Elle

Is Elle Bad for Women? Elle Editor Says No

The August edition of Elle is out, but I’m still chewing on the “Editor’s Letter” from the July issue, wherein editor-in-chief Roberta Myers defends herself and the magazine. The charge: is women’s media harmful to women? Elle_july2010_rihanna

If you guessed that Myers said “no,” congratulations! Here’s her inauspicious start:

On May 3, I went on the Today show, and in a segment about the winds of change blowing down last season’s runways, I uttered the words “[Elle Macpherson] is not a skinny girl.” Not skinny as in, not one of the anorexic, near-dead models that Ann Curry and I had just been talking about… How ironic that I was actually praising the presence of an almost 50-year-old demonstrably busty and athletic woman as a hopeful sign in an industry where the models have always been way too skinny (read: underweight).

This might be an understandable explanation if Elle had never taken part in the industry tradition of using “way too skinny” models, and if comparing favorably to a “near-dead” model were a meaningfully positive evaluation. Is that how low the bar is now?

“Well, Roberta, she’s definitely still among the living. I even held a mirror in front of her face and detected exhalation!”

“She'll look great in the new Vuitton. Let’s book her!”

[The furor that erupted following her statement] was about what it was about 15 years ago, when I was an editor at Seventeen, and 10 years ago, when I was an editor at Mirabella: In the “who’s responsible for my self-hating body image” debate, there’s no debate at all.
That’s because, in the “who’s responsible for portraying pre-menarche girls as the pinnacle of female achievement” debate, there’s no debate at all.
As New York blogger Amy Odell put it, magazines for women “make us feel bad about ourselves.” I wrote to Amy, hoping she might…explore that a little bit on assignment, but she never wrote me back. Alas.
If only there were more than one blogger who might explain this! If Amy isn’t available, I certainly am.
Why do images of women who are prettier, slimmer, younger, darker, lighter, smaller, taller seem like an affront to our self-worth?
Oh, only because they’re used to point out how flawed we are in comparison, and then sell us products to fix ourselves.
And would self-esteem generally rise were models to look more like the rest of us—5’4” and 165 pounds, the current build of the average American woman?
Um, YES. Obviously.
It’s curious to me that there’s still a belief that the media puts too much pressure on women to be thin, because as a measure of influence it’s an utter failure: The average woman has added 20 pounds to her frame in less than 30 years. More than one third of adult American women are obese, a medically devastating (and expensive) condition.

Hey, did you hear that? It’s the death knell of print media. Isn't the publishing industry’s profit model entirely predicated upon influencing readers and then peddling that power to advertisers?

But seriously: It’s curious to me that Myers ignores the increasing amount of research that being overweight is not necessarily an indicator of poor health. And that the relative affordability of processed and fast foods and the sluggish economy might have more to do with the general rise in the population’s weight than her magazine. And that Elle vacillates between influential and ineffectual depending on whether it suits her argument.

