“I like that she’s on the cover of Vogue. It’s a really fitting denouement to this whole cultural farce.” (From Jezebel commenter Kirov)
It’s a generational thing.
It’s a moral thing.
It’s an intellect thing.
It’s a sex thing.
It’s a class thing.
It’s a race thing.
It’s a taste thing.
So many issues. So many grievances. But we’re all talking about this bloody cover. We’re all engaged in these lengthy comment threads voicing our views on moral propriety and the “right” people to place on the cover of American Vogue and airily denouncing our allegiances to Vogue (come on – who ACTUALLY unsubscribed? They make the process so lengthy you may as well stay subscribed).
I’ve never watched Keeping up with the Kardashians (no, for real – I don’t have MTV). I only know her image by fleeting glimpses of her at shows and quick glances at her on websites and Grazia magazine. She’s so far from my radar that I rarely ever wade into cover politics either. The cover itself would barely have mustered a cursory thought in my head, until I started to read below the fold. I delved fairly deep into the reactions – here, here and also on an in-depth Twitter/Instagram/Facebook search.
What struck me was a) the staunch values and “standards” that people place on Vogue US as a publication and b) the sharp level of judgement levied on all the things I mentioned above. Feathers were ripped, rather than ruffled. Or to borrow a phrase that people have been throwing about a lot – there was a lot of amusing “pearl clutching” as they denigrate this woman – who for them represents everything that is wrong with the world.
I’m just going to say it. I kind of love that Vogue US threw out this controversial curveball. At least, I love what has come out as a result.
On a personal level, whilst I highly respect the publication, I guess I have never placed such a high level of expectation that would get me riled up in the way that we’re seeing. Their aesthetic is for me, mild-mannered, highly-polished with often very conventional notions of good taste in fashion. There’s a multitude of style titles out there, that set the agenda for fashion in a way that I personally find far more interesting and so perhaps at the end of the day, perhaps I’m not the target audience for Vogue US. Judging by a lot of their Facebook comments, their readers duly reflect this narrow view of fashion, as they make their sweeping generalisations of what is “classy” (a problematic word for me to the extreme) and what is “stylish”. These rigid boundaries of taste feel constrictive and often not conducive to the extraordinary breadth of fashion that exists.
By placing Kardashian, this woman who, for so many, represents the epitome of “poor taste” on the cover, rang as first and foremost, a decision based on circulation figures and business nous (despite the heightened negative brouha, she WILL shift copies). We can fruitlessly rile against that decision but it’s one that only Anna Wintour, who knows the ins and outs of the metrics of the publication as a business, can make. And let’s not forget that’s what it boils down to – the business. Romantic notions that Vogue as an establishment is held to these wildly artistic ideals are a little naive. When people talk about Vogue like it’s a some sort of dreamy gateway to art and culture, it does make me chuckle when the reality is over 80% (maybe more) of the pages in the magazine is dedicated to selling pure product to readers.
Then beneath that, to me, it was a wry-tinged acknowledgement of the current culture climate – that for better or for worse, does reward the seemingly “talentless” (no judgement here – I have no idea what it is she does so am unable to assess her skills) people, who are very clever at self-promotion and putting out an image of themselves, that somehow engages people, based on a dichotomous mixture of hate and curiosity. We live in an age of hate-fuelled voyeurism. See this entire forum dedicated to GOMI blogs – as in “Get Off My Internetz”. Vogue US, with this single cover, is acknowledging this movement and somehow, the debate spinning off of it as a result, is almost a positive contribution in itself as we sit here pondering the values of our society and how we have gotten to this point.
In a fairly safe but beautiful Lanvin dress, with Kanye West lingering in the background on this gold-y beige background, she’s toned down to the point of blandness so that the conversation beyond the pages of the magazine becomes far more interesting. Let’s not hate the player, but the system that surrounds Kardashian, who is but a pawn (a very rich pawn, I grant you) in the game. Let’s ask who are the people commissioning pap photos of her and who are the editors running them in their magazines, that are then bought by the public. Who’s commissioning the reality TV series she’s on that has been renewed season upon season? Who at Sears is saying “Let’s makes clothes together!” and piling them up on the racks? Who is this whole other segment of the population propping all of these mechanisms up whilst this very public and noisy debate riles around her?
