Vogue Italia June 2011 : Candice Huffine, Tara-Lynn & Robyn Lawley by Steven Meisel

[fashion_in_love]

Wonderful cover!!!! the best in 2011 so far!!!! they are all stunning!!!

 

[Mchunu]

actually it pretty much does. U don't have to be a teenage boy, u just have to be human to know it... This cover just screams sex sex sex
Posted via Mobile Device

It's just a matter of opinions. Why am i being hammered for having mine? People perceive images differently...period. There is no right/wrong, yes or no answer for how you interpret the cover image. If anything, how you choose to says more about what's in your mind, versus what's actually presented in the picture. I don't think the cover screams sex, which is why I said it was understated in the first place. Given it's elements and Meisel's usual way of working, it could be much more sexualized. My attention isn't immediately taken by the way the model on the right is sitting, or the middle model's cleavage..but as I said before, it's a matter of who's looking at what...we all bring out own perceptions. I'd really like to know why, besdies the obvious, the image screas sex sex sex? "You just have to be human to know it"..so it's human nature?

 

[mikel]

^Thank god for some well articulated common sense!

I can't help but see Mirte in the girl on the right.

 

[muglerette]

supernice!!!!!!bravo steven...reminds me of old cover from 1992 ...has a touch of shana zandrick,helena christensen etc.

 

[zacatecas570]

Really? Food on the table?...
But the models are georgeus and the cover its beautiful! great change, except the food

 

[mikel]

Why is the food on the table such a big deal?!? Suddenly it is insensitive to depict plus size models with food in the same setting? Hell, am I even allowed to use the word 'big'?!?!

 

[dreamss]

It's just a matter of opinions. Why am i being hammered for having mine? People perceive images differently...period. There is no right/wrong, yes or no answer for how you interpret the cover image. If anything, how you choose to says more about what's in your mind, versus what's actually presented in the picture. I don't think the cover screams sex, which is why I said it was understated in the first place. Given it's elements and Meisel's usual way of working, it could be much more sexualized. My attention isn't immediately taken by the way the model on the right is sitting, or the middle model's cleavage..but as I said before, it's a matter of who's looking at what...we all bring out own perceptions. I'd really like to know why, besdies the obvious, the image screas sex sex sex? "You just have to be human to know it"..so it's human nature?

my dear are u kidding me? Nobody's hammering anybody? Since u say it's ur opinion, i'm also only pointing out my opinion... And Damn right it's human nature. How ever way, u look at it, u'll always notice a sexual something in it (especially curvy women in lingerie, spreading there legs open)
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[mikel]

^so now it's 'something sexual' instead of 'screaming sex sex sex'. Thats's a big difference.

 

[dreamss]

***
What i meant was since Mchunu says ppl perceive images differently (which i think it true), u might not "see" it the way I do. But whether u look at it like I do or like Mchunu does, sex is gonna be there some how
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[3RingCircus]

The thing I find ludicrous in this thread is that smaller models are shot in lingerie with their legs open ALL THE TIME but because it's larger models people are saying somehow it's more sexual. Um, double standards much?

 

[tigerrouge]

Well, I would make the argument that everyone should keep their legs closed and covered at the dinner table, simply for practical considerations, in case you spill something hot in your lap... it's more a case of damage limitation than morality.

 

[Psylocke]

^^I can't think of a VI cover with a model spreading her legs while only wearing lingerie?

And about the food. It's just another one of those stereotype things. It seems like fashion magazines can't put 'minorities' (black, asian models, plus size models) on the cover unless they do some sort of a theme issue that's supposed to make them look all tolerant and open minded when we know such a thing pretty much doesn't exist in the fashion world.

 

[Mchunu]

my dear are u kidding me? Nobody's hammering anybody? Since u say it's ur opinion, i'm also only pointing out my opinion... And Damn right it's human nature. How ever way, u look at it, u'll always notice a sexual something in it (especially curvy women in lingerie, spreading there legs open)
Posted via Mobile Device

You think the image is sexual because of how society sexually tames women, not because it's human nature. And what Mikel is saying is that your argument changed a great deal with using "something sexual" instead of "screaming sex sex sex"...that's an inconsistency. And no one was ever saying that there wasn't anything sexual about the cover, I think we all agreed in that in the beginning. Understated or not, it's a strong cover image not only because it has incited a debate, but also because it has a number of layers that people will react to.

 

[3RingCircus]

^^I can't think of a VI cover with a model spreading her legs while only wearing lingerie?

Being pedantic about whether it was on a VI cover or not is not the best argument here. There are literally millions of images out there of smaller models with legs open. They do it in swimwear, too. Ahem - latest issue.

 

[Marc10]

Wow, absolutely fantastic. Seems like this will be one of THOSE VI covers: polemic topics, but beautifully and creatively executed.

A huge BRAVO! to Meisel and Vogue Italia for using plus-size models on the cover, and proving once for all that beauty and sensuality don't have size. :

 

[Psylocke]

^^I'm not being pedantic, it was a serious question. And I don't consider swimwear equally sexual as lingerie at all.

 

[diorelle]

It's v. '90s I like it. One of the girls reminds me of Shana Zadrick so it makes it even more classic '90s Meisel.

 

[mikel]

^^I can't think of a VI cover with a model spreading her legs while only wearing lingerie?

And about the food. It's just another one of those stereotype things. It seems like fashion magazines can't put 'minorities' (black, asian models, plus size models) on the cover unless they do some sort of a theme issue that's supposed to make them look all tolerant and open minded when we know such a thing pretty much doesn't exist in the fashion world.

I don't see this cover as stereotypical.

When people see the food on this cover as a stereotypical element it's because they associate plus size models with eating and so they (and not the editor) are guilty of putting plus size women in a stereotypical context , and that's not the point of this cover.

 

[radolgc]

the cover is interesting, I see the 80s vibe, but yet it looks modern...Meisel managed to put his 80s and 90s signature and be in 2011...and I am not annoyed that there are no real models again, because these ladies look gorgeous indeed better beautiful women on the cover of VI then models i do not like)

 

[BibiRose]

Not a big fan of the setting, but overall it's a beautiful cover.