The attractive people favored by media as a whole—movies, TV, magazines, websites—can seem oppressive at times, though they do reflect this truth: Good-looking people get attention.
While this may be true, it also ignores that, beyond the fashion industry, there is no universally accepted definition of “good-looking.” Any model who deviates from the youthful, emaciated standard is shoved into a story about camouflaging those flaws or becomes an excuse for a magazine to onanistically praise its own open-mindedness. Which, you know, could "seem oppressive."
As we grow up and out into the world, how much does the presence of women who have more of whatever it is (brains, success, piano-playing ability) that bothers us about ourselves really hurt us? ...as an adult I realized it felt good to be told I was attractive. And it didn’t diminish my accomplishments one bit.
In other words: “I don’t have self-esteem issues, so I don’t understand why anyone else would. And I’m not publishing this in a national magazine because I feel the need to prove anything.”
And it’s a fair question to ask if media is setting, or reflecting, the cultural norms. Feminism allows us to be, pursue, remake ourselves however we like, so it’s challenging to consider what’s the right amount of “change” advice (let’s not call it improvement) for Elle to offer...
You know, I'm loath to make any kind of definitive statement about the nature of feminism, but I’m going to have to go out on a limb here: I’m pretty sure feminism doesn’t exist so we can “be, pursue, remake ourselves” according to Elle’s high-priced doctrine. It’s so we can “be, pursue, remake ourselves” as anything we want. Anything! Even, say, equal to men, whose magazines—last I checked—don’t contain nearly as many condescending explanations of why their readers’ feelings are totally unjustified.
Do we think that if Elle and the rest of “women’s” media stopped running stories about the latest skin saver, we’re all stop caring about our faces?
Scare quotes and a straw man.
And if the average model (under 20, 5’10”, and 124 pounds) were suddenly replaced by a 35-year-old five-footer, would we no longer find the leggy teenager beautiful?
Is there a reason we can't have both? Because—this might blow your mind—we could find them both beautiful.
Yes, we love [the musicians in this issue] for the way they look! And for the way they sing, write, perform, and otherwise rock our worlds. In every way, I flunk by comparison. And the world is so much more interesting for it.
Wait, so Myers admits to feeling inferior in comparison to these women...when that’s the same attitude she decried earlier.

Admittedly, it’s a daunting task to justify the existence of an entire industry. And while I don’t think anyone expects Myers to launch an all-out attack on her own livelihood and, like, immediately cease Elle’s publication, it isn’t unreasonable to hope for a genuine attempt to answer the fashion industry's critics. Instead, we get clichés, contradictions, and almost zero acknowledgment of magazines’  role in promoting the outrage that inspired Myers’ response. Women’s magazines can't speak for all women, but it would be a vast improvement if they at least tried to speak to us.

Related: Elle Editor Goes on the Offensive, Gets "Real"

A Rant: Miley Cyrus, Thigh-High Boots, and the Fetishization of Youth

Oh no! Miley Cyrus looks vaguely mature in the August edition of Elle—cue the outrage!

At 16, is Miley too young to be posing “provocatively,” as she does in this feature? Riddle me this,Miley cyrus elle august  universe: what is the proper age to don thigh-high boots and a push-up bra in a national publication? Can you imagine the uproar if Elle had photographed an older woman, say Helen Mirren or Judi Dench, in similar attire?

Our culture has fetishized youth. We worship it. Women undergo surgery and inject toxins into their faces to maintain lineless complexions. They wax their nether regions to a pre-pubescent smoothness. Youth and attractiveness are coveted and prized to an insane extent, but a young woman wearing form-fitting black clothes—you know, being youthful and sexy—is somehow crossing a line? Forgive me if I find Botox a far more insidious force than Hannah Montana’s cleavage. 

Sure, these photos aren’t exactly congruent with the squeaky-clean way she’s normally packaged. But so what? Is it so shocking that, at 16, she might want to be portrayed in the media in a more adult fashion? After all, she's been working full-time for years. In many ways, she is an adult. And didn’t we all spend significant portions of our teen years trying really desperately to be viewed as grown-ups?

I'd much rather see a teen star wearing sophisticated clothes in an attempt to look sexy and mature than following that time-honored tradition of posing in lingerie for Maxim. (Hello, double standard! Where are the pictures of Justin Timberlake stripping to prove his readiness to move beyond boy bands?)

All that said, I'm troubled by the pervasive conflation of sexuality with maturity. Can't we have the "not a kid anymore" story without the requisite trying-hard-to-be-risqué photo shoot? (Sorry, Elle. It's just so predictable.) Even so, the downright hypocrisy of a society that so treasures sex appeal but condemns women for cultivating it is far more damaging than a glimpse of Miley’s decolletage ever will be.

Lowest Comon Denominator: Elle, April

3: Number of exclamation points on the cover (Reese!, Exclusive!, and Career Survival!)

