There has been some heated discussion on other threads as to whether or not Janice Dickenson was the "first" supermodel. But to answer that, 2 questions must first be asked.
1. What is a Supermodel?
2. How does one define success in the industry???
Most people would relate the word supermodel with the faces of Linda, Christy, Cindy, Claudia & Naomi. In the early 90's this group of elite models became household names and made modelling main stream.
Hence, my early definition of being a supermodel was being able to be identified as a model by first name only ie. Linda, Christy etc. To be recognized by first name in a competitive field of thousands is truly an accomplishment. But my definition has to change in light of "reality tv" where average joes are now celebrities. If I say Adrianna, Joanna or Eva, most people would know whom I am talking about, but they are far from being supermodels.
As well, the crowd from these pages are quite fickle and harsh in terms of defining a successful model. There seems to be a hierarchy in the modelling world:
1st tier High fashion/Runway
2nd tier Sports Illustrated/Victoria's Secret
3rd tier Commercial
There seems to be a bias that runway fashion is the only type of modelling that defines success of supermodel-dom. I question if one can make hundreds of thousands doing any type of modelling, are they not successful???
Take Tyra Banks for example, not high fashion, but still very successful and well known in pop culture. She's probaby making more money than all of us here, yet doesn't qualify to be a supermodel because she isn't high fashion??
Can someone please help explain to a layman the questions I pose?? Thanks![:D :D :D](/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/biggrin2.gif)
1. What is a Supermodel?
2. How does one define success in the industry???
Most people would relate the word supermodel with the faces of Linda, Christy, Cindy, Claudia & Naomi. In the early 90's this group of elite models became household names and made modelling main stream.
Hence, my early definition of being a supermodel was being able to be identified as a model by first name only ie. Linda, Christy etc. To be recognized by first name in a competitive field of thousands is truly an accomplishment. But my definition has to change in light of "reality tv" where average joes are now celebrities. If I say Adrianna, Joanna or Eva, most people would know whom I am talking about, but they are far from being supermodels.
As well, the crowd from these pages are quite fickle and harsh in terms of defining a successful model. There seems to be a hierarchy in the modelling world:
1st tier High fashion/Runway
2nd tier Sports Illustrated/Victoria's Secret
3rd tier Commercial
There seems to be a bias that runway fashion is the only type of modelling that defines success of supermodel-dom. I question if one can make hundreds of thousands doing any type of modelling, are they not successful???
Take Tyra Banks for example, not high fashion, but still very successful and well known in pop culture. She's probaby making more money than all of us here, yet doesn't qualify to be a supermodel because she isn't high fashion??
Can someone please help explain to a layman the questions I pose?? Thanks
![:D :D :D](/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/biggrin2.gif)