I’d loosely liken it to the way the personal style blogging genre is hated on, and how these girls are not “doing anything” other than get photographed (of course negating the hours and hours that goes into those images and the very fact that they SHIFT product). Likewise, Kim Kardashian sells stuff. The ongoing negative conversation around Kardashian still turns into $$$ for her. We must ask ourselves why this is the case instead of emptily complaining, whilst hate-reading and hate-looking at the same time.
And so hey here I am penning a polemic about a US Vogue cover – that’s a first for me. That’s because for once, they’ve touched a poignant extremity. For better or for worse, the pair have lived up to that ungainly hashtag on the cover. We are talking about them. A lot. Not in a good way but the discussion matters as our moral compasses spin violently, as we wonder whether we can change the system that the magazine, Kardashian and ultimately all of us are ensconced in. And who instigated it? Vogue US. And what would have normally been a quiet and inconsequential April issue, throwing out pithy articles about pear and apple shapes no less.
Yea, I mean. Business is business. I totally agree with what you said the ongoing negative conversation around her still turns into $$$ for her., hehe. Have a good night, Susie. I love your writing. <3
http://www.shallwesasa.com
She might be in ‘poor taste’, but the woman knows how to dress. Granted, pre-baby and pre-Kanye she had some questionable looks, but recently she’s stepped it up. Maybe it’s all gearing up for this cover, but wearing brands like Proenza and Alai etc put her up there with the fashion elite. Big bum or not, you can’t deny that some of her outfits are well put together.
It’s all about money money money as we know, but this is, for sure, the pinnacle of Kim’s kareer. She may as well give up on the show with falling ratings now.
I too don’t like how US Vogue seems to still govern this industry. It’s time to move on. One thing’s for sure though, comparing Kim to bloggers is SPOT ON. Never a truer word.
Yes! While I myself am not a big fan of the cover photo – can anyone say awkward hands? – US Vogue are a business and Kardashian’s sell covers. What’s interesting is the adverse reactions people have had to this cover – Kim is a cultural figure. Her reality show, her relationships, her clothes are all talked about by the masses and therefore she makes for an interesting person to put on the cover of any magazine, whether it be Closer or Vogue. She sells. Vogue wants to sell. It’s a match made in heaven. And what is more interesting is, like you’ve said the conversations that have surrounded the cover. A clever marketing ploy by the creators, if anything and one which will shift covers.
I think what I find most interesting about the entire discussion surrounding the cover (I don’t really bother reading magazines as much since as you mentioned, they’re mostly advertising) is how people call her cheap and tasteless, and all sort of elitist ideas on who is worthy of being on a cover of Vogue.
It’s extremely unfair for people to ostracize another, when they themselves will probably never be on the cover. We like to think in the US that people can make it big, but the reality is that only the people deemed fit are allowed to.
Interesting post, really enjoyed reading your fresh take on the subject.
everything is not equal and KK is cheap & tasteless. You need to develop some sophistication. Anna Wintour is just desperate for business.
a really well written view-point on this whole ‘situation’ there’s been so much drama past and present about Kimye and Vogue and i guess in some respects it’s good they’ve used someone who sells because yes, Vogue is about selling products and lifestyle, but I see why people who don’t care for her lifestyle are annoyed.
If it were Emma Watson or someone there wouldn’t be this issue, so I think maybe we should just accept that Vogue is thinking outside their box and using what is now and current, whatever the opinion. the more we voice our opinions, the most attention vogue gets
Lauren x
Britton Loves | Fashion Lifestyle + Photography – http://www.brittonloves.blogspot.co.uk
Vote for my blog here !