Approximately 5: Number of pages before David Beckham appears in his underwear in an Emporio Armani ad. You know, just in case you’re into that sort of thingElle April Reese Witherspoon

1: Paragraphs of Joe Zee’s “Style A to Zee” that I actually read. This is why: “[A friend’s legal office] was full of smart, accomplished women, but they just couldn’t get their clothes right…Why have working women put style on a backburner?” I don’t know, Joe, maybe they’re busy working?

155: Page on which “Yes we can!” is appropriated to explain that, yes, we can wear python prints to the office

At least three months ago: The day I’d had my fill of that phrase being shoehorned into every objective, no matter how insignificant

167: Page on which a profile of Amy Poehler appears with the words, “Watch your back, Tina.” Why, yes, Elle, there can only be one funny woman with her own NBC sitcom at any given time!

Never: When I’d like to see another swooning profile of 21-year-old Zac Efron in Elle. Who are these readers who can afford $730 shorts (page 156) and are actually interested in anything Efron has to say?

$39.95: Price of a bottle of the Fill Pill, a fiber supplement that expands to 50 times its size when mixed with water, as explained in “Full Service”

6: Age of restaurateur Julie Daniels Janklow’s son, whose mother is quoted on page 224 saying to him, “I love you, you’re perfect, I want you to be gay and live with me forever and ever.”

12: Women featured in “The Mentalists” who “should—and do—rule the world”

Microscopic: Size of the photos of non-celebs in “The Mentalists” compared to the pictures of stars (There’s a random picture of Seth Rogen—not a woman!—that’s like four times as large as the photo of Washington D.C. school chancellor Michelle Rhee, who’s number 2 on the list.)

4,583: Estimated number of pages devoted to the profile of Eat, Love, Pray author Elizabeth Gilbert

0: Number of times I’d pondered the endowment of Muppets…until Andrew Goldman asked Jason Segel about it in “Naked Amibtion”

Pop Quiz: What Does Elle Know About Affordable Fashion?

Good morning, class! Please put your books away and take out a pen and a sheet of paper. I hope you’ve been doing your reading, because it’s time for a quiz on this week’s assignment, “Fashion Foolery,” from the February issue of Elle.

Elle february kate hudson

1.  The article’s subhead says “Mixing high and low is totally on trend.” This purported “trend” is:

a.  A good thing, because many women are reducing their clothing expenditures
b.  Irrelevant, because many women’s finances never allowed them the option of buying high-end clothing in the first place

2.  Author Joe Zee writes, “All other fashion outside this rarefied world was considered—good heavens!—mall clothes: the poorly dressed black sheep of a very chic family.” In this sentence, “mall clothes” refers to:

a.  Apparel from retailers such as J. Crew, Banana Republic, and Nordstrom
b.  Aesthetically bankrupt clothing whose sole virtue is protecting its wearers from the elements

3.  Zee claims that in 2004, “things went topsy-turvy.” Which of the following events does Zee say happened that year? (Choose all that apply.)

a.  Facebook was founded
b.  Karl Lagerfeld’s partnership with H&M “single-handedly ushered in a new fashion era”
c.  Edvard Munch’s The Scream was stolen from Oslo’s Munch Museum
d.  George W. Bush was elected to a second term as president of the United States
e.  Lagerfeld’s H&M collection, priced significantly higher than the retailer’s regular line, made it “cool to love cheap clothes”

4.  From a fashion magazine’s perspective, what would be a primary reason for promoting inexpensive clothing labels? (Again, choose all that apply.)

a.  Inexpensive clothes and pricy ones are often of similar quality
b.  In light of the current economic situation, Americans have reduced unnecessary expenditures
c.  Only a tiny fraction of people can afford the higher-end brands, so Elle is attempting to acknowledge its readers who have limited financial resources
d.  Photographic comparisons of high-low outfits give magazines yet another opportunity to push the designer brands that advertise 
e.  Belt-tightening stories are trendy right now—as soon as the economy recovers, Elle will revert to covering almost exclusively exorbitant apparel

