The girls who have earned their way into the show have worked for it. You have a brand position and you have a brand point of view. It’s hard to build Vogue, Ralph Lauren, Apple, Starbucks. Razek: Because the brand has a specific image, has a point of view. If we had done Rihanna’s show, we would be accused of pandering without question. Everybody keeps talking about Rihanna’s show. They shouldn’t have to apologize for that. Many of them work out at the same gyms they have complex routines. We don’t tell them to they compete with one another and they work hard, they work in pairs, they work in threes. At the time the conversation was “they’re too big for us, we can’t possibly put them in our show.” Progress gets made, and part of what’s happened in our show is that the girls have just continued to get more physically fit. They were too “fat” was the prevailing wisdom of fashion at the time. Razek: By the way, in 1999, 2000, after we’d done the show for a few years, none of the designers who did shows would use any of our girls. it’s all been part of our brand, this mix of women and who they are. Getting to know the girls, their routines, their families, their husbands, their children. They asked her what it was like to model lingerie, and people were so excited, because no one really asked the models to speak, no one knew who they were. I did The View years ago with Stephanie Seymour. They have personalities, and we care about who they are and what they have to say. That’s one thing we’ve been really proud of about the show it’s not just women who are hangers carrying clothing. I think we were one of the first to tell women to wear their natural hair, and that was a huge headline years ago. Mitro: I feel like our runways have been culturally diverse for a long time and that we’ve always celebrated our models’ backgrounds. Victoria’s Secret has-what is it?-a third of the market share, but there are new companies, some with former Victoria’s Secret people involved, some direct-to-consumer, some with inclusive advertising. It’s 23 years later, and the lingerie business is radically different. If Ashley Graham, who touted her 42-30-46 measurements onstage at Vogue’s Forces of Fashion conference last month, can walk Michael Kors, why not Victoria’s Secret? In many ways, the discussion around Victoria’s Secret is not about who it’s letting in, but who it’s still keeping out. Nineteen new faces will walk this year’s show, and none of them remotely approach plus-size, or curve, to use the new parlance. Victoria’s Secret gets credit for being a conversation starter, but the brand is not part of the evolving discussion around size diversity now. They are less white, less young, and not as overwhelmingly thin. But thanks in part to their embrace by key designers-the Fall 2010 Marc Jacobs for Louis Vuitton show starring the curvaceous Elle Macpherson, Bar Refaeli, and Laetitia Casta comes to mind-and the subsequent loosening up of who belongs in the spotlight and who doesn’t, the 2018 runways look a lot different than they did a decade or two ago. To start with the runways, it’s true that Victoria’s Secret bombshells were once deemed “too big” for high fashion. Maybe you’ve heard of Rihanna’s little project, Savage x Fenty? Victoria’s Secret’s critics, in contrast, see mounting evidence of a cultural shift that has both influenced and been impacted by changes in fashion a social media–savvy generation that expects to see themselves reflected in advertising and marketing and, not least of all, a shift in the lingerie business itself. Here’s one: Last year the show, which was filmed in Shanghai, China, was seen by some 1 billion people in 190 countries, a 45 percent increase over 2016. Internally, Victoria’s Secret believes it has many good reasons to stick with the Angel wings and status quo. Does the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show need an overhaul? That depends on whom you ask.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |