Monday, October 12, 2009

GLOSS-ARY: Karl, curves and claws on the catwalk

(First and foremost, my apologies for the belated blog-posting. Things have been a little hectic at the House of KH and the two things to suffer have been The KH Chronicles and a growing pile of unwashed laundry. While the laundry hasn't been touched, I am fast attending to my blogging tardiness. I promise it won't happen again, Mum.)

The name getting a media bashing this Monday 12 October is none other than fashion icon, Karl Lagerfeld who's got social commentators and female activists all in a tizz for his comments regarding curves on the catwalk. Despite the acclaim he received for his barnyard and androgyny-inspired fashion show in Paris late last week, Lagerfeld has been shot down in a storm of flaming arrows for his comment that "no one wants to see curvy women" on the catwalks.

The comments come after German glossy magazine, Brigitte announced they intended to no longer promote skinny models in their pages and instead, publish images of "real women" which their readership can identiy with. The magazine has even invited its readers to audition for modelling roles, aiming to abolish skinny models from the magazine by 2010.

Suffices to say, Lagerfeld was less that impressed with this change in management, commenting that the fashion world was about "dreams and illusions" and the actions by Brigitte were "absurd." He went so far as to say, "You've got fat mothers with their bag of chips, sitting in front of the television saying that thin models are ugly."

As Lagerfeld's comments began to circulate through the media pipeline, he has received a backlash of negative public opinion. The story posted on the Sydney Morning Herald's website this morning has been inundated with responses, some enthusiastically shunning the designer and others supporting his curve-free catwalk.

"I applaud Brigitte's decision and hope Australian magazines follow suit - at least by using more realistic looking models in their shoots. I am in total shock about Karl Lagerfeld's outrageous comments."

"I agree with Karl. Women on the catwalk are walking clotheshorses; fabric hangs better off a frame with no bulges. For presentation of clothes as art, curvy women are not appropriate. Questions of body image shouldn't even come into it.

"Why are models not regarded as "real women"? I think this is offensive to thin beautiful women. It is rediculous that overweight, unattractive women refer to theselves as "real women".

"Bottom line is: if I want to see "real women", I will go for a walk up my street or go to the supermarket. If I want to see someone looking fabulous and dressed beautifully, I will buy a high fashion magazine."

"Women are meant to have curves, bust and hips that is what makes us women. I for one am tired of seeing unrealistic and unattainable body shapes being held up as the ideal and warping the minds of your girls to think a size 12 is a plus size. Mind you, most of the clothes seen on these skeletal models are not every day wear and are unaffordable for the real women they are not designed for."

As a dedicated lover of fashion and having worked for fashion magazines before, my opinion is biased, yet informed. I've seen the original images from a fashion shoot and seen the images they become upon publication. Hell, I've even giving advice to photo-touchers about where more detailing needs to be applied to make a model look better. I don't excuse myself for this, because it is a factor of the industry. Whether this is a factor that needs to be changed is yet to be seen, but my personal opinion stands that while Lagerfeld could have been more considerate in his comments, they do hold an element of truth.

The 'dream and illusion' Lagerfeld refers to is the reason we buy magazines in the first place. Magazines are not meant to reflect what humans have. They are designed to reflect what humans want. Whether its luxury holidays, car parts, kitchen appliances or beauty products, magazines are about selling a lifestyle to people. Fashion and beauty magazines revolve around this premise specifically, as do the designers, suppliers and advertisers that essentially determine what is 'in fashion' to begin with. Magazines must sell 'the perfect life' or there is no reason to read them in the first place. It may not be an attractive scruple and it in no way condones the use of stick-thin anorexic models, but fashion magazines rely on this human desire for perfection and hence they employ the models who can deliver it.

These women are as immaculate and beautiful as the clothes they promote because that. is. their. job. They are models, walking clotheshangers and once the designer pushes them onto the catwalk or in front of a camera, it is their job to sell what they are wearing. The names behind the clothes on these girls' backs are the best-of-the-best of the fashion industry; the designers that dictate the styles that will eventually trickle down into Target and Big W. Their clothes are not your average every-day wear. They are pieces of art, and when you buy an orginal Monet or Matisse painting, you don't hang it on the wall in your average every-day frame.

I am by no means the epitome of a model, (I have a gut on me that could rival Homer Simpson) and I do find myself staring at the women in the pages of my magazines wishing I looked a little more like I belonged in their magazine world, but I accept that I am never going to look like that. Because I know those women don't look like that all the time. Kate Moss looks in the mirror and has the craving to pop the occasional pimple and I'm sure Gemma Ward needs a few cups of coffee and a beauty team before she looks any good in the morning. The point being, we all have our flaws and these pristine women we look to for our fashion forecasts are no exception. Whether they are the models of the 50s with their big boobs and big hips or the beanpole girls that currently march the runway, models are simply playing the role they were given.

What are your thoughts? Is Karl Lagerfeld overstepping the runway? Do we need to reinstate what is considered 'perfection' by introducing curvy women to the catwalk or should models remain as they are in their world of 'dreams and illusions?' Click to post a comment and share your opinion.

2 comments:

  1. In accordance with c), I "agree somewhat and disagree in another"

    :) or maybe I don't know what to think, or I'm a little indifferent.

    I think models I have seen (that fit the the beanpole description) look amazing. And in line with some of the comments above, who's to say they're not real people as well as those who have more curves?

    They do well at what they do (as long as they know their healthy limits). But I'm not inclined to suggest things should stay the way they are - perhaps the catwalk would benefit from some variety, or even a change.

    If the 50's saw voluptuous women hit the catwalk, why not the 10's? (2010's that is)

    After all, fashion is generally a cycle of things past, no? I enjoy seeing models as they are now (every now and then, I don't go out of my way to see fashion shows)...

    But if fashion is art, then surely there are creative types wanting and waiting to break the mold and bust out some arty clothes on a busty body (excuse my lame choice of words)

    Basically, one body type isn't better or worse than the other, but why not celebrate the different types and allow for a wider expanse of creative designs?

    Maybe I've missed the point. But I think you and I (as more curvy types) can play with wearable art as well as any other women.

    Enjoyed reading your writing, as always x

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't mind the skinny flawless models in high fashion magazines, because you sort of know when you're looking at them that these people aren't really real - they spend their lives being beautiful and that's actually their job, unlike the rest of us who have to squeeze cooking and eating well and exercise around our work, even if we have perfect genes to begin with.

    What worries me is when the stick thin trend hits magazines aimed at tweens and teenagers, who don't necessarily realise they've been photoshopped or that not all girls look that way. I certainly didn't know that at 13, and I think I first started dieting at about 16 - and I've been health and size conscious ever since, and a large part of that comes from the media. In fact, almost all of it does - the only time I think I've felt completely happy regardless of size was when I was with my now ex-boyfriend who made me feel sexy and fabulous even when I had more weight. (It all went to my ass and my chest, which he had no problem with.)

    That's why I get worried - size 0s in Vogue, not a problem for me, but stick thin, perfect girls in Dolly and Girlfriend do.

    ReplyDelete