5.  Zee showed 100 people high- and low-end versions of seven different outfits.  In four of those seven instances, the respondents correctly identified the more expensive ensemble. Thus, his contention that it can be “hard” to determine the difference is:

a.  Correct
b.  Incorrect
c.  A half-hearted endorsement of affordable apparel
d.  A hedge carefully designed not to alienate the luxury brand advertisers

Extra credit essay question: The author mentions that First Lady Michelle Obama has worn a $148 Donna Rico dress and a $420 Azzedine Alaia belt in public appearances. In your opinion, are these examples of high-end or low-end items? Leave your answers in the comments section below, and be sure to show your work!

Next week in class we’ll cover the latest editions of Cosmopolitan and Lucky. Enjoy your weekend, everyone!

The Headache-Producing Hermeticism of Elle's Editor's Letter

Nicole Kidman’s on the cover of November’s Elle gripping her head like she’s got a vicious migraine, and after reading this month’s “Editor’s Letter,” I know just how she feels. Elle_november_nicole_kidman

Even the most hermetic of us (and if you’re reading Elle, I seriously doubt you qualify)…

Why, yes! Because I read Elle, I am far from insulated! I’m exposed to all sorts of points of view, most of which involve clothes I can’t afford, privileges I will never have access to, and lives I don’t care to lead. But whatever, my horizons are broad!

Oh, the irony. The rest of Roberta Myers’ missive explains precisely how hermetic the magazine’s viewpoint is.

But if you take away the actors and celebrities—and the film characters they play so memorably—it’s really hard to point to more than a handful of female public figures whose stories are well enough known to us that they present as archetypes to emulate.

Indeed! There must be a shortage of adulation-worthy women! That’s why the Olsen twins appear in every issue, right?

There’s Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi (quick: name one thing you know about her personal life), and Michelle Obama, and Cindy McCain, I guess. Sarah Palin??

Is Nancy Pelosi’s personal life critical to her “archetype”? Since she’s the Speaker of the House and not a reality show star, I think not.

Which is to say that the narratives about women (and sadly, for women—quick: try to name one female military figure) belong to the imagemakers and movie stars.

Because there are more prominent female movie stars than military figures, the latter aren’t worth writing about? If Elle thinks its readers can’t name women in the service (and I’d bet most of us can), isn’t that even more reason to cover the many, many women who’ve enlisted in the Armed Forces?

Because let’s face it, power in Hollywood reaches beyond its fabled zip codes into politics, the economy, culture both high and low—to hear some foreign policy wonks tell it, even national security!—in short, every aspect of our lives today.

If the entertainment industry affects our national security, explain to me again why we’re only reading about actresses and not those women in the military who are, by Elle’s own postulation, indisputably affected by Nicole Kidman’s next film?

Never mind! Let’s talk about men!

…Anderson Cooper, who is, sorry to objectify, just the most beautiful human on television.

Um, apologizing for objectifying him is pretty much contradicted by the very act of printing that objectification in a national magazine, but go on.

I am sure he loathes any description of himself that starts with his looks as opposed to his hard-won journalistic chops, but perhaps he gets some of the same kind of pleasure that constantly underestimated, beautiful women receive when they succeed at something other than just being good-looking.

Perhaps. Or, you know, perhaps he doesn’t find it pleasurable when people are surprised to discover that he’s competent.

Mercifully, the letter ends shortly thereafter—with, what do you know, an Olsen mention. After tackling that page, I completely understand why Nicole’s head might be throbbing. Good news, though: Botox alleviates headaches!

On second thought, Nicole? Forget I mentioned it.