But is it necessarily a good thing that Vogue would only be focused on business and selling an issue? I do really love Vogue; I love Andre and Hamish. And Grace. My love for the magazine never really comes from the cover; after all, how many Cate Blanchett movies have I really seen? (None). I think we should go back to the time of models on the cover, or at least celebrities who have a REAL hand in fashion (Kanye doesn’t count; he just pays his way through). I’ve always disliked arguments, for anything really, that are basically saying we need to lower our standards. Because I certainly never will.
http://criticallycouture.blogspot.com/
I wasn’t saying that our standards need to be lowered but in this instance I’m saying she has a cultural relevance in so much that we’re all polarised about her, discussing her and debating this that and the other. I think that’s far more interesting and indicative of the times we live in, than simply plonking a model on the cover. That’s not to say I don’t love models – I think US Vogue could do with mixing it up a bit more. But I think already, this cover has contributed something of cultural signficance. It’s making us ask questions and that’s a good thing.
You make a great point there; Even when I totally disagree with something, I love watching the world discuss and form opinions. Thanks for responding!
I love your intake on this! I don’t like the cover because I grew up with Kim in the spotlight, and always for bad things. However, I highly respect Vogue and Anna Wintour. I did read her editors letter and her choice to put Kim on the cover was a bit more rationalized for me.
http://www.khoasinclair.co
Honestly I’m kind of like ‘bleh, whatever’. Sure it’s a bit weird or just for publicity and business but I’m not a raging fan of Vogue so maybe that’s why I dont feel affected. I loved reading this Susie!!
I think you pointed it out so right, can’t agree more. It is all about making money, and that is what Kim has successfully contributed to, everybody is happy Conde Nast, Anna Wintour, Kim and Kanye and the public who have nothing to do but riling about the cover 🙂
-All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
William Shakespeare
http://www.stylehenge.com
Oh wow, US Vogue doing something that excites people.
Who would’ve thought?
what is the difference between Vogue & People? Nothing now.
I just now saw a clip of Naomi Campbell on an Australian news station giving a no comment-comment on her disapproval of the cover, though she did state several times that she was a “fashion model,” a term she used to differentiate herself from the troglodyte Kim K.
Naomi and Kim are both beautiful, photogenic women. Naomi had the grace and skill to be many inches taller and many inches smaller in the proper places. These attributes helped land her Vogue covers. Kim’s different attributes led her down a different route, but still landed her a Vogue cover. In the end, they are both models and they both have Vogue covers—other skills and behaviours notwithstanding.
Kim K. is NOT a fashion model, she is TV reality celebrity, which is quite different. Naomi is a top high fashion model, no comparison. Kim clearly could never fit into designer samples nor does she have grace or personality….she is also not a real designer or talented or interesting. maybe some time in school and learning manners & elocution would have been time well spent for her and her sisters….all that nasal whining, geeze. Are the lives of Americans so dull that they find this empty headed Valley Girl to be interesting?
Kim K is not talented? I think people forget that this is a woman who has managed to build a multi-million pound business around only herself. She has managed to cultivate a place in culture for herself through marketing herself, something which only a select few people have managed to do. Something which I think few people would be able to emulate. I think you have to give props where they are due. This woman started off in the spotlight because of a sex tape and she’s managed to turn that around to now be on the cover of Vogue.
I really don’t like the cover either. I saw them enough on celeb gossip magazine. Don’t like it/Don’t buy it 🙂
Sarah Jessica Parker, Taylor Swift and Rihanna have all appeared on the cover of Vogue and they are not “fashion” models – why is Kim Kardashian any different? I doubt the cover will have any effect on sales whatsoever, but in the meantime it’s certainly made good internet fodder.
http://www.girlinmenswear.com
I followed your blog religiously a year or two ago and somewhere a long the line I stopped reading blogs altogether. Checking in today and coming across such an eloquent article with a unique voice has made me really regret my absence ! Looking forward to being a dedicated reader again ! You have such a great attitude towards fashion !
Any way you look at it, the only reason they are on the cover is because we “cultural society” put them there. If the show was not popular, if people did not listen to his music, if reality star celebrities were not the new movie stars of yesteryear, they would not be were they are today.
As a fashion professional Vogue has been rather meaningless for some years now but this cover of Kim K. really nails that coffin. The dress is beautiful, too bad for designer that she is pictured modeling it. McDonalds is very successful but that does not mean they sell good food. Kim K. is not chic or stylish at all, never has been and lacks wit & charm and is clearly not the brightest bulb on the string IQ wise. Would you really want your daughter to role model after her? Would you want your son to marry her? There is no “culture” expressed here, indeed it’s a picture of non-culture & crass materialism. Nothing chic or stylish at all. The Kardashian family embarrasses me as an American.
For me the problem is not that much that she is on the cover, as much as the fact that he is there too. Like as she for herself is not enough, and both of them are actually an icon which then is worth putting on the magazine cover. It is a kind of compromise which is quite disrespectful for my opinion.
It is supposed to be a fashion magazine. But American Vogue unlike other Vogue publications is not that much about fashion. Is more about status symbols, personalities that embody a certain lifestyle. That is what is a complete turn of for me. It is more of a lifestyle magazine than fashion. Except Grace Coddington, all the rest of the magazine looks just like a posh, boring catalogue.
I always will prefer Vogue Paris to any other. It is just more daring.
I just love everything you said regarding vogue being this faux ‘dreamy gateway to art and culture’. very naive. Do people really think Anna Wintour is there for them? a nurturing fashion Aunt teaching them right from wrong through this fashion handbook? I do respect Vogue US but I definitely feel there are publications that offer a less rigid view of fashion than Vogue US which has been for the majority of time extremely placid and middle of the road. It represents a very commercially inoffensive and easily digestible facet of fashion. People have invested so much into this publication and put it on a major pedestal as a ‘class style and culture’ (jarring words) heavyweight. Vogue US has a massive massive pull. Bigger than I thought, I was actually beginning to feel it was becoming newsagent space filler. Its respected and its there and its constant, but it leaves the stuff that makes you jump to the fresher younger publications with less at risk. I do applaud them for this move. I love your whole stance on this and I like the way you think. The word classy and these staunch notions of style and good taste are definitely intensely problematic. These words aren’t universally compatible and cut a lot of people out. There’s a lot to talk about with this and I love reading and listening and watching the debate, its exciting! Vogue US has stepped out of line and got some knickers in a twist!
My initial reaction to seeing this cover was horror. I have never bought US Vogue, am not interested in its content and understand fully it is a publication that tells people what to buy and how to wear/consume it. I am a fashion designer and label-owner, however, so I am interested in its role and influence in the industry.
My horror came from the feeling of being visually dragged into someone else’s game. This cover feels manipulative. It’s unnerving. It’s inauthentic. We know it. We can see it. As fashion magazine readers we like being sold fantasy – we don’t want it delivered under the pretense of being based in reality (even a constructed reality-tv /celeb-based reality).
So, I judge the construction rather than the people. No one likes the feeling of being lied to. No one likes the feeling of being sold something. It should be more subtle than this. And personally, I would have liked to have seen Kim on the cover without Kanye, wearing something true to her style – it would be far more convincing and celebratory. What place does a man have on the cover of Vogue without a woman, or at all? Hilary got the cover without Bill. Michelle got the cover without Barack. All three women are all trailblazers – just of different kinds. We made Kim famous. She sells a lot of product. Why is she only considered Vogue-worthy in the presence of Kanye? If the story had been about Kim the entrepreneur I’d have bought my first ever copy of US Vogue.
Since Kim hooked up with Kanye it seems that she now prefers sheer dresses with clean lines than her previous default
bandage dress
I’m sorry but I really didn’t like this cover. Kim Kardashian came to prominence because of a sex tape and now we regard her as some sort of cultural icon?!? Western culture really is in trouble.
Google pictures of her before she became mega famous and you’ll realise how much work she’s had done on her face. She’s made herself look less ‘ethnic’. How can you respect someone who does that?
She cheapens everything she touches. That gorgeous Lanvin dress just looks like a tacky Primark special on her.
Kanye is just a joke but his delusional statements are always worth reading for a laugh.
I always will prefer Vogue Paris to any other. It is just more daring.
I really don’t like the cover either
I love your intake on this!