I know 'glamour' is such a dirty word in the offices of Vogue nowadays, but why does the cover have to look so dreary?
Firstly, visually speaking, the image itself is just not American Vogue. Not even nu-Vogue, the celebrity obsessed wannabe that tries so hard to be 'part of the conversation'. It looks more like a lockdown cover under Farneti. Someone commented newspaper supplement and I see that as well. There's not enough refinement to make it Vogue.
Overall the entire effort seems a bit like a box-ticking exercise, something that will be added to the trivia and flashbacks of all parties involved.
I don't understand where Vogue is going with the 'women dressing women' angle, because lest we forget that when the time came for Miuccia to champion someone other than herself, she chose a man. I mean I doubt it shocked anyone because, at the core, she was always a second-wave feminist. But it's just very odd to see her presented under this label because if you want to talk about the 'boys club' in fashion she's right there at the head of the table. Think back on all the fashion brands people used to complain about who had the least ethnic, shape and gender diversity (the very complaints and pushback that led to this Vogue cover celebrating women designers), Prada was easily the most problematic.
Making clothes for women doesn't start and end at simply being a woman. There must be more criteria, surely. What else are you doing to empower women not only through your clothes but also through your position? Are they consistently working with female creatives and artisans, female-run suppliers, how many women are employed by the brand and what are their benefits? The list goes on!
All of this is far too surface level for me.