The Elle Words: Lindsay Lohan, Leggings, and Lesbian Chic

With the release of her new line of leggings, Lindsay Lohan is making the public relations rounds. Lacking a fresh stint in rehab or a spate of late-night carousing to dish about, the mags this month confront a new facet of Lohan’s public persona: her rumored relationship with Samantha Ronson. Are they? Aren’t they? If two women in L.A. date and refuse to discuss it with reporters, are they in fact a couple? Only a publicist can say for sure! Elle_october_jennifer_lopez

But the unconfirmed nature of their relationship doesn’t prevent breathless insinuations in Elle and Marie Claire, two magazines in which Lohan appears this month. In theory, the alleged Lohan/Ronson assignation gives the magazines a chance to depart from their heteronormative ways and reflect the lives of a broader range of women. This should be a good thing, right?

Elle thinks so, because they just adore the way lesbians dress! From “Fashion News”:

Red Wing, the 103-year-old Minnesota maker of rugged outdoorsman boots, has finally gotten around to launching a women’s line. These black knee-high classics would go great with fall’s new take on lesbian chic.

And what better way to celebrate that “lesbian chic” than with a bit of sniggering about Lohan? From “Hot Child in the City”:

Until then she’ll have to rely on her favorite new bag—a birthday gift from her …friend DJ Samantha Ronson. [innuendo-relaying ellipsis theirs]

On one hand, I see no problem with calling out the inconsistencies between a celeb’s statements and their behavior. On the other, well, the article continues thusly:

She and Sam have been inseparable for months—providing the tabloids with kissy photos stoking endless gossip fires about their relationship.

Like Elle has provided a real counterpoint to the tabloids by discussing their relationship in a non-salacious fashion? For the record, their article about Eva Mendes—another unmarried female—doesn’t once mention potential lovers.

Marie Claire, to their credit, tackles the whole topic in greater depth and in a more straight-forward manner. From “You Don’t Mess with the Lohan”: Lindsay_lohan_marie_claire_octobe_3

…[the bulldog in Lohan’s trailer] belongs to Samantha Ronson, the proto-scenester and DJ with whom Lohan is enmeshed, although she refuses to confirm no-brainer rumors that they are lovers. Lohan’s anecdotes are studded with references to Ronson…

When she tells me, with a giggle, that she’s looking to buy a house “with someone,” it just seems obvious who that someone is. But when I ask Lohan specifically about the relationship, she says, “Um, people can think what they want. I’m really happy, and that’s all that matters.”

Marie Claire seems to concur with that assessment, continuing for three more pages with little further mention of Ronson. Even better, in “My Rookie Year,” about the first year of marriage, two female newlyweds discuss their experiences alongside three hetero couples. It’s progress—and it’s smart business. Why not incorporate as much diversity as possible? There’s no sense in ensuring that entire segments of society will never identify with anyone in the magazine (or at least not exacerbating the current state of disenfranchisement).

Fashion mags have typically endorsed progressive views like pro-choice legislation and family leave laws. Their current incarnations are based on women’s sexual freedom and economic independence. There’s no reason they should be flummoxed by the notion of a same-sex couple—or, on a less cosmic level, by a celeb’s reluctance to discuss her relationship.

Maybe she’s missing the chance to cash in on Elle’s declaration of the “lesbian chic” trend, but Lohan is certainly not the first actress who doesn’t care to elucidate every nuance of her sex life in the pages of a national magazine. Isn’t respecting that—and respecting a variety of relationships—the chicest thing of all?

Lowest Common Denominator: Elle, September

600+: Number of pages in the September issue, according to the cover

636: Actual number of pages in this issue

1.75: Number of hips Jessica Simpson has, also according to the cover Elle_september_jessica_simpson

4: Contestants from the upcoming Stylista featured in a co-branded H&M ad (Best quote from one of the contestants: “You can look good in anything as long as you have a smile on your face and you haven’t bad too many Double Doubles.” Thanks for that insight.)

3: Length, in minutes, of a Stylista preview promoted in Robbie Meyers’ “Editor’s Letter”

239,402: Based on the promotional brigade thus far, the approximate number of further Stylista mentions I’m expecting in this issue

2: Ugly Betty characters who receive Joe Zee makeovers in “Style A to Zee”

100%: My expectation that this issue will also contain numerous mentions of Just Shoot Me, since Elle seems bent on cornering the fashion-mag-as-TV-show market

1: Reference to The Lost Boys as the inspiration for gothic fashion, in “Wicked Ways”

$3,840: Price of the “bag of the season,” a snakeskin Fendi, as listed on page 310

0: Percent of people who are not fashion editors who think $3,840 is a reasonable price for a bag for “the season”

Boundless: My incredulity that “short trousers” are in for fall, as shown in “Fall’s Must-Haves.” Can anyone who isn’t a 6-foot-tall model wear these? Would anyone even want to?

90210: Zip code-turned-title of the show Elle deems “DVR-worthy” in “Elle 25” (Okay, okay, I’m looking forward to it, too. Donna Martin graduates!)

428: Page on which Stylista is mentioned AGAIN. This time, an editorial assistant interviews Joe Zee and Anne Slowey, apparently because they so rarely get a chance to express themselves in the pages of Elle

2.333: Pages assigned to “Killer Stiller,” a profile of—you guessed it—Ben Stiller

7: Pages devoted to political coverage

19: Pages of beauty coverage

13: Age difference, in years, between writer Philip Nobel and the girlfriend whom he left his wife to be with, in “Danger Man”

Monthly: Estimated frequency with which at least one of the women’s mags runs a similar story about a man who left his wife in pursuit of a younger woman

40: Age of model Stephanie Seymour, who appears in fashion spread “Forever in Blue Jeans” (and looks amazing, for the record)

23, 20, and 19: Ages of Ashley Tisdale, Zac Efron, and Vanessa Hudgens, respectively, who appear in “High School Confidential”

Business as Usual: Blonde Celebs Land September Covers

We’re just a few weeks away from the massive September magazines! That means it’s almost time for the same crop of overexposed celebrities who appear on all the covers to snag yet another one. (Vanity Fair, while not strictly a fashion mag, will feature a handful of models.) Here’s who’ll be gracing, er, appearing:

Vogue: Keira Knightley (and just like last year, I’ll be liveblogging as I read the issue)

Allure: Carrie Underwood

Cosmopolitan: Blake Lively

Elle: Jessica Simpson (who, apparently, was on the cover of Elle’s best-selling issue ever. Ever. How is that even possible?)

Glamour: Penelope Cruz

InStyle: Uma Thurman

W: Kate Hudson

No word yet on which flaxen-haired tabloid fixture will land Marie Claire, Lucky, or Bazaar.

Elle Redefines Street Harassment

In the August issue of Elle, the magazine’s creative director, Joe Zee, decides it’s time men had a forum to air their perspectives on women’s appearances. As one of the few guys on staff at a women’s magazine, civilians are always asking him what he thinks about their outfits. Elle_august_mariah_carey

Whenever I meet people at nonindustry social gatherings, they’re naturally inquisitive about my job and often wind up asking me, “So what do you think of what I’m wearing now?” I’m like that lone doctor trapped at a cocktail party doling out advice for nonexistent ailments.

Zee is the only man who makes a living in women’s fashion, so he’s determined to share his wisdom with the masses. The best way to do this? By accosting random pedestrians on the street! You know, the street. The place where men never offer unsolicited opinions about the way women look?

Yeah, this plan was obviously hatched by a man.

The creative director set up shop on New York’s Wall Street—which, according to him, is “man’s territory.” Of course!

Considering this feature is a fairly blatant ripoff of Glamour’s “Dos and Don’ts” (although these women are posing, and so are at least aware they were being photographed), Zee had to set himself apart somehow. His solution? Green x’s across their faces. Oh, and he’s even worse to his targets than Glamour is.

