Glossed Over

To-Do List • Attempting to walk in Lucky’s shoes? Deadline’s approaching! The cut-off to enter the magazine’s caption-writing contest is Monday, March 3, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern.

And if you’re looking for reading material beyond the new issue of Vogue (what is up with Drew Barrymore on the cover?), these stories have captured our attention this week:

• Anna Wintour responds to Carine Roitfeld calling her a “puppet” by refusing to comment, thereby crushing our hopes for an all-out intercontinental war between the Vogue editors.

• Take a glimpse at the past—and the present, and, we fear, the future—of women’s magazines. (Thanks, Melinika!)

• InStyle mixes up the non-Beyoncé members of Destiny’s Child.

• And are Holocaust memorials wildly inappropriate locales for fashion shoots? One brand, facing backlash from shots of a male model at the Vienna monument, admits they “didn’t think through everything.” Well, that much is clear. (via SuperColossal)

Bazaar Justifies Luxury Price Tags, Own Existence

For a long time, we’ve been peeved by magazines’ skewed ideas of what constitutes affordable. (Never mind the debate over whether fashion prices are deliberately exclusionary.) So pervasive is the notion that $150 is a reasonable expense for a belt that we occasionally have to wonder why our wardrobe contains so few expensive pieces. Will we ever own a pair of red-soled Louboutins? Is there some expense we could cut from our budget to be better able to afford a Balenciaga bag? Are we flat-out deluded thinking that our ensembles look like they don’t come from H&M? Not that we want those things, exactly, but we want to be able to afford them.

And then we had a sobering experience. We were at MAGIC, talking to a sales rep. As she showed us a handful of modal t-shirts, we asked the wholesale price. “$37,” she replied.

Our response? “Oh, so that’s really accessible.” The sales rep nodded and moved on to pick up a hooded sweatshirt, and we started to hate ourselves. At a wholesale price of $37, that t-shirt likely retails for at least $70. Which, even if money were no object, is an awful lot of cash to spend on a mere tee, and $70 is certainly not a mass-market price for a little cotton shirt. But in the moment we deemed that particular price point “accessible,” we wholeheartedly believed it. We were sleep-deprived, we’d already spent days walking the never-ending aisles of the show seeing pieces whose prices were far more unjustified, and, well, the t-shirts were baby-blanket soft. (We just feel fortunate that we snapped back to reality before we broke out the Visa card at the Fashion Show Mall later in the week.)

All of which is a really long way of saying that, having been immersed in a fantasy land of desirable consumer goods, we sort of understand how writers for Bazaar choke up the nerve to refer to a $300 cardigan as a “steal.” So our interest was piqued by “Why Does It Cost So Much?” in the March issue. Why, indeed?

Unfortunately, the article devotes just one brief paragraph to the actual reasons why apparel and accessories bear exorbitant price tags. Discard any notions of getting an educational glimpse inside the industry! Rather, the focus is on “how to cope and still look cool.” Here’s what writer Nandini D’Souza had to say:

...I held up my beloved pair of silver Dries Van Noten leather sandals...“How much do you think these cost?” I asked my husband, playing devil’s advocate. “Flip-flops are cheap,” he analyzed in a finance-thinking way. “But since they’re designer, $40, maybe $50.”

Until then, I had never doubted the $300-plus I had shelled out a few years ago for them…I started questioning my sanity: More than $300 for flip-flops?...I had thought I was one of the more frugal fashion editors around. But I wondered, when did everything get so expensive, and when did I stop noticing?

This apparently sincere question is followed by a litany of agreement from people who can actually afford those $300 flip-flops. Which, you know, is annoying. Can you really complain that $500 is too much to pay for shoes when, in fact, you have the ability to buy $500 shoes? (Tangential whine: when did “social” become acceptable parlance for “socialite”?)

“Social” Nina Griscom says,

“The prices today are so astronomical.”

And designer Jenni Kayne weighs in:

“You can’t get a pair for less than $500; $300 used to be the normal expensive shoe.”

So who’s to blame for these ultra-pricey pieces? Designers! Phillip Lim explains himself.

“A dress can cost you $20,000. That’s a whole lot of money,” he says. “You can renovate your kitchen for that, or for some people that’s their salary or their child’s school tuition. You start to feel guilty.”

