Crazytown in Fashionland?

image from Refinery29- see link below

There hasn't been any big issues I've felt the need to address lately so I've been quiet. Recently I've been perusing the September issues and they have triggered a few thoughts. Firstly, the thought that I have not felt compelled enough to not be able to put them down. I pick one up, flick a few pages and then am completely ok with putting it back down and moving on. So here we are at NY Fashion Week already and I haven't even done my homework. Although I have had enough of a flick that I know that if I don't have a camel coat and a pair of clogs (i do actually- at this point they're vintage- and Miu Miu's on top of it!) I'm not allowed out of the house.

Secondly, I'm happy that we seem to be returning to the using of models for ads and editorial. This has been talked about but i really feel it now and- thank god- isn't that what they're there for? I'm also loving that some of the oldies but still-stunningly-gorgeous-goodies are back. Big time! The Aussie press is ALL over Emma Balfour and we have several others joining Christy and Linda back on glossy pages. Age is but a number ladies- especially when you look THAT good for THAT number.

Disturbingly though, i seem to be noticing a few too many WTF? moments. I mean, things that really make me question- what WERE they thinking? Considering i do not think of myself a certifiable fashion expert but more a lover of it with a good eye (or so i like to think) I'm wondering if I'm the only one. In times of suffering retail isn't this the time to nail it, no excuses, make it happen, be spot on?

a few examples:

Blumarine ad in Harper's Bazaar- the model's face/head looks like it is photoshopped onto a random, leaping, predictible and editorial looking series of poses.

Saks 5th Ave. high fashion with a sport theme. Not worth anymore words it's so insane- except I'm guessing you're looking for a new marketing team?

Jennifer Aniston as Barbra Streisand? Really? REALLY??? and this has to do with.....??? Cause she's starring in yet another total blockbuster that everyone just RUSHED to see?

Let's not talk about 21 (21???!!!) pages of Julia Roberts- who is historically a questionable fashion icon. Especially as this issue has so little real content this REALLY stands out.

Halle Berry as cover girl? Cause her new movie is...???

You get the point.

Luckily there are still lots of beautiful pages to make up for the crazy ones but I have to ask- did anyone else think a few people had taken one too many crazy pills? maybe it was the accountants?

What were your thoughts on this year's September Issues?

PS: Refinery29 did a recap and shared their thoughts here

Storm in a Teacup

Apologies for it being so long since I posted. I was busy (blah, blah) and then I was in Australia doing the family & friends thing. While I was there, I attended the L'Oreal Melbourne Fashion Festival's business seminar. During such seminar Australian Vogue's EIC, Kirstie Clements, made a statement that has had the internet slightly abuzz (especially as Australia hardly gets any fashion attention outside some fantastic designer exports). When I heard it I was surprised, bordering on shocked and fashion journalist Patty Huntington responded with an immediate tweet. What was this scandalous statement?
In a discussion with Calvin Klein's EVP of communications, Malcolm Carfrae, she asked him if they deleted negative comments off of the Calvin Klein social media forums. He responded with no and she (quite emphatically and almost happily) gave up that they remove negative comments about designers posted on the Australian Vogue website.

News got to Cutblog who felt free to share. It was also reported in Melbourne's The Age newspaper when Vogue issued a defending statement.

The fashion industry isn't particularly known for being nice. Critics have been banned from studios and shows for harsh reviews and as with any creative field, it can be diva central. But, while understanding that in tough times its necessary to be nice to advertisers, I guess we can ask where it starts and where it stops. The internet is meant to be a democratic forum where we all can have a say and there have been plenty of stupid comments posted on many a blog and website. What can be so bad that it needs removal anyway?

so we can ask:

- does a publication have the right to monitor their comments to make everyone sound good? Should they? If bloggers have to state that they received complimentary goods, should editors have to do the same (and state that they have edited their forums)? After all, isn't this the same? all in the name of truth and full disclosure?

- how will knowing that Vogue censors change comments that are left on it? The teacup that is Australia isn't big- better believe this got round fast.

- how important is the truth in something like this? Is everyone doing it? Does anyone really care? Is anyone really paying attention to these comments? Or are they?

tell me what you think.