Fashion Victim

VS

Style is something I'm comfortable with: fashion is not. Style is about expressing yourself through clothes (and even that makes me a little leery sometimes). Fashion is a machine designed to sell products. Sometimes, it's so blindingly obvious that it's kind of pathetic.

The most recent, obvious change is from the model-off-duty, glam-punk shenanigans we've been seeing for the past few years to the retrofitted seventies things Celine's been churning out. Everyone's frieking out about "the new minimalism" and the switch from teen-hipster focused fashion to clothes that look designed for older women.

In reality, all of this is a bit ridiculous, because even when studded leather jackets and leggings felt fresh, they were hardly new. Same thing with Celine, et. al. - um, camel coats and leather skirts are hardly breaking any new ground.

What frustrates me about recent events is the attitude magazines have towards the new change, specifically Vogue, whose manifesto in their July 2010 issue read:

I AM WOMAN. Hear me roar. Hear me issue stock-purchase orders from the Wall Street trading floor. I am woman; I am not girl. I do not emulate the pop-burlesque fashion stylings of Ke$ha or Katy Perry. I do not aspire to PASSÉ MORNING-AFTER CHIC, with bird’s-nest hair and shredded leather leggings. No. Of Lana Turner and Barbara Stanwyck — and Lena Horne — I sing.

(Have you felt the smooth, snug tug of fine leather gloves being pulled on? Have you considered the REBELLION, the nonconformity, inherent today in a Marnie Eisenhower knit suit? Have you worn a crinoline lately?)

Reader, if you’re older than fourteen, fashion for fall 2010 offers more WEARABLE OPTIONS than it has in eons. Skirts fall below mid-thigh. Designers are giving us dead-cool-but-still-practical STREETWEAR UNIFORMS for work or school. Black-with-black is totally back.

Can we get an “Amen” up in here?

This is frustrating because, duh, Vogue popularized the supposedly "passe morning after chic" look (I'm not going to even go into the race issues). I think it's understood that Vogue has always been targeted towards richer, older women then most magazines target, and although I understand that the power-moms of America may have been alienated by the popularity of leggings and studded jackets, why did Vogue have Balmain advertisements or feature Lady Gaga if their readership is so obviously not of that demographic? Why are they hating if they participated?

Additionally, Vogue continues to act as if young, DIY fashion bloggers have nothing to do with fashion. I'm not counting myself here AT ALL, but when they did feature bloggers in one of their issues, the only one I'd heard of was Bryan Boy. They entirely ignored the fashion bloggers who are actually widely influential and well known - Tavi of The Style Rookie, Susie Lau of Stylebubble, Zana Bayne of Garbage Dress, Laia Garcia of Geometric Sleep, Isabel of Hipster Musings, and Michelle and Marie of Kingdom of Style. Saying in their manifesto "reader, if you're older then fourteen..." is a pretty insulting jab at Tavi.

I guess what this all comes down to is the difference between FASHION and STYLE. Vogue is part of an industry, and what it focuses on is the buying and selling of products. Vogue falls under fashion, dedicated to making people feel insecure about themselves so that they will buy more. It's unsurprising that, in order to make more business, they're now pushing people to flip flop from leather to camel coats. Me? I'll stick with my skinny jeans and hoodies, thanks.