To a woman in shorts, he writes:

Working girl? You bet, if your profession is the oldest one in the world.

Here’s his take on a woman in a pink trench coat:

Elle Woods may have gotten office cred for her ensembles, but this it’s-my-first-day-at-work-in-a-funky-office Barbie look is a real clunker.

Um, didn’t he watch Legally Blonde all the way through and catch the elegant non-pink outfits Elle wore to work in that cad Callahan’s office? At least this victim can take solace in the fact that Zee referred to another woman as a

bargain-bin Carrie Bradshaw who got dressed in the dark

and compared a third to Melanie Griffith’s character in Working Girl.

Perhaps worst of all, he says this about a woman in a suit and (okay, okay) truly hideous heeled clogs:

At work, I want to take you seriously, not dance with you.

Ah, so it’s her fault you don’t take her seriously. Thanks for filling us in that wardrobe determines our worth in the workplace!

Sure, Zee is trying to be helpfu with his advice, but if I encountered a guy on the street who wanted to appraise my clothes, I’d be terrified. Next time I hear a whistle or a catcall, I might just consider myself lucky if it isn’t accompanied by a zinger about my outfit.

Magazines Acknowledge The Cost of Clothes: A Recession Fashion Rundown

So, the U.S. is teetering on the brink of a recession. While there is a smattering of financial advice scattered throughout the July issues, the magazines focus on something far more important than investments and job security: looking good! Priorities! The best investment to weather an economic crisis is, apparently, your wardrobe. I’m no financial expert, but based on what’s in the magazines this month, I will say this: If Forever 21 ever goes public, buy.

Nearly all the magazines offer looks at lower prices, but considering the source, lower-priced is not necessarily low-end. Here’s a breakdown of the style sticker shock:

Bazaar

One page of “Hottest, Newest, Latest” is devoted to “fashion at AFFORDABLE prices.” It was wise to emphasize the word “affordable,” because otherwise—well, see for yourself.

Total number of deals: 6

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $69 Banana Republic scarf

Most expensive bargain: A $395 Elie Tahari clutch

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $140 J. Crew flats

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $450,000 Neil Lane for De Beers bracelet

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A $46,650 Balenciaga dress. No, it isn’t woven from gold. Why do you ask?


Cosmopolitan

“How to Shop Summer Sales” blends fashion with suggestions to befriend a saleswoman and keep your receipts for price adjustments. Original!

Total number of deals: 14

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $49 dress from Macy’s

Most expensive bargain: A $158 necklace, Marc by Marc Jacobs

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 DKNY jeans

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $575 3.1 Philip Lim dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Cosmo neglects to list prices for the most expensive items, like the YSL cardigan worn by a model riding a jetski. Where else would you wear such a sweater?

Elle_july_marykate_olsen_2

Elle

An eight-page spread, “Le Cheap, C’est Chic!,” is annoyingly teased on the cover with the line “No She Didn’t!” Because, you know, spending less than $150 on an item of clothing is totally a novel lifestyle choice and not a necessity!

Total number of deals: Who can tell what Elle thinks is “cheap”? They’ve got Forever 21 mixed with Burberry.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $6 bead necklace and, the fashion find of the century, a $7 Hanes t-shirt. Thanks for uncovering that hidden gem, Elle!

Most expensive bargain: Elle’s “inexpensive” clothes are paired with thousands of dollars of jewelry, as if that’s the only way to redeem them. The highest-priced piece in “Le Cheap” is a $3,990 diamond ring.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $48 Levi’s denim shorts worn by Mary-Kate Olsen

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $5,600 Marchesa satin dress

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Ludicrous $300 square sunglasses by Luella by Linda Farrow. People aren’t actually going to buy those, right? Right?


Glamour

Bargains are splashed across one page, “Summery work stuff—all less than $40,” and a high-low feature, “Your Summer Extras.”

