Interview September 2015 : The #Me Issue

[Sweet rus]

Why do we label Miley's pics as attention seeking and p*rn*gr*ph*c and Joan's (probably any model's photoshoped naked pics for that matter) as a powerful woman in control? is Miley degrading herself by licking a carpet? who gets to decide? I don't enjoy this editorial but she and Mert are telling a story after all, it's raw and real and sexual imo.

because she is an attention seeker. I am not a fan of all these "for men" shoots per se, but if I had to choose, I would pick Joan's shoot any day. I don't mind nudity if it's done tastefully. I mean look at Ritz's or Avedon's work, a lot of nudity, but it is so beautiful (I feel bad for even bringing up these name in this thread). We don't see such things nowadays, but I feel like (again, my personal opinion) if people want to stay on the verge of being risky/being too much, if they want to reflect the reality in the images/their work in magazines/whenever, I want to see such things filtered through the creative mind of the photographer, I want more glamorized, glossed version of the reality if you will. I can make selfies myself or find tons of them on instagram, I don't need smth unprofessional being portrayed as smth cool in a magazine. I want the reality to be processed through the creative minds and being shown in a truthful and yet polished light, if you know what I mean. Being raw and realistic is an excuse for being lazy and producing mediocrity these days, and I stand by this opinion. I don't wanna see girls licking the carpet, taking nude pictures of themselves, etc. I don't wanna see the reality the way it is, I can experience it without buying a magazine.

 

[Deleted member 130879]

Oh no, don't you come all "those shoots look he same". It's like comparing Playboy to Vogue. First of all, those poses are terrible. She's liking a dirty floor, rubbing her *** on that same dirty floor while holding a camera and putting her hand on her crotch in a totally "orgasmic" way. I hate that Joan editorial (really, is that even attractive?) but Miley's even worst. And I used to Love Lui and I love classy visually appealing and well photographed sexy/sexual editorials.

 

[jemina]

Miley just looks like someone from some cheap p*rn site.

 

[russianelf]

Are there any other edits besides this giant #ME one?

 

[justaguy]

I'll pic Madonna's cover over all the rest. Don't love Madonna's cover, it's just the best of the worst, IMO. Disappointed overall in the previews, too. Just seen a few, but already bored with this issue.

 

[A.D.C.]

I'm not offended by the Miley pics I'm just bored by it. Yawn. If they want controversy why not dress her as Mohammed? Have real balls don't give me the same crap over and over. It's been how long since Madonnas SEX book?

 

[Phuel]

^^Thanks for bringing up this comparison. In fact, I quite find that Joan's editorial to be the one of the two that actually feels so dated, sexless, and sad. It's such a tired cliche of sexy at this point. And while Miley's may be more "vulgar" in a certain way, it's the vulgarity that is clearly ruffling feathers. Joan's editorial is clearly riffing on tried and true fashion references of Guy Bourdin and Helmut Newton, who I'm sure at their prime ruffled a fair amount of feathers themselves, but their visual vocabulary has become so much a part of our visual culture at this point that when photographers reference their style, the real biting sex appeal of the originals is often missing, as in Joan's editorial, and all you're left with is a glossy, useless fashion image.

I don't hate this issue at all, nor do I find it to be "stooping" to any low level. Fashion magazines need to be trying new things, need to be on the pulse, need to appeal to masses, and I don't think it's terrible that Interview is trying it out with this issue. Whether or not they always work or are successful...at least they are trying something new. Way more applaudable to me than what we see in Joan Small's editorial which is so stale, I can't stand it.

Absolutely... Like a shark, high fashion has to keep on moving and feeding off the latest and greatest to stay alive, or it ceases to be... high fashion. I agree with that.

I don't agree with the notion that high fashion needs to stoop-- and that's what Fabien and his team are doing when they mimic everyday-selfies from the likes Snapchap, Grindr etc and publishes these facsimiles as feature stories. That's stooping to laziness. To me anyways.

I don't particularly think the Joan and Candice Lui shoots are the alternative to that sort of laziness; it's typical and it's predictable-- but there's effort there. And I always will appreciate people making an effort, even if the results don't thrill me.

Sweet rus's post puts perfectly into words what I always believe should be the purpose of high fashion and what Fabien and his team have always done: Reflect and interpret the current state of culture through their highly stylized, high design and inventive and imaginative lenses and layouts. That's what the best of high fashion visionaries have always been doing-- and I've always thought of Fabien as a visionary.

You know, Helmut Newton took those raunchy S&M concepts and gave them a highly stylized spin and made it his signature; Bruce Weber took those Blue Boy beefcake magazines of the 1950s and spun them into his signature All-American golden boys. But they never copied their inspirations as-is-- the way these Interview/ Miley edits have. I like Miley, so I have nothing against her, and this is just typical of her; it's neither shocking or entertaining to me. It's just... typical. And typical is not something I expect from Fabien and Interview.

