Anna Wintour, the editor of Vogue who has until now held the fashion world in the palm of her hand and at the nib of her red pen, is handily disrupting the parades of the designer elite on a regular basis these days, and I find myself entirely confused as to why the most prestigious names in fashion continue to allow her do it.
Never a vision of light and sugar, Wintour is all business (Meryl Streep’s character in The Devil Wears Prada was allegedly modeled after a toned-down Wintour) and is often referred to as “Nuclear Wintour,” a moniker she is said to despise. Personally, if I were in her position with the reputation she obviously works hard to maintain, I would treasure such a nickname… but that’s just me and alas, I digress. She knows fashion and has indubitably thus far managed to reach and maintain the very pinnacle of success in every aspect of the fashion world. I am not professing admiration of her technique, I am merely acknowledging her consummate and undeniable ability to do what she does. That being said, her ability to remain at this level for the considerable future remains to be seen, and is at least somewhat dubious… as it should be, when viewed from the perspective of the designer.
Wintour’s new “thing” is to limit her appearance at the most important shows of the year to only a few days, a calculated move that sends every show into utter turmoil. Why? Because as history suggests, if Wintour isn’t front row and center watching your line walk, Wintour doesn’t include your line in Vogue. Having the coveted “showcase” spot of the Fashion Week shows suddenly becomes a disaster rather than the honor it was when you were originally scheduled to show last.
This time around it’s Milan’s Houses of the Holy (e.g., Fendi, Armani, Dolce and Gabbana, Prada, etc.) who are falling over each other trying to reschedule their shows so they can present their wares (wears?) to the Anointed One and hopefully end up on the pages of America’s fashion bible. A juggling display that has been repeated with several Fashion Week schedules this season due to Wintour’s limited appearances, with the exception of Paris Fashion Week, which successfully and honorably resisted any kowtowing. Apparently the French are the only ones with beautifully diamond-encrusted balls.
What I don’t understand is why these permanently established and much loved fashion houses continue to willingly give Wintour this power, and worse, choose to ignore the impression it leaves with the bystander when a house finds itself literally begging for her attention. Much like Microsoft’s failed attempt to rule the internet world, Wintour’s monopoly of the fashion world on behalf of American Vogue is not in anyone’s best interest. I don’t want to be force-fed Wintour’s idea of the best in fashion when it is clearly skewed to favor those who kiss her ass, any more than I want to be forced to surf the net with Explorer (in which case, I’d just shoot myself in the head) simply because Dell and Microsoft made a deal and Explorer came installed on my machine. In fact, these legendary houses’ lack of confidence in their designs to stand on their own disturbs me… a lot.
Are the advantages of a Vogue spread even worth the humility? Wintour’s power to control the fashion houses does not equate to the power Vogue currently has with the fashion-buying public. I am of the opinion that Vogue’s perceived image by the fashion industry as the end all and be all of fashion is not in reality anywhere near the level it once was. If I am any example, as much as I continue to covet my spring and autumn ad-stuffed issues of Vogue (the only two I continue to buy after close to four decades of loyal reading), it’s been years now since I considered it my main source for all that is fashion. I much prefer the immediacy and more varied points of view found on the net for the latest news, and vogue.com, an internet failure as far as I’m concerned, is rarely in my Firefox history of fashion sites I’ve viewed. In fact, I tend to save my latest dead tree issue of Vogue for when I desperately need an excuse to get out of the LongLocks studio and can more easily appease my conscience by curling up with a justifiably work-related, month-old spring issue I have yet to crack open than I can spending an hour watching Oprah.
It’s the electronic age, and as much as I love the magazine I am afraid that Vogue does not have roots securely planted in the future. While the recession takes its toll on many magazine publishers, Condé Nast hardly being left unscathed in the turmoil, the new wave of fashion journalists are busily uploading their reviews and videos of walks that took place only moments before. These are the journalists of the future, dare I even say the present, and these hungry, competitive, and most importantly industry-appreciative e-mags appeal to the budding fashionistas that Armani and Prada have to convince they can dress, not the women of Vogue who have been wearing their designs for years.
So why on earth does a man as talented and legendary as Giorgio Armani believe Wintour can still make or break him? Is it not obvious that resistance of this manipulation to the point of saying “No, I am showing on the last day, it’s unfortunate that you will not be able to attend” would demand infinitely more respect and suggest more confidence in the Armani line than the begging for Wintour’s attention could possibly ever deliver? Wintour only has as much power as designers are willing to give her and for some reason the houses that need Vogue least seem to be the most desperate to do just that. Worst of all, it seems they do this more out of habit than as the results of any sort of logically thought out conclusion.
Remarkably, it goes ignored that if all those who matter say no to Anna, Anna would either ignore everyone who matters in return, in which case Vogue would fail, or she would bring attention to the designs that deserve it rather than the designs of those who merely fell to their knees and cowered at her Louboutins in order to suitably impress her.
My personal preference is to buy from those designers, and only those designers, who have the integrity and confidence in their lines to stand on their own. As an artist who actively refuses to participate in anything that comes my way that would bring my designs too much exposure solely because I refuse to compromise the quality or uniqueness of my designs that becoming a manufacturer would certainly adversely affect, I can’t imagine ever reaching a point where lowering myself to beg for the attention of anyone would be something my own personal integrity would allow me to do. I refuse to believe there wasn’t a time when most of the top designers of today felt exactly the same way, back when their art was the center of their world and little else mattered.
So, the question begs to be asked… when did being subservient to anyone become more acceptable than having integrity and confidence in your own art, especially among those who are considered legends in world of fashion? And more importantly, why should this point of view encourage me to wear the designs of those who don’t think twice about going there? The logic behind the suggestion that I should, or would, completely eludes me. Worse, the supposition on behalf of designers who actually think I should, or would, ignore their lack of confidence in their own lines simply confounds me. The actions designers take, or any company for that matter, are not ignored and do matter to those of us who pay attention.
Perhaps it’s time for the fashion elite to ignore the chill of Wintour and put their belief and passion back into the art that they, and we, so obviously love. I for one, am looking very forward to the warmer days of spring.
Filed under: Angst
