US Harper's Bazaar August 2024 : Winona Ryder by Liv Liberg

[NYLA22]

Love Winona, and they did her dirty here. Such a wasted opportunity.

 

[philophile]

Society being woke shouldn't mean the death of glamour.

I don't understand why certain members of this forum insist in equating wokeness with fashion being crappy right now. No matter how hard I try, I simply fail in understanding, conceiving, rationalizing and seeing the logic of how the one is the consequence of another. There's a thread in Fashion in Depth that names countless reasons for the state of the fashion industry right now, (blaming it on wokeness is just one and it's by far the dumbest) I highly recommend it.

I've been a Winona fan since I was a teenager, so she's been some sort of a personal hero. However, as happy as I am to see her in a cover, this is godawful in every possible way. And while I remember amazing pictures of her in the past, I simply don't think she can be this bad at modelling. The photographer simply failed and this is coming from someone who has enjoyed Liv's work in the past. Also that hairstyle is not flattering on her, the poses are the most awkward thing in the history of fashion magazines. This is why this cover is such a disappointment.

 

[Kaze]

Not sure what they were thinking here. Last month we had armpit hair and now we have this. Someone needs to be let go.

 

[aracic]

I don't understand why certain members of this forum insist in equating wokeness with fashion being crappy right now. No matter how hard I try, I simply fail in understanding, conceiving, rationalizing and seeing the logic of how the one is the consequence of another. There's a thread in Fashion in Depth that names countless reasons for the state of the fashion industry right now, (blaming it on wokeness is just one and it's by far the dumbest) I highly recommend it.

The industry started very visibly declining at the same time as everyone started suddenly banging on about inclusivity. Not that one is related to another neccessarily, but in a lot of ways it is because inclusivity allowed for a lot of mediocrity under the guise of social progress. Something shifted and just never aligned properly.

 

[youarearockstar]

This is wildly bad, and unsuccessful at whatever 'vision' was trying to be achieved. And with Winona??

 

[philophile]

The industry started very visibly declining at the same time as everyone started suddenly banging on about inclusivity. Not that one is related to another neccessarily, but in a lot of ways it is because inclusivity allowed for a lot of mediocrity under the guise of social progress. Something shifted and just never aligned properly.

I believe more qualified people already wrote very backed up reasons why this is happening in the thread I mentioned. This is a very simplistic explanation at best. Even the NASA is inclusive, not out of altruism, not out of humanitarianism, but because it is a proven fact that progress relies on problem solving and collaboration and groups composed of people with diverse backgrounds, experiences and areas of expertise tend to be more creative and innovative. It was only until NASA hired three black women (engineers and scientists) that they could think out of the box and when they finally made it to the moon.

Finally and most importantly: I do not believe the diversity quota is that high in the fashion industry as you are giving it credit to. I research editorials every single day and most of the people working behind them are in an overwhelming majority white. You just see more representation in front of the camera, but behind the scenes there is not much. What is so ridiculous about what you are mentioning is that you are suggesting that hiring PoC automatically means that they are mediocre at their job. Do you really think businesses want to face any risks or losses just by hiring others out of compassion? That is insanely risible. Nepotism, on the other hand, is a very well known practice in the fashion industry, and let me tell you that is the real cause that allows a lot of mediocre people being hired in the base of their family ties, social class, or connections.

 

[MModa]

Love everything about this cover! ❤️

 

[Kimy Jo]

Horrible
Not even Brazilian Bazaar would do stuff like this

 

[upNorth]

I actually love it, it feels very Winona.

 

[Avonlea]

You have a beautiful woman woman and can't take a single good photo of her. Liv Liberg should think about different career.

 

[crmsn]

That is the most horrifying promo of LONGLEGS so far.

 

[LastNight]

So amateur. So so amateur.

That glorious cover with Regina King was truly a one off, huh?

That concept of the many little b/w photos is so badly executed here it’s laughable.

 

[aracic]

I believe more qualified people already wrote very backed up reasons why this is happening in the thread I mentioned. This is a very simplistic explanation at best. Even the NASA is inclusive, not out of altruism, not out of humanitarianism, but because it is a proven fact that progress relies on problem solving and collaboration and groups composed of people with diverse backgrounds, experiences and areas of expertise tend to be more creative and innovative. It was only until NASA hired three black women (engineers and scientists) that they could think out of the box and when they finally made it to the moon.

