STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Hermes

Supermodel Karlie Kloss’ Ribs Photoshopped Out Of Her Numero Shoot

pollyjean23 · Marc Jacobs

Both pictures are going to used in positive and negative ways by different groups of people, which, I guess, makes the writer's last point ("At what point do magazines ask themselves, 'Why hire such thin models?'") the valid one. The image shouldn't have been captured in the first place, and Kloss shouldn't be able to readily find work. :-/

Suasoria · Chanel

Jezebel.com had a really good piece on this. I could find the link, but that would tax my already overworked brain. Their point was that the magazine was trying to have their cake and eat it too - that is, they get to have a super thin model, but not be seen as promoting super thinness.

I actually love the rawness of the original image. If I saw the second image only, I confess it wouldn't have occurred to me that it was altered to that extent. It would have just seemed off to me in an intangible way, like most fashion images do in the digital age. But comparing the two side by side, I can definitely understand why the photographer was upset.

I don't jibe with PJ's statement that she isn't entitled to work because of her body. The photos are beautiful, as is she. To me, the original image is the "healthy" one: it shows the unnatural state of these women and their bodies, these living coat hangers, all for the service of our dysfunctional consumerist capitalist interests. I like the perspective behind that. She is thin. She is thin and it's the fault of our shallow culture. Are we going to airbrush over that, like the magazine that desperately wants to conceal the shallowness that is their very livelihood to protect themselves from scrutiny?

Hermes

Suasoria wrote:
To me, the original image is the "healthy" one: it shows the unnatural state of these women and their bodies, these living coat hangers, all for the service of our dysfunctional consumerist capitalist interests. I like the perspective behind that. She is thin. She is thin and it's the fault of our shallow culture. Are we going to airbrush over that, like the magazine that desperately wants to conceal the shallowness that is their very livelihood to protect themselves from scrutiny?

Excellent observations, Su. ITA.

itsapinkthing · Coach

D wrote:
Suasoria wrote:
To me, the original image is the "healthy" one: it shows the unnatural state of these women and their bodies, these living coat hangers, all for the service of our dysfunctional consumerist capitalist interests. I like the perspective behind that. She is thin. She is thin and it's the fault of our shallow culture. Are we going to airbrush over that, like the magazine that desperately wants to conceal the shallowness that is their very livelihood to protect themselves from scrutiny?
Excellent observations, Su. ITA.

This is almost exactly what I told my husband when I showed him this. And I will tell my 13 year old daughter when we talk about it...

Boots · Gucci

I have to admit, my first reaction was disgust at the original image. But after thinking about it, I believe that I'm more disgusted by the photoshop aspect of the second photo. By removing her ribs, it's similar to when they "shave" inches off a model (or actress') thighs or stomach in a photo. Only by softening her emaciated frame, it creates an image that is more attractive (and will sell more of whatever they are selling), but it also creates an image of a woman that will never exist. They are giving us not an idealized version of an image, they're giving us an unattainable version of the image. The first photo is frightening because it is real. That woman actually looks like that and it saddens & scares me that people validate her for it (by giving her work as a model.) But the second photo is the more dangerous one if you ask me. It says that this woman is that thin and yet still hot in a soft way (the way that we as a society, both men and women, like beautiful people to look.) And it's not only not real, it's never going to be real.

-- Edited by Boots on Monday 1st of October 2012 11:03:44 AM