Pages

Thursday, January 15, 2009

something kinda oops*

"There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. And it is this strangeness that makes beauties what they are, and someone like Cheryl Cole a good looking girl." The words of Alexandra Shulman a mere 2 months prior to Mrs. Cole's Vogue cover debut. A major "Oops" on Shulman's part is my guess and it is clear the accompanying article from this month's issue does all in its power to flatter and fawn over Cole. Presumably to compensate for that silly blunder of dissing the UK's sweetheart. Consider Vogue's latest description of Cheryl: "..And there is a few nicks in her black opaque tights, which underline just how very young she is. And - perversely - how classically, epically shockingly beautiful she is as opposed to just plain old TV - star pretty." (hmmm just a tad too much Vogue, yes?)
Like many others, Cheryl Cole's Vogue cover irritated me. Cheryl is after all LOOK mag fodder and no amount of Herve Leger and Balmain (her new fave designer, don'cha know?) will change this (..well if anything clingy Herve Leger party dresses add to her appeal for gossip weeklies.) I've no major problem with Cheryl. She is what she is - a popstar, a reality TV judge, a pretty face - but style icon? You've got to be kidding.

Perhaps, choosing Cole was Vogue's rather dubious attempt to appear young and cool and in touch with the zeitgeist. But, if this was the aim, then Vogue has only succeeded in alienating much of its intended readership even further. Where Vogue Paris has Lara Stone and Vanessa Paradis, Vogue UK has Cheryl Cole. Spot the difference?
Cheryl Cole isn't setting trends and although, she is certainly blessed with good looks, I for one don't find hers a fascinating face.
My main gripe is Vogue's pathetic jumping on the bandwagon. Fashion magazines are supposed to inspire, introducing us to new faces not splashing over exposed, essentially dull popstars on the cover with the frankly laughable tagline "Cheryl Cole: The story we all want to know"...ehh like who exactly wants to know? Besides I probably read it in HEAT already.
Vogue seem to think we care about how her style has "evolved". And what style is this again? If you happened to catch Cheryl on The X Factor, all dimples and big hair twinkling in spangly floor length gowns and glowing in rainbow bright mini dresses, you might have thought to yourself, like I did: "Ahh my eyes! Too much!!!"
This notion that you can throw on an uber - glamorous, designer dress and be a style icon bothers me immensely and the fact that Vogue promotes this so shamelessly with Cole and her obvious lack of real style, should be another "Oops" moment for Shulman.
* i must really stop using terrible song titles, or puns on song titles like in this case as the titles of my posts..

12 comments:

Ana said...

I have nothing against her either however I'm tired of Vogue declaring all their cover stars to be style icons. Especially when all they wear are designer gowns picked out by a stylist.

PinkBow said...

so true. a very disappointing cover for vogue, too mainstream!

Mary said...

I am confused at how classy Vogue manages to make everyone look.... I want Vogue to make me awesome.

The Sexy Pedestrian said...

Gah. I love how everybody's forgotten the 'battering a nightclub toilet attendant' incident of a few years ago as well.

Pixienish said...

I was a little irked at the issue as well :|

Jenny said...

that vogue paris cover is to die! there's hardly even a comparison . . . although the past two covers of us vogue have been very disappointing. the revered anne hathaway looking, well, boring to be honest, and then tv star blake lively? what's going on at vogue?

Ciara said...

She looks like Jessica Biel on the cover...

@TSP I said it before Christmas, there was a time Cheryl would have assaulted Alexandra. How fickle we all are.

donna AND navaz said...

Ooh well said. Cheryl Cole...like, who cares!

Anonymous said...

THANK YOU! I'm so sick of whenever a starlet rockets into fame and manages to acquire designer dresses and a spanking new stylist, magazines declare her "best new style" etc. etc. fashionable and fabulous-looking, yes, but nothing to do with a unique, personal style, and nothing without that professional stylist. They're little cookie-cutter dolls. Audrey Hepburn would be ashamed.

No, the same rules of style apply to celebrities as they do to ordinary people. Original + fresh ensembles, the ability to casually rock a red-carpet dress as if it were your favorite blue jeans, an overall air of je ne sais quoi. Sofia Coppola, I think, is a good example.

Alanna said...

oh i so agree with you, blake lively ( shes on this junk tv show in the states) is on the cover of vogue, shes got awful, plain taste its disgusting really...

technology said...

bilk811
bidder701
brich811
blot611
bloom310

gracie takes fashion so seriously it can turn ugly said...

i hate her . i stopped buying brithish vogue when she made the cover . i dont think she is breathtakingly beautifu lets be honest.... 1. not the brightest crayon 2. wears a stupidly big ring from her husband who always cheats on her . 3. fake tan 4. fake nails. 5. fake eyelashes 6.fake teeth . 7. fake hair . and her stylist is really boring .