Finally and most importantly: I do not believe the diversity quota is that high in the fashion industry as you are giving it credit to. I research editorials every single day and most of the people working behind them are in an overwhelming majority white. You just see more representation in front of the camera, but behind the scenes there is not much. What is so ridiculous about what you are mentioning is that you are suggesting that hiring PoC automatically means that they are mediocre at their job. Do you really think businesses want to face any risks or losses just by hiring others out of compassion? That is insanely risible. Nepotism, on the other hand, is a very well known practice in the fashion industry, and let me tell you that is the real cause that allows a lot of mediocre people being hired in the base of their family ties, social class, or connections.

I never mentioned inclusivity exclusive to race, though. Mediocrity I speak of applies to everyone, and perhaps the most offensive sort of inclusivity is the inclusion of regular people with little to no skill but excellent connections, allowed at the table thanks solely to their social media numbers and reach. But I do understand why your mind went directly to poc. Naturally, I don't think all poc are automatically mediocre at their jobs... And I also don't think that companies hire them out of compassion, it's never about compassion or will to do better so much as it is about profit. It's always about profit.

But anyway, it doesn't matter really. This is still a horrible cover in a sad time for fashion.

 

[grimesisnotmymother]

I never mentioned inclusivity exclusive to race, though. Mediocrity I speak of applies to everyone, and perhaps the most offensive sort of inclusivity is the inclusion of regular people with little to no skill but excellent connections, allowed at the table thanks solely to their social media numbers and reach. But I do understand why your mind went directly to poc. Naturally, I don't think all poc are automatically mediocre at their jobs... And I also don't think that companies hire them out of compassion, it's never not about compassion or will to do better as much as it is about profit. It's always about profit.

Anyway, it doesn't matter really. This is still a horrible cover in a sad time for fashion.

I never comment on here but "Naturally, I don't think all poc are automatically mediocre at their jobs..." is the craziest thing I've read that I have to applause for this!!!!

 

[blueorchid]

Again, a group of "qualified" people sat in a room and chose this for the cover. That will never stop amazing me.

This is what bothers me the most about these poor covers/magazines. It's absolutely wild to me that people thought: "Yes, this is EXACTLY how I want to present our magazine! This is what the people want! They will buy it!!!"

Alexey Brodovitch is rolling in his grave!

 

[alwaysademo]

nobody who genuinely cares for the subject would choose that picture as a cover and pick that sensationalized tagline to go with it. zero pride.

 

[mepps]

Burn it all, then burn it again.

 

[oaklee91]

Certainly too messy

 

[Alquimista]

If it was mediocre it would be good. This is bad, amateur, lacking in any rigour you would expect from a publication like HB.

Magazines are not dying. They're already dead.

 

[MulletProof]

I never comment on here but "Naturally, I don't think all poc are automatically mediocre at their jobs..." is the craziest thing I've read that I have to applause for this!!!!

Yeah.. when you extract it as a phrase to be judged alone just to accelerate and nurture shock. You really could've grabbed any part of these posts, or any line in any post about a more sensitive topic, and it would sound just as crazy:

- inclusivity allowed for a lot of mediocrity
- inclusivity is the inclusion of regular people with little to no skill
- allowed at the table thanks solely to their social media numbers
- It's always about profit.

This is also why the industry has plummeted in terms of content and competitiveness and become dependable of shams like commodity activism, because the attention span of the average fashion enthusiast has been intentionally reduced to microscopic levels to favor rampant consumerism that critical thinking to absorb context, which is the very foundation of debate, is quickly shut down under the good ol' "you're a hater" "I'd like to see YOU directing a magazine!" "you're bullying!" "I've never seen so much negativity" (when in reality, what you have seen on social media is an excess of faux positivity that demonizes criticism of any kind). Fast forward to 10-12 years of the same conglomerate-sponsored indoctrination and as soon as anyone is spotted saying anything more than just applause, we scan quickly hoping to fish for that part that will quickly elevate ourselves at the expense of sinking or invalidating someone else regardless of their intent. Individuality reigns and the often unethical practices of corporate fashion are preserved.

Given the popularity of this phenomenon in current, commercial fashion, I'm not surprised this would be your preferred method to debut your new account, just slightly surprised that you felt compelled to tell us that you never comment yet imply that you read regularly and somehow this is "the craziest". Assuming you do read regularly and aren't just scanning for spicy content, of all the highly offensive things posted in the last year (especially in relation to women working in fashion), it's a line you chose to be crazy what is the craziest..

Finally, 'I never comment on here' 'I don't feel like commenting here much because it's all a bunch of bitter old women!' (another recent, similar debut) only means one thing: you want to comment here so bad, regularly, but don't have the humility to just post a comment and carry on, no, you need the attention, the bombastic and offensive first post that will make people quickly notice you, god forbid no one likes your posts because.. wired to social media. FYI, tfs did not have likes until very recently, and now I wish they had never brought them here, they really bring out the worst in some.