 

[dfl-001]

Re: post 92 Behati Prinsloo by Hugh Lippe in Proenza Schouler

What is with this gruesome trend of pics on the toilet!
eeewwwweee
Are they going to start putting little 'scratch and sniff' squares in the corner so we can tell if they're going #1 or #2.

 

[MulletProof]

Man, we must be going full speed backwards if we are thinking nudity is p*rn and p*rn is just nudity and it's all the same. I think the naked woman with some fur and diamonds is a cliché and it doesn't particularly suggest power or lack thereof, unless you judge the fur and diamonds alone.

You can be photographed naked just because you look good naked, and portray a certain image or ideal of beauty, without necessarily selling sex or being explicit enough as in hey this how I look when I go down on people. I think the amount of technicalities is what makes something p*rn*gr*ph*c... it has to do with the act itself and nothing else. In a way it's like saying a catalog and editorial are the same, sure for most people, but you'd think you're on tFS because you can see some remote difference.

I get Miley was going for the 'send me a nude' spirit of the times, sexting and all that. However, the average 'curious' observer had it better than fake (and certainly better than freaking Miley Cyrus...) last year with the celebrity nude photo leak. So all artistic value or zeitgeist commentary is lost and all I get is that Miley wished she had been a part of it, and if she was, it didn't stand out, so here, she's sending us her nudes again ... and it's still meaningless since I imagine this is actually her day job, just hanging around the living room, eating cheetos, sexting randoms and waiting till 7 pm hits and it's time to go to some event where she might get some press.

 

[Phuel]

I'm not offended by the Miley pics I'm just bored by it. Yawn. If they want controversy why not dress her as Mohammed? Have real balls don't give me the same crap over and over. It's been how long since Madonnas SEX book?

OMG... Miley would be the next Salman Rushdie and the Interview office would be another Charlie Hebdo massacre.

 

[A.D.C.]

OMG... Miley would be the next Salman Rushdie and the Interview office would be another Charlie Hebdo massacre.

I'm not saying it's a good idea but sexualized pics just aren't controversial anymore. Why do magazines keep pushing it as if it was? It's like they have no clue as too any other way to push boundaries aside from showing us t*ts.

 

[happycanadian]

Zaaayyyynnn....

so. damn. sexy.

like, on fire level of hot.

 

[dior_couture1245]

I'm not offended by the Miley pics I'm just bored by it. Yawn. If they want controversy why not dress her as Mohammed? Have real balls don't give me the same crap over and over. It's been how long since Madonnas SEX book?

13 years since Madonna's SEX book. And as someone who owns the book - I can tell you it is still unbelievably tantalizing to this day. Every time I flip through it I am still shocked (in the best possible way). The audacity and the vision is unparalleled and genius and has completely maintained its potency.

Interesting that SEX was also a project that Fabien Baron was involved with, too.

On the other hand, I am not inspired or tantalized by the Miley photos, which maybe is my problem. The content is by no means offensive to me, and I like that it's a mirror of our culture of sending nude photos to each other...but it's lacking just a little spark. That I suppose is what Phuel was writing about. I don't think these photos need more "glamour," but they maybe need just a little something extra...what, I don't know? That'd be up to Fabien to figure out next time

 

[Slater]

jlo looks amazinggggggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dsamg]

Re: post 92 Behati Prinsloo by Hugh Lippe in Proenza Schouler

What is with this gruesome trend of pics on the toilet!
eeewwwweee
Are they going to start putting little 'scratch and sniff' squares in the corner so we can tell if they're going #1 or #2.

It's an Ozzy tribute...

 

[mepps]

13 years since Madonna's SEX book. And as someone who owns the book - I can tell you it is still unbelievably tantalizing to this day. Every time I flip through it I am still shocked (in the best possible way). The audacity and the vision is unparalleled and genius and has completely maintained its potency.

Interesting that SEX was also a project that Fabien Baron was involved with, too.

On the other hand, I am not inspired or tantalized by the Miley photos, which maybe is my problem. The content is by no means offensive to me, and I like that it's a mirror of our culture of sending nude photos to each other...but it's lacking just a little spark. That I suppose is what Phuel was writing about. I don't think these photos need more "glamour," but they maybe need just a little something extra...what, I don't know? That'd be up to Fabien to figure out next time

It's been 23 years since the Sex book.

 

[dior_couture1245]

^^OMG! Hahahaha my poor math skills rearing its ugly head! Haha
Thanks for clearing that up

 

[modelista]

Never enough Abbey Lee — @abbeylee might be too busy for a selfie, but not too busy to feature in the #InterviewGang series in the September 2015 issue of @interviewmag. #NextOnThePage
[

 

[Benn98]

Abbey Lee looks gorgeous! A far cry from that Rag & Bone heroin chic waif. Still, If there's no 'proper' edits, I'll not waist my money on this. It's a shame though. Will be eyeing this issue's sales performance like a hawk.

 

[elle_gb]

I'm dying to see the whole story and others.This is soooo intriguing.