Start?

For one, lines like Lim’s 3.1 Phillip Lim and Kayne’s label are filling the yawning gap between high and low. Socialite turned designer Tory Burch says, “The whole reason I started my company is because fashion is expensive.”

Tory Burch also charges $195 for a striped cotton tee, so forgive us if we aren’t exactly in agreement with her assessment of “expensive.”

To be fair, the article does give some reasonably good (if not novel) advice about not buying things just because they’re on sale, and recommends that women develop a uniform that suits their body type and lifestyle so they don’t feel the need to give in to every passing trend. However, the article gets progressively more grating, predictably returning to the justification of the positively vulgar price tags of luxury goods. What else can be expected from people whose livelihoods are dependent on the public buying costly stuff they don’t need? A chorus of fashion people rationalize their expenditures thusly:

On a $1,300 pair of Chanel boots:

“But they’re worth it, and they make everything look chic.”

On an Oscar de la Renta dress:

“…I’ll have it for the rest of my life. You can wear it again, and it never looks like last season’s dress.”

On $800 Azzedine Alaia shoes:

“Outrageous. But I wear them a lot.”

About the $7,000-and-up Kelly and Birkin bags from Hermès:

“It’s more about what’s timeless than what’s trendy.”

And our favorite, on a handbag by Yves Saint Laurent:

“I was like, ‘Oh my God, it’s only $1,595. It’s a deal!’” she recalls. “How sad is that?”

Very, very sad. Even worse is the article’s next implication. Can’t even manage to splash out on one of these “deal”s? You’re probably fat, too!

But let’s face it, not everyone can pull off those curved contours the way Jennifer Connelly did just weeks after Nicholas Ghesquiere introduced them. That doesn’t mean that that look can’t translate for a less-than-lithe nonceleb gal. “If you can’t afford the dress, get the shirt or scarf,” says [actress/designer Katie] Nehra. [emphasis ours]

Wait, we’re confused. What exactly is our problem again? Is it that we can’t afford or can’t fit into designer garb? Never mind! Here’s another plug for Phillip Lim!

…For spring, he has several alternatives to his own runway looks, including versions of a mint Grecian dress and a citron frock with a chain neckline.

At least he’s smart enough to knock off his own designs before Forever 21 does! Though we aren’t exactly sure how this reconciles with the guilt he mentioned earlier, especially when he suggests a way to acclimate to items whose prices contain a comma.

Lim’s advice for things that seem too expensive at first? “Sit on it for a few days, maybe a week.” [emphasis ours]

However, the most incredulity-inducing quote in the whole article has nothing to do with cash money:

Echoes Burch of seasonal hits, “They’re so identifiable, and I’d rather not wear something that screams what it is.”

This from a woman who puts her logo all over her line.

Ultimately, the article concludes that we should approach our wardrobes and our retirement plans in a similar manner.

The best way to stretch your dollar while still looking like a million of them is to think long-term investment...

Designer clothes as a long-term investment? Rather ludicrous coming from a magazine that tells us we need new clothes every single month.

A Glossed Over Guide: How to Be Carine Roitfeld, Editor of French Vogue

Carine Roitfeld, the editor of French Vogue, is the subject of a profile in the current issue of New York magazine. The article by Amy Larocca radiates a staggering amount of antipathy—perhaps best exemplified by the choice to recreate Roitfeld’s Gallic accent and broken English verbatim. (Actual quote: “I have in my office—what you call in America?”)

Perhaps because we’re so accustomed to the sickly sweet world of fashion magazine profiles, where everybody loves everybody else, we were thrilled to see an actual, honest-to-goodness point of view. Whether we agree with Larocca’s take is almost irrelevant; we learned so much from this profile. Roitfeld may be near  universally revered as an arbiter of chic, but many of her secrets were laid bare. What did we learn about navigating the tricky path to becoming a top magazine editor?

1. Portray yourself in the best possible light. Literally.

She is a fiftyish woman having a double espresso in the lobby of the Carlyle on Madison Avenue. “For me, it is best to be the youngest in hotel,” she explains, “and I was not having this feeling at the Mercer.” She has come to New York for her son Vladimir’s 23rd birthday, which she celebrated the night before with dinner at Indochine. “It makes me happy because there is vewy great lighting,” she says about the restaurant. “Vewy flatter.” (Roitfeld has reached a compromise with the hard American r by converting them all to ws.)