Total number of deals: 12 for sure; the high-low feature doesn’t designate what is what. A $40 scarf could go either way.

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $10 Shop Suey ring

Most expensive bargain: A $70 Roberta Freymann tote (assuming this is what counts for low-end in Glamour’s universe. Since another page in the same story features a $795 straw hat, I think it must.)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $25 Chinese Laundry belt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: The $12,000 Louis Vuitton Speedy mentioned here

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Gotta be that hat.


InStyle

An anemic single page is devoted to “Deals & Steals.”

Total number of deals: 7

Their idea of dirt cheap: $14 aviator sunglasses by Shop Suey

Most expensive bargain: A $139 MNG by Mango dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18 American Apparel t-shirt

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $88,000 Van Cleef and Arpels ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: An $18,000 Donna Karan crocodile bag. It’s just a purse.


Lucky

An entire feature, “The Season’s Best Looks Under $100,” is given over to low-price style.

Total number of deals: 67

Their idea of dirt cheap: An $18 Mossimo for Target top

Most expensive bargain: Tie: at $99, a “tiered maxiskirt” by WDNY International and a Tommy Hilfiger cotton dress

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $7 Metro 7 tank top

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $1,465 bracelet by Steven Dweck

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Chanel charges $1,225 for a belt. A belt! I regret not launching a career in luxury fashion.


Marie Claire

They’ve spread the discounts throughout: there’s one page of “101 Ideas,” one page of “Splurge vs. Steal,” and a feature, “Black & White,” that’s high-low.

Total number of deals: 40

Their idea of dirt cheap: $7 Hue socks (Thanks, Marie Claire, I was really overspending on socks.)

Most expensive bargain: $300 Marciano shoes (worn with the $7 Hue socks, natch)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: $5.80 Forever 21 sunglasses

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: An $18,800 Cartier ring

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: A Chanel top and skirt set that retails for the low, low price of $10,745.


Self

Looks like all the clothes shown in the  fashion features under $100, which is excellent.

Total number of deals: 100, according to the cover

Their idea of dirt cheap: It’s a tie at $8 for a Forever 21 necklace and Old Navy earrings

Most expensive bargain: Another tie, this one at $99, for a Nahui Ollin tote, an RJ Graziano necklace, and a $99 Tommy Hilfiger clutch. Those are special prices for Self readers, however, so this hews dangerously close to cheating.

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: See above for $8 jewelry.

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: That tank top Anne Hathaway is wearing on the cover? Yeah. It’s $845, and she’s wearing it with necklaces whose combined total is $5,300.

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: $49 jelly shoes, but probably only because I’m old enough to remember buying jellies the first time around.

Vogue_july_nicole_kidman_2

Vogue

In “The Economists,” Vogue editors offer “inspired finds under $500 (plus one key investment piece).” Oh, thank god, because I needed help to find clothes that cost so little.

Total number of deals: 31, not counting the home décor and investment pieces

Their idea of dirt cheap: A $127 Sykes London belt

Most expensive bargain: Seven items retail for $495, including a John Varvatos coat, a Moschino Cheap and Chic skirt, and a  3.1 Philip Lim dress. (You didn’t think they’d go four whole pages without mentioning Lim, did you?)

Cheapest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $150 YSL dickey

Priciest item elsewhere in the magazine: A $16,600 Cartier watch

Item whose price makes me question the wisdom of capitalism: Hands down, the dickeys were the most egregiously priced items I saw in any of the magazines. Vogue featured two: a $150 YSL version and a $395 Prada one. That’s an awful lot of scratch for something that isn’t even a real shirt.

Masthead

Editor: Wendy Felton


Front of the Book



Back Issues

Search


Subscribe



Powered by FeedBlitz

Glossed Over’s Most-Read Articles

Updating! Stay tuned.


Blog powered by TypePad

Alltop, confirmation that I kick ass