that magazine two years later. My favourite Kate cover is the gold issue (December 2001) where Kate appears only in silhouette on a gold background. In the 90th birthday issue of Vogue, Kate is photographed in "The clothes that changed our lives" - items such as "the bra", "denim" and "tights" - an icon in the iconic women's clothes that were invented during the lifetime of the magazine. Source THE INDEPENDENT
Last edited by a moderator:
tigerrouge
don't look down
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 18,299
- Reaction score
- 8,104
My personal take from finally getting my subscription issue:
The cover is much better in real life, as not only is it made of a nicely substantial light card, it folds out three times, to leave you with four pages of covers. On the reverse, it's a four-sheet long ad for Tom Ford's Black Orchid perfume, with Carine's daughter.
I like the articles more than the editorials, such as a 6 pg look at how Vogue's photographers have reprised the same scenario in shoots over the years - on the phone, on safari, on a bike, on the airfield. Bizarrely, posing with donkeys seems to also be a recurring theme. A 4 pg whirlwind tour of nine decades of models gives us one small image each of one or two of the most important faces from each decade.
I'm not entirely fond of the Nick Knight edit with Kate Moss, but seen on the page, it has an undeniable energy, especially in the underwear shots. Other shots are hit-and-miss.
Teaming Coco with Gemma in the 14 pg Craig McDean "vintage" edit serves to show the former to a slight disadvantage; Coco looks like such an amateur when seen on a page facing an intense shot of Gemma. I find Coco OK in small doses - she has a certain charm - but I feel that she's still... playing at being a model, rather than actually becoming one. It's not a horrible pairing, these two, it's interesting, but you know, Coco, always with the open mouth. She must have swallowed 20 flies by now.
Portraits by David Bailey brings together the old and the new, and includes on simple shot of Lily Cole standing with Marie Helvin, my fave from this section.
The 66 pg supplement, The Vogue List, is the usual nonsense, where they hype people, things and places that will mostly sink without trace in six months' time without ever meaning a thing.
I'd buy two issues, specifically for that Tom Ford ad, which will slink well down a stairwell wall. Where's my blu-tack?
The cover is much better in real life, as not only is it made of a nicely substantial light card, it folds out three times, to leave you with four pages of covers. On the reverse, it's a four-sheet long ad for Tom Ford's Black Orchid perfume, with Carine's daughter.
I like the articles more than the editorials, such as a 6 pg look at how Vogue's photographers have reprised the same scenario in shoots over the years - on the phone, on safari, on a bike, on the airfield. Bizarrely, posing with donkeys seems to also be a recurring theme. A 4 pg whirlwind tour of nine decades of models gives us one small image each of one or two of the most important faces from each decade.
I'm not entirely fond of the Nick Knight edit with Kate Moss, but seen on the page, it has an undeniable energy, especially in the underwear shots. Other shots are hit-and-miss.
Teaming Coco with Gemma in the 14 pg Craig McDean "vintage" edit serves to show the former to a slight disadvantage; Coco looks like such an amateur when seen on a page facing an intense shot of Gemma. I find Coco OK in small doses - she has a certain charm - but I feel that she's still... playing at being a model, rather than actually becoming one. It's not a horrible pairing, these two, it's interesting, but you know, Coco, always with the open mouth. She must have swallowed 20 flies by now.
Portraits by David Bailey brings together the old and the new, and includes on simple shot of Lily Cole standing with Marie Helvin, my fave from this section.
The 66 pg supplement, The Vogue List, is the usual nonsense, where they hype people, things and places that will mostly sink without trace in six months' time without ever meaning a thing.
I'd buy two issues, specifically for that Tom Ford ad, which will slink well down a stairwell wall. Where's my blu-tack?
liberty33r1b
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 24,304
- Reaction score
- 691
ah, i have to get it today!!
Coco, always with the open mouth. She must have swallowed 20 flies by now.
lol that mad me laugh so much! i,m gonna make it my mission 2 get a copy today, have 2 get it today! was anyone watching this prog on Haute Couture last nite on bbc3, was so good! really makes you see how much hard work goes into the pieces.
lol that mad me laugh so much! i,m gonna make it my mission 2 get a copy today, have 2 get it today! was anyone watching this prog on Haute Couture last nite on bbc3, was so good! really makes you see how much hard work goes into the pieces.
J'ador-DioR
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Messages
- 6,389
- Reaction score
- 1
contiguous said:
Absolutely!. She' s by far the best british model and it' s very odd not to have her in this issue.
I have decided not to invest in this issue mainly because of how utterly boring it looked. I might change my mind and buy it for the Coco/Gemma ed because they both look great there
Thanks for the scans susie
ilovechanelbags
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2006
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
its a wicked issue. I am dying to buy a pair of the silver leather adidas trainers which kate moss models. Does anyone know where i can get them, i've searched all over the internet............... 
Alien Sex Friend
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 8,565
- Reaction score
- 1,356
i won`t agree about coco : for me this ed it`s the last ed whre i tolerate gemma now i`m just sick of her she`s everywhere and everywhere the same coco appear not so often as gemma but i think in a short time she annoy me
that`s just because of the same image everywhere and because of frequent appearence
and i don`t like that ed ( i like McDean though) this work reminds me of his last work for another with gemma and jessica s and for UK vogue with guinevere
boring
that`s just because of the same image everywhere and because of frequent appearence
and i don`t like that ed ( i like McDean though) this work reminds me of his last work for another with gemma and jessica s and for UK vogue with guinevere
boring
peacelover142002
go red sox
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 7,387
- Reaction score
- 1
I hate to admit it: Coco is starting to grow on me.
She and Gemma look great in this ed.
She and Gemma look great in this ed.
Similar Threads
Users who are viewing this thread
New Posts
-
D la Repubblica ‘DStyle’ Autumn/Winter 2024 : Raquel Zimmermann by Mark Kean (10 Viewers)- Latest: alwaysademo
-
-
-
-