Quote in Crystal Renn NYT article
There's a new article about Crystal Renn in the New York Times. It's the familiar story to everyone who's been following the news over the past few years, and I kind of wish a paper like the Times had discovered a fresh angle.
However, the one quote that struck me as extremely important was this one - and as usual, not for any reason that they writer seems to recognize:
(An aside: I have never seen Crystal look anywhere remotely near a size 20. I wish. The closest ever has been her Australian Harper's Bazaar editorial, where she looked like a true size 14.)
But that's not the important point. What is important is the part that I underlined - that plus-size models' sizes are artificially increased "to be more appealing to larger customers." That's a direct quote from the article.
For heaven's sake, that means that the plus-size industry realizes that customers do want plus-size models to be bigger!
In that case, since the industry realizes this, then why don't they use fuller-figured models!?
Instead of taking a smaller model and purportedly making her "appear to be a size 20," (whether through digital manipulation, or worse, through the absolutely contemptible idea of "padding"), why not use a size-20 model!!?
I find that bit of information incredibly revealing. I always doubted that the plus-size industry could be unaware of the fact that the public loves to see fuller-figured plus-size models, true plus-size models, and is annoyed by faux-plus girls modelling plus-size clothing. But now, here's the proof. The public preference for fuller girls is known. They realize it. But they don't do anything about it.
For goodness' sake, why? Why don't they accede to their customers' wishes? The industry has so many absolutely gorgeous models who are well above a size 12. Kelsey Olson (my favorite), Charlotte Coyle, Katherine Roll, Marritt, Justine, Barbara, and many more. Even Kailee is a 14. Look at how much enthusiasm Lindsey's swimwear campaign attracted - because she looked beautiful and plus.
If the straight-size fashion industry has a problem with size, that's no reason for the plus-size industry to have one. The Vogue crowd may not accept true plus-size models, but who cares? Full-figured customers love them (as the industry itself seemingly realizes, according to the article!).
Come on. Forget the digitizing, forget the padding, please just use gorgeous and truly plus-size models. Show what full-figured beauty can be.
Re: Quote in Crystal Renn NYT article
Yes. YES. I can't even begin to say how much I agree with this. Either ask the models to be fuller-figured, or find some who are.
And it's not just that fuller plus-size models are "more appealing to larger customers." They're more appealing to smaller customers as well. After all, the majority of customers are of regular height; nowhere near the height of most plus-size models. Therefore, when they see a size 16/18 plus-size model, that model is actually closer to their own proportions, even if they're not that size themselves, because the model's height alters the look. A size 14 customer of regular height doesn't have anything like the proportions of a size 14 plus-size model; but if the model is an 18, they'll be closer in proportion, because of the model's height disparity.
Also - and this is crucial - the faux-plus models often don't have plus characteristics, but the larger plus-size models do, with softer facial features and fuller limbs. That too makes them more appealing to all customers, since even smaller plus customers often possess these characteristics. But larger plus-size models have these traits, and they show the customers that such features are very beautiful.
I earnestly hope to see fuller models in plus-size fashion.
Re: Quote in Crystal Renn NYT article
I've never seen or heard of plus-size models being digitally enhanced to appear larger. Quite the opposite in fact. I look forward to a day will come where plus-size models are allowed to be plus-size and booked because of their generous proportions.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:34.|
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.