Everyone in the industry has their own opinions on this topic and just seeing the previews of the editorials on models.com caused some heated arguments.
Just take a CLOSE look at one of the editorials from the issue, photographed by Terry Richardson. Please ignore the tackiness that generally comes with Terry's photography.
For those of you who didn't look close enough, there are actually TWO MODELS featured in this editorial. On the left is Jacqueline Joblonski who is a size 2, and on the right is Crystal Renn, who is a size 12. Both models are with Ford. Surprising, right? THEY BOTH LOOK FREAKING THE SAME.
Obviously this editorial is designed for viewers to make comparisons between the models. In my mind, I've come to the conclusion that a size 12 model can hold her own against a size 2 and make clothes look amazing. But now that V magazine has proven this can happen, will the industry change?
My prediction is probably not. I'm curious to see if V will be incorporating plus size girls in their issue from now on.
But do you want my take on the size issue?
Models are super thin nowadays because when it comes down to it, the clothes are the most important aspect. Models must fit the sample size. End of story.
Designers believe thin models sell their clothing best....and as long as they are making money off of super thin models, they will continue to employ them. Which is unfortunate...because many models take it to the extreme to get booked.
And I get that there are many sides to the debate. First of all, there is this "fantasy" side of the argument, which I understand. Average women are drawn to things that are unobtainable. There is something otherworldly about fashion models....they are much taller and thinner than the average woman. This aspect intrigues women and sells the clothes. Even I agree with this argument. I would never be interested in buying clothing that made me look *gasp* ordinary, so why would I want a model to be ordinary looking?
Nevertheless, people are jumping on the "plus size" bandwagon. Here is another look at photographs from the latest issue of V, by Solve Sundsbo.
BUT I am not one of those "full curves ahead" people....and by no means will I be jumping on the skin and bones bandwagon anytime soon. There should be a happy medium. Why do we have to go from one extreme to the other? Let's compromise! Think Lara Stone, Hilary Rhoda, Doutzen Kroes.
Sample size should be 4-6. That way, models would still be thinner than the average woman (normally a size 14) . Also, there would be much less pressure on models to be so thin....which would allow them to live a healthier lifestyle...maybe girls would stop smoking all the time? Starving themselves? Just a thought.
Any opinions here? What do you think?