2. Believe in yourself, regardless of immaterial details like training or education.

“Some editors, they have that, they know all the designer from the beginning of the nineteenth century. They know this is triple cashmere, this is simple cashmere. Maybe they went to fashion school. Me, I don’t. I just get a feeling about what is exciting. It is all just from feeling. So I don’t know”—she pulls her lips into a pout and gives one of those poufy little French exhales—“I think maybe I have a talent.”

3. Do everything you can to keep fashion the exclusive province of the wealthy and slender.

Because of this, Roitfeld’s French Vogue is the polar opposite of most American fashion magazines. It is unconcerned with making fashion wearable or accessible to its readers. It is not inclusive: There is no advice on how to dress if you’re shaped like a pear or about to turn 50.

In Roitfeld’s world, models are never too skinny, diamonds are never too expensive.

4. Lob passive-aggressive insults at more influential editors. (Excellent! We’ve got a head start on mastering this one.)

“The American editors are very, how you say, slick,” Roitfeld says. “Very perfect. Hair is perfect, they have a manicure. They are very clean, they follow fashion. I don’t think they take many risks. They do the total look of Prada. Me, I wear a lot of Japanese piece mixed with a bit of classic Hermès and Prada. Even though jeans suit me, I never wear jeans.”…

“It’s very difficult not to become a puppet,” she says of it all. “Like Anna, she becomes so iconic that she becomes like a puppet. I don’t want to be like that, I don’t want to wear this uniform, I don’t want to be just an envelope.”

Roitfeld styled a shoot last year in homage to Wintour’s look, puppetlike or not, starring a model with a bob, dark sunglasses, and many a fur coat. (“PETA, they like to pay attention to her, not to me,” she says, “so this is good for me.”)

5. Bite the hand that feeds you.

In an industry where accessories count for the bulk of her advertisers’ revenue, she has this to say: “Right now I think that fashion in the world becomes a bit boring. There is so much money, and I feel a bit when you go to shows they want to sell so many handbags, and for me, well, I do not like handbags. I do not wear handbags. It is not a nice look, to carry a handbag.”

6. Look for the good in everyone!

“…So people always say that I weigh my staff, and it is totally wrong. All my girls are very skinny and very chic and very beautiful. And if they are not beautiful, well, then they are very charming. So people always say that I weigh them, but no. I don’t weigh my girls.”

7. Know what tools are essential for doing your job well.

Her desk is nearly empty—Roitfeld does not know how to use a computer—save for a telephone, a pair of black suede gloves, some color printouts of a fashion shoot, and a tiny snakeskin clutch.

8. Have an open mind about other cultures!

Roitfeld is 48 hours off a ten-day vacation in Thailand during which she worked a great deal on meditation.

How was this trip?

“You think this will be so glamorous,” she sighs. “You have the idea in your mind and then you get there and the people in the hotel …” She grimaces and gestures hugely in the hip area. “There were lots of people who were so fat and like that.”

Well, we hope they were at least charming!

More Glossed Over Guides: Parlaying Your Pregnancy Into Press; Becoming a Big-Time Beauty Editor

We Read It So You Don't Have To: The Entire February Issue of Cosmopolitan

Okay, we’ve been away from the blog for a while. Now that we’re back, we feel a little penance is necessary—after all, you’re still here, aren’t you? So we read the ENTIRE ISSUE of Cosmopolitan this evening. Here are the highs, the lows, the points where we just couldn’t resist a smartass remark. Enjoy while we take a lengthy shower to decontaminate.

•    First, the cover, on which Katherine Heigl is wearing a truly appalling dusty pink Herve Leger bandage dress. Does anyone actually need horizontal lines encasing their entire body? Does this look good on anyone who doesn't weigh 110 pounds? Hell, it barely looks good on Heigl.  Anyway, our favorite cover lines:

10 Subliminal Tricks That Make People Adore You

Guess what? Reading Cosmo in public isn’t one of them!

John Mayer Shares Why All Guys Aren’t A**holes

Well, there’s an unlikely source for that story.

•    Best letter to the editor ever.

