US Vogue May 2007 World's Next Top Models by Steven Meisel

[Tierney]

^ I agree!! I really don't understand. I guess to each their own. :-)

 

[sepia]

there will not be Supermodels again, the same Meisel explained the phenomenun of the late 80's, early 90's Supermodels in the HIT GIRLS article.

To some degree, I think this is true. The 1980s were a perfect time for people to have popularity out of the stratosphere, even in other industries, like music. Take Madonna and Michael Jackson, for instance. Can you imagine anyone being more popular or selling more records than Michael Jackson? Ever?

BUT I don't think it's entirely out of the question for a new type of "supermodel" (given a new name, of course, to reflect the difference) to emerge. Can we have popular models again? Can they get on the covers of mainstream magazines? I think that's a possibility. It really all depends on the industry, and if there are enough models to fit the bill. You can't revive the supermodel phenomenon with just a handful of great models.

Now, will there ever be another Christy, Linda, Naomi, Cindy? That's doubtful. But I do think we can see the pendulum swing and see more talented, popular, healthy-looking models soon.

 

[jssy4eva]

^ KARMA!!! That's a great post!

 

[Madhuri]

I don't get all this negativity towards chanel, it seems like people are reaching to finds things wrong with her sometimes

It's actually starting to sound rather insidious but I don't want to go there. When I looked at the editorials Chanel immediatley stood out to me--not for her color- but for her beauty and striking proportions. Her pics were easily the best of the lot. Everyone I showed the cover to immediately commented on her in a positive way. If she were a bad, bland model I could understand the criticism but she is 16 and already has the makings of a star.

The one thing the Supermodels and any other model who becomes well-known have is sex appeal. None of the girls on this cover save perhaps Doutzen have any appeal to the opposite sex. These girls will not be the next Supermodels on the level of the one-name legends. They will have a good run on the runways and high fashion editorials but that is about it.

 

[sepia]

It's actually starting to sound rather insidious but I don't want to go there. When I looked at the editorials Chanel immediatley stood out to me--not for her color- but for her beauty and striking proportions. Her pics were easily the best of the lot. Everyone I showed the cover to immediately commented on her in a positive way. If she were a bad, bland model I could understand the criticism but she is 16 and already has the makings of a star.

I agree. She's not even one of my favorites, but people give her such a hard time. Even if she's not as smart or mature as people would like, she's a good model. I've heard such harsh comments about her, I can't even think of a comparison.

The one thing the Supermodels and any other model who becomes well-known have is sex appeal. None of the girls on this cover save perhaps Doutzen have any appeal to the opposite sex.

You never know, though. Look at the young Kate Moss. She was such a departure from the "sexy" supers of the time and, frankly, she was a strange looking girl. Odd features and a thin body. But she was and is still looked at as a major sex symbol.

Not that I disagree that most of the girls probably wouldn't be considered sexy, but a few might.

 

[Day]

I think Caroline Trentini and even Hilary can be both sexy and high fashion. And of course Doutzen.

I just got mine in the mail today...the article seemed condescending to the models in my opinion, but it was nice to learn a little more about them.

 

[seanutbutter]

I don't think so, American people is too lazy for those names, they want the easy thing, Suzys, Heidis, Cindys are better names in America. Heidi Klum works better than Sasha Pivovovarova or Freja Beha.

By saying "American people [are] too lazy for those names," you're implying that every American is, which is definitely false. I'm American and easily memorized 'Sasha Pivovovarova' (which is actually 'Pivovarova'); the task is not too difficult to do.

If you're going to claim that Americans are too lazy to learn 'difficult' names, then I could go ahead and say that the British are too lazy to learn difficult names, too.

 

[Madhuri]

Not to be crude but by sex appeal I mean- make men horny. Cindy, Christy, Naomi, Gisele made men horny and that is why they transcended the snooty high fashion crowd. The likes of Caroline, Agyness and Coco are not going to leave the average male hot and bothered.

You never know, though. Look at the young Kate Moss. She was such a departure from the "sexy" supers of the time and, frankly, she was a strange looking girl. Odd features and a thin body. But she was and is still looked at as a major sex symbol.

Kate Moss's image when she burst on the scene was definitely provacative. While the other supers were in-your-face sexy she was presented as an archtype Lolita. I recall all the hoopla over her Calvin Klein shots being kiddie p*rn. Her shots were regarded as too "sexy" for someone of her youthful appearance.

