SHOWstudio: Blog: Let's have a heated debate!

Let's have a heated debate!

By Penny Martin, 15:57 Wed 06 Dec 2006

Unfortunately no photo, as it doesn't do to be too conspicuous about these things, but this afternoon, I was invited down to Vogue's 'Size Zero Models' debate. Can't disclose much, of course, as it's going to form the basis of a forthcoming feature. But it's always an interesting moment when fashion is forced to come out and defend itself over the issue of body image...

Despite the fact that fashion is always held to account for all manner of societal ills by the right wing press, the point this time is that the specific aesthetic associated with Size 0 (UK size 4) hasn't been created by fashion: the incredible shrunken woman with her oversized accessories is a Hollywood/US TV confection that you rarely see referenced in a fashion magazine. What's interesting is where the whole 'too fat/too thin' pantomime is now being played out. Previously the preserve of the right wing press, the cover-selling discussion has now been hi-jacked by the weekly magazines (Heat/Closer), the success of which means that it is increasingly feeding into the glossy magazines that are trying to emulate the weeklies' tabloid-style mode of address. This particular topic is like proverbial kimet to them: a constant opportunity to print pictures of scantily clad models and celebrities.

For me, the whole topic about the health of fashion models -as distinct from celebrities- which seems to get tacked onto the Size 0 debate is a red herring. Of course we should be working in an industry that protects their workers (I'm from Scotland: I'm pro-unionisation and a hearty diet!!). Naturally, we should applaud Milan Fashion Week coming out and saying that models under the age of 16 and under a BMI of 18 can't work. What's to argue about? But you can't on one hand argue that fashion image-making is guilty of putting unrepresentative imagery in young women's heads -i.e. level criticism about the representation of fashion and then cite examples of malnutrition among models as proof (as terrible as those two awful examples of death-by-catwalk are). That's another arguement: about the production of fashion.

On the matter of representation, then, what's so dispiriting about the focus on the Size 0's and the WAGs is what utterly dismal personalities they are (as role models and as visual icons) and how limited our world of fashion imagery has become as a result of their overexposure. With fewer and fewer photographers shooting the campaigns and such little variety between the models we see, we're in a sea of bland. Camille Paglia's point about fashion being a 'triumph of conceptualisation' as opposed to a reflection of reality begs the question of whether we are looking for fashion to be forced to reflect the mundane and ordinary -us- or to offer us something -and importantly, someone- extraordinary to look at and aspire to?

Comments (6)

Comments are also posted to the Blog Comments Forum

I apologise when I admit that this brought a slight smile to my face. I have seen you are, somewhat, affectionate towards fashion. I always find your articles fascinating due to your astonishing capability to reinforce your ideas. The addressing of this subject by the fashion industry, especially Vogue, will no doubt be an absorbing feature to look forward to. Although I have not relentlessly studied the debate around size zero models, and therefore not established a strong opinion on the subject, I feel compelled to disagree with the undeviating blameworthiness of US film and television. Designers, as a majority, have been constructing garments for models of this stature for some time and production before the actual shows commences months in advance. It was for that reason, in my opinion, a conscious decision of theirs, or possibly fashion conglomerations who to some degree dominate by demanding a distinguishable ideal. I do offer blame also to “right wing” press for addressing the issue so fervently but nevertheless do not believe they are as responsible as the actual portrayers, with genuine authority, dictating representation.
I keenly await your response.

Josh :D

By Josh Baker at 19:57 Thu 07 Dec 2006 | reply to this >

Penny - As far as the Size 0 model issue is concerned, I agree that this is primarily a focus of the tabloids and lad-mags and that, for the most part (and from my experience), agencies are pretty diligent when counselling their girls and will temporarily take them off the books if they drop below an acceptable weight. I think that the action taken by the Milan Fashion Week is this same consideration taken one step further - it also acted to counter the tabloid press and their typical 'skeletal anorexic model' statements. The public view that the industry demands and fosters the skeletal look is an ignorant opinion gathered from 'reading' such tabloid newspapers.

Regarding your comment that with fewer photographers shooting campaigns and such little variety between the models that we are in a sea of bland - I would have to disagree - I find both the work produced and the models used far from bland. I agree that we see the same faces but surely these are the someones extraordinary that you refer to later on in your post - I most certainly wouldn't describe them as mundane. Of course we do not look for fashion imagery to reflect our dismal existences - we do want the fantasy - and that fantasy is always going to be slimmer and better-looking than us (...well, than me at least).
I am curious to know more about what you meant in your closing line about wanting something/someone extraordinary to look at and aspire to - what is it that you would consider extraordinary seeing as you describe the current climate as being bland?

By martinb at 04:32 Fri 08 Dec 2006 | reply to this >

.....I sometimes wonder who was first the chicken or the egg ?....the anorexic image used by the fashion mags. seem to have been born out of a perversity rather than 'diversity' ...and perhaps out of idiotic thinking if I may say so ...but there is nothing wrong with being thinner than thin if that is encoded in your genes, but anorexia that is a ' dish' apart and rather complex subject and dangerous waters to dive into in order to be use in fashion to be emulated , which I will never believe was the intention in the first place.... To blame the fashion gurus of the ill is rather naive...no one jumps from a balcony because a 'mad' photographer made it to be 'in'.....and cool! to jump to death from a balcony because he made it ‘in’ and ‘ cool’ by photographing a top model jumping from the Eiffel Tower......It is a lot more complex than that......but indeed anorexia was trivialised in a big way and maybe by the desperate attempt to find something ' new ' ?.......But as it was referred to in the the subject.........fashion's ‘mission’ ( if you can call it) is to give as something to aspire to.....and that is a matter of debate according to each individual’s values....but in general it is all about aspiring to something extraordinary.......unreachable.....that is the core of the fantasy......no one wants to look like the girl next door...unless your name happens to be Kate Moss without the whole baggage of course ! ( ...forgive the example as there are so very few worth mentioning for their total captivating allure ) ....To aspire to be anorexic is not something you can call 'fashion' in the making....on the other hand the positive side of the whole messy business is that it made it possible (without realising it ) to discuss and make public an ill that needs to be address to..........

By Galileo's Universe at 09:57 Fri 08 Dec 2006 | reply to this >

.............................

By Galileo's Universe at 10:21 Fri 08 Dec 2006 | reply to this >

Interesting, too bad I discovered this thread kinda late. My immediate reaction to this was-would working with more average size models affect creativity? Would working with a size 8 model who is 5'9", limiting art director's and photographers' creativity, compare to working with a size 2-4 model? I think not. The wave of critcism of thin models could change as the trend change. 20 years ago models were bigger, then grunge arrived and we have been in the skinny model debate since. Maybe in 5 years the trend would go back to more Cindy Crawford type of models.
I don't think we have fewer photographers and models now than before. It's no different than in the 70's when there was a group of in demand photographers and models, they were everywhere-Janice Dickinson was in almost every European magazine, every cover, as an example. Guy, Mike, they were the Nick, Peter of today.
The choices are always out there, there are tons of photographers and models, it's up to those who have the authority to decide to pick which models to use, so to say we are seeing fewer models, the better question perhaps would be why not take risks and use more variety of models?

By KaWai at 19:36 Wed 07 Feb 2007 | reply to this >

From my perspective many factors how so many thin models end up walking on the runway. Mannequins for the dress makers are "perfect" in its sense, and these mannequins aren't plump. If all the dressmakers use a mannequin to drape for measurments, of course the garments would have to fit on models who look like mannequins!

By BillySoh at 02:53 Thu 08 Feb 2007 | reply to this >

Add a comment

Requires Log-in (You are not logged in)