I want to give you a high five for featuring Beyonce on the cover of your December issue. Thank you so much for showing more diversity in your magazine and featuring our country as a whole!

Because, you know, Beyonce is really representative of “our country as a whole.”

•    Oh! What an honor! Katherine Heigl is Cosmo’s “Fun Fearless Female of the Year.” Apparently, she earned the title by going head-to-head with former costar Isaiah Washington:

Last year, after costar Isaiah Washington allegedly used an offensive word (faggot) to refer to T.R. Knight…Katherine spoke up against Isaiah at the Golden Globes. “You can’t give me too much credit for being brave,” she says now. “I was just a girl who had had a couple of drinks and was angry and got mouthy.”

But then she says this…

“As I was opening my mouth, I kept thinking, Shut up. But it’s an issue that I felt really passionately about.”

Well, which is it? Was she loose-lipped after drinking,l or did she feel strongly about defending Knight? Also, we LOVE how Cosmo put the f-word in italics, like it’s a foreign language or something.

Two other reasons Katherine’s so fun and fearless: She last cried watching an episode of Grey’s spin-off Private Practice, and she has her own line of hospital scrubs. Is that what passes for awesome at Cosmo HQ?

•    We’re skipping the confessions, because they make us feel old. Also because they’re completely fabricated. In any case, we can’t exactly relate to tales of women accidentally exposing themselves during a dormitory fire drill or puking in the boss’ potted plants, possibly because we’re at the advanced age of 31, or because the last time we were senselessly drunk, we cried about college football in the diner at the Palms hotel in Vegas at 4 in the morning. Hey, Cosmo, we’d be happy to write that up and submit it for an upcoming issue!

•    In “Man Manual,” Cosmo calls out mensfitness.com for proffering dumb advice that a woman wearing flats to a bar “certainly isn’t there to lure a mate.” And Cosmo certainly has the moral high ground here, since all of its advice is spot-on!

•    Here’s some ludicrous Hollywood trivia that’s supposed to be surprising insider information, from “Informer”:

In the movie Catch Me If You Can, Grey’s Anatomy star Ellen Pompeo plays the hot stewardess who hooks up with Leo DiCaprio’s character. Jennifer Garner also appears in the flick as—get this—a high-class hooker!

Get this! It’s called acting! Also, her IMDB entry!

•    We are deeply amused by the anatomical euphemisms used in the lingerie feature “Pour Some Sugar on Me.” Resolved: to start referring to our breasts as our “powerful pair,” just like Cosmo does.

•    John Mayer’s letter to us readers on page 101 gave us the creeps.

A guy who has to say he’s nothing like those other guys is usually exactly like those other guys. Also, “passion-filled endeavors”? Signing the note “I love you”? Think we’ll pass on that drink, John.

Here are Cosmo’s other “Fun Fearless Male” honorees:

Chris Brown, who has eight tattoos! Fun!

Dave Annable, who has “always been scared of sharks in a little-girl way.” Fearless!

Dane Cook, who tells a scintillating tale of eating bad shellfish on a date. “I went to the bathroom and knew it was going to be an all-night situation, so I told her we had to drive home…and that I’d have to stop a couple times on the way.” Suave!

James McAvoy, who…well…we have nothing bad to say about him.

Tony Romo, who says football is “not as glamorous as everyone thinks.” Revealing!

John Krasinski, who should have combed his hair and worn something other than an undershirt for the photo, but we lurve him anyway.

Dave Salmoni, who is apparently some kind of wild-animal daredevil. Uh, reckless?

Common, who enjoyed playing a police officer in the upcoming movie The Night Watchman because he “got to learn about the ghetto part of Los Angeles.” Seriously.

Peter Krause, who likes to speak in clichés! “There’s something very romantic about doing things that make you feel incredibly alive.” Original!

Tom Anderson, who we deleted from our Myspace friends.

And Zac Efron, who…God. Do we really have to explain why no grown woman should be interested in him?

•    Wait. Why are there twelve fun fearless males, but only one female?

•    “9 Big Secrets of Male Arousal”: One of those secrets is that a man’s nose is an erogenous zone. Well, they get credit for trotting out a sex tip we are absolutely certain we’ve never seen before.