The Supermodels inspired envy in women who wanted to look like them and lust in men who wanted to sleep with them. The so-called top models of today do not have the same effect. In fact a lot of people may look at the cover and think She's a model? Heck I can be a model.

By saying "American people [are] too lazy for those names," you're implying that every American is, which is definitely false. I'm American and easily memorized 'Sasha Pivovovarova' (which is actually 'Pivovarova'); the task is not too difficult to do.

I agree. I get tired of these negative generalizations about Americans on TFS. Americans had no problem learning Paula Porizkova's name. If you give the public a model that appeals to them ,the name won't matter.

 

[taben]

^ i get what you mean but... do you think horny men would pick Vogue over Playboy if Cindy or Naomi were on the cover, modeling a haute couture gown ?
I don't think the average guy would buy a fashion mag to get excited so i don't really know if the mag would sell more...

 

[Madhuri]

^ i get what you mean but... do you think horny men would pick Vogue over Playboy if Cindy or Naomi were on the cover, modeling a haute couture gown ?
I don't think the average guy would buy a fashion mag to get excited so i don't really know if the mag would sell more...

My comments about men were in regards to what makes a model a Supermodel-not what sells magaznes covers. I was noting that a common characteristic of Supemodels was that they appealed to both women and men albeit for different reasons.

 

[iluvjeisa]

Madhuri, I think Caroline wouldn't have any problem getting the SI crowd horny. All it takes is a GQ and you're set. I mean, have you looked at her? Just oil her up, send her to GQ and tell her to look like a sl*t and I'm sure all the guys would drool over her It really just takes a decent body, and I'd call Caroline's far far more than decent, and the right submissive setting to bring out most of their instincts You're right about Agyness and Coco, though, they'd have to bring on some new moves...

 

[Cut Copy]

I don't get all this negativity towards chanel, it seems like people are reaching to finds things wrong with her sometimes

exactly, it's called JEALOUSY.

go Chanel. i wasn't really a fan before, but now that so many people are bagging her out, I want her to have a FANTASTIC career.

 

[TheGlassAngel]

I really dislike it when people attribute jealousy to criticism. Just because someone doesn't like a model doesn't mean they're jealous.

 

[sepia]

Just because someone doesn't like a model doesn't mean they're jealous.

I don't know if I would call it jealousy, but the extent of the Chanel hatred is a bit disturbing.

 

[jssy4eva]

I don't know. Every models has the people that like them and the people that don't. I think that the reason the Chanel bashing has been so obvious as of late is simply because of the Vogue cover.

I do agree with TGA. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I guess the Chanel bashing can be a bit much at times, but you can't really say that everyone who dislikes a model is jealous of them. Sometimes people just have their own taste.

 

[Day]

exactly, it's called JEALOUSY.

go Chanel. i wasn't really a fan before, but now that so many people are bagging her out, I want her to have a FANTASTIC career.

I'm not a fan of Chanel, and I'm certainly not jealous of her or her life. Like TGA said, criticism does not always equal jealously. You can just not understand a certain models appeal, as many do not with Chanel.

And I think it's kind of ridiculous to like a model based on what other people think of her.

 

[LucyInTheSky]

I've been having fun these past few days getting friend's (who aren't into fashion or models) opinions on the cover models. It seems everyone loves Doutzen and Hilary the most. Some of them commented that Lily, Sasha, and Caroline looked alike. Most of them said Chanel was beautiful.

 

[june gloom]

I swear, I thought Sasha was Gemma Ward. I never liked her before, but I do find her to be warmer with the color change. Overall, I'm pleased with the cover choices and the article inside. I wish Caroline would've gotten more coverage since she is my favorite, she was written about much too quickly! There are models in there that I'll never find the appeal of (Coco and Agyness equal the top spots), but reading about their personalities has at least warmed me up to them.

 

[ShoeGal4Eva]

the best ossie of american vogue.in a verrrrryyyy long time! kudos to anna and major karma!

 

[polka_dot]

If hating models is jealousy then there would be many highly jealous members on tFS, and I really can't see it. There are a lot of really amazing members here, and they all bring their own unique view of beauty to this forum.

"Beauty is bought by judgement of the eye,
Not utter'd by base sale of chapmen's tongues."
- Shakespeare