Vogue Australia November 2015 : Taylor Swift by Emma Summerton

[Zorka]

POEM HUNTER (Reprint from Glamour US September 2015)
Photographer: Will Davidson
Stylist: Jillian Davison
Hair: Panos Papandrianos
Make-up: Georgi Sandev
Models: Sabrina Ioffreda & Gabriel Marques



Vogue Australia

 

[Zorka]

GAME CHANGER
Photographer: Justin Ridler
Stylist: Kate Darvill
Hair: Michele McQuillan
Make-up: Peter Beard
Models: Erin Shea & Cassie Lapthorne



Vogue Australia

 

[Zorka]

MOD MOVEMENT
Photographer: Nicole Bentley
Stylist: Meg Gray
Hair: Koh
Make-up: Linda Jefferyes
Model: Fernanda Ly



Vogue Australia

 

[Zorka]

MODERN MUSE
Photographer: Nicole Bentley
Stylist: Philippa Moroney
Hair: Koh
Make-up: Victoria Baron
Model: Kia Low



Vogue Australia

 

[AL92]

Every time I open a thread for VA, I see so many people commenting on how it's the best of the Vogues and the one to beat and all this other stuff, and I find myself wondering... is everyone just idealising it because it's from another part of the world?

Seriously. I'm in Australia and I find this magazine to mostly be mediocre, with a really good editorial every once in a while. They've been tending more towards celeb/socialite covers again in the last year or two and most of them have been rather lackluster, this one included. I thought it looked good until I realised it was Taylor. Now I'm wondering what happened to her face.

As far as Australian magazines go, Russh is about ten million times better than this.

I think it is unfair when you do compare a very commercial magazine like Vogue to Russh which remains to be niche. If anything, compare it with Bazaar and Elle, which for the record pales in comparison to Vogue.

I can't imagine what your thoughts were on Vogue during Kirstie Clements' era atomicblue but I sincerely believe McCann and Centenera have elevated the brand and quality of the magazine immensely.

 

[AL92]

​

 

[DelicateFlower]

Every time I open a thread for VA, I see so many people commenting on how it's the best of the Vogues and the one to beat and all this other stuff, and I find myself wondering... is everyone just idealising it because it's from another part of the world?

Seriously. I'm in Australia and I find this magazine to mostly be mediocre, with a really good editorial every once in a while. They've been tending more towards celeb/socialite covers again in the last year or two and most of them have been rather lackluster, this one included. I thought it looked good until I realised it was Taylor. Now I'm wondering what happened to her face.

As far as Australian magazines go, Russh is about ten million times better than this.

Right before Clements got replaced I thought the magazine was becoming more interesting and innovative. Now, I agree that it's becoming more mediocre. Something's missing...I don't know, I grew up with Clement's Vogue, and maybe I'm just not used to change. I just find the covers to be really blah and I'm not liking..something..about the magazine now. I do like the addition of Centenara and Will Davidson to the mix.

I've bought every Vogue via subscription for the past 8 years, and this year I let the subscription slide. I've still bought it at the newsagents most months (I missed September though! *twitch* )so I should resubscribe again, but I was actually thinking about getting a Russh subscription instead, and just buying Vogue months that I really like rather than doggedly collecting....Still deciding.

 

[HeatherAnne]

I think Vogue Australia has had quite a few bad issues in a row now, but Russh without Davidson/Davison and Stevie Dance has been hot garbage.

 

[rox_yr_sox]

^ So true. Russh is a shadow of its former shelf, compared to the early years when Stevie was editor, and they were launching the career of Will Davidson. Though, its still better than VA.

Honestly, there is so little content to get stuck into in VA. At least US and UK Vogues have some quality journalism every now and then.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

What I appreciate about VA is you can see an effort being made which is more than I see in most magazines.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

I like it, the colours are stunning she also looks rather model like ont he cover and ed. Reminds me of 90s/early 2000s US/UK vogue. As fror putting Fernanda on the cover in the end we have to be realistic, its Vogue cover which means its not some arthouse publication its a commercial fashion magazine which has to sell a huge number of covers. Even I dont know who Fernanda is

 

[DelicateFlower]

It's true that at least they make more of an effort. Despite my bitching, I'm still proud of our edition of Vogue. And yes, they need to sell more copies in this digital age. I just hope it doesn't go down the line of US Vogue. The covers have reminded me more of InStyle magazine than Vogue.

I just felt personally incensed by the power play that went on with the ousting of Clements. I thought the last few covers she produced were awesome. I was never a fan of Harpers Bazaar under McCann, as a teenager with a limited income and then a perennially poor uni student I would carefully make my magazine selection every month, and (usually) Vogue won out.

I know I'm probably being unfair to the new Vogue team. *grumble grumble* Edited to add that I'm glad they're still using Nicole Bentley, she's awesome.

 

[kokobombon]

I usually can't wait to see VA's content every month but this is issue is just so meh imo. I really miss Will Davidson.
I think that Fernanda's ed is kinda nice but too monotonous.
Why would they reprint a September editorial? where's the sense in that?

 

[Cicciolina]

I think it is unfair when you do compare a very commercial magazine like Vogue to Russh which remains to be niche. If anything, compare it with Bazaar and Elle, which for the record pales in comparison to Vogue.

I can't imagine what your thoughts were on Vogue during Kirstie Clements' era atomicblue but I sincerely believe McCann and Centenera have elevated the brand and quality of the magazine immensely.

I'm with you on that one. And honestly, Russh is so irrelevant now - it's still riding on the good will of the Charlotte Scott/Stevie Dance era.

I didn't mind some of what Kirstie Clements did at Vogue. I do agree, right before she left the covers were improving again, but I can't forgive her for that period where all they did was lift covers from the inside of Vogue Nippon. Yes the ousting was callous, but how many times has this happened at Vogue elsewhere around the world - Grace Mirabella, Diana Vreeland, etc? Linda Wells, founding editor of Allure who has been there for 25 years (!!!) has just been let go in favour of the former editor of Nylon. It's horrible but in the magazine industry, it happens...

Vogue at the end of the day needs an element of the commercial. Yes, we'll lament that it's got a big mega brand on the cover (Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Burberry, etc etc) and yes, it'll need the omnipresent celebrity on there every now and then, but it's a tricky line to balance. With both Clements' and McCann's visions of Vogue there's the commercial in there, but to me Clements' was hit and miss and bland, whereas McCann's at least there's excitement, and cohesion, and something a bit more interesting.

And also, I think Vogue Aus has great articles by Lynn Yaeger, Zara Wong, Jody Scott, Sophie Tedmanson. The usual boring celebrity articles are written in a more interesting way. I'm someone who loves to read fashion magazines (and other books and non-fashion magazines), and sometimes at TFS I feel like that's the minority... There's actually stuff to read in Vogue - it's very often jam-packed whereas Harper's Bazaar always feels a bit empty in comparison (though I do like their shopping pages).

I also like reading Elle too - their fashion shoots are boring, but you can see they put effort in the articles. (However, they sometimes cram so much stuff on a single page I get a bit worn out and give up.)