•    “Get Him to Go There”: You know how Cosmo won’t use the word “hair” twice in the same article, instead subbing “tresses,” “locks,” “strands,” and “sun-catching silk”? Well, they do the same with female genitalia! In the one-page story “Get Him to Go There,” writer Elise Nersesian uses the following terms:

Ahem, bush

Down below

Between your legs

Privates

Southern regions

Below the belt

Your goods

•    Aah! There’s more! In “The Most Satisfying Sex Position,” Bethany Heitman uses the expression “hot button.” TWICE.

•    There may be only one fun fearless female, but there are stories of five women who were “Young and Murdered.” Ah, so that’s the other way young women can get media coverage!

•    Then there’s “I Suddenly Had Baby Panic,” which sums up the decision to be a single mother like this:

I’m a romantic. I wanted the partner, then the baby…before long, I was considering single motherhood. A baby was my priority, so I decided to make it happen despite the obstacles.

Single motherhood isn’t exactly a fresh topic for a women’s magazine, but they could have printed something slightly more thoughtful than this. Writer Louise Sloan talks about searching for a sperm donor and “shopping for eye color the way you select pumps in red or navy.” Oh, excellent comparison. We never would have understood otherwise. Either Cosmo thinks its readers are sexually precocious twelve-year-olds, or they think we’re stupid. We can’t decide which is a worse editorial philosophy.

•    “It’s A Wild, Wild Life,” a fashion spread with way too much khaki, uses the following caption:

She always wanted to use that line “I am woman, hear me roar.”

Using a feminist anthem to sell clothes? And we thought we were cynical.

•     “The Secrets of Being an ‘It Girl’”: Apparently it has something to do with being named Jessica, as both Alba and Biel are pictured in the opening spread. No need to read this one!

•    Oh no! Another way we could die! “Beware of This Scary Infection” tells us all about MRSA, which is one more disease whose transmission can be prevented by thorough hand-washing, but which we’re going to fret about anyway!

•    This is why we don’t normally spend any time on the “Red-Hot Read.”

He really does want to make me his own personal ice-cream sundae, she thought and gasped as the ice cream dripped from the spoon onto her belly, her hips, her thighs…

This “erotic” story really does want to trot out every tired cliché, she thought, and rolled her eyes as she realized it was possible to write graphically about sex and still be totally dull...

•    Ooh, our horoscope! “Uninhibited booty awaits!”

•    Finally, the last page of this issue, the “Cosmo Quiz.” Turns out we’re “flirt averse,” but we think that just translates to Cosmo-averse. Good night!

Lowest Common Denominator: Vogue, January

75: Number of “hot tips for 2008” promised on the cover

13: Number of photos of “plus-size” models appearing on a pull-out calendar inside the issue

Bucketloads: Amount GlaxoSmithKline must have paid for the calendar, which is an advertisement for weight-loss supplement Alli

Infinite: The disappointment that, other than the Shape Issue, this is the only time we’ll ever see models who even approximate average sizes in Vogue (And let’s be honest—it’s not as if the token appearance of two plus-size models in last year’s issue constitutes a valid attempt to portray a more diverse range of body types.)

$200,000: Amount given to the first-place winner for the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund, as explained by Anna Wintour

Endless: Measure of our wonder at the workings of  André Leon Talley’s mind, hence our decision to post his quote from the “Contributors” page despite the fact that no actual numbers are involved.  (Except, you know, dollars.)

What is your New Year’s fashion resolution?

“To order custom Charvet pique tennis shorts and silk kneesocks the color of clotted cream and Manolo Blahnik white suede brogues, for spectator sports at the U.S. Open.”

1: First-person essay about abortion, Lori Campbell’s “Private Lives”

1: Irksome photo accompanying the piece.  In it, the author poses with her daughter in the street, while wearing high-end clothes and towering heels.  Predictably, she is thin, white, and attractive.  Would Vogue have published this essay if its author weren’t so camera-ready? (Remind us some time to talk about this more.  The trend of photographing authors and magazine staffers—ahem, Lucky—only lends credence to the idea that you have to be conventionally beautiful to partake of fashion and/or work at a magazine.)

77 and 78: Pages on which this perception is furthered. Matilde Borromeo, the youngest daughter of an aristrocratic Italian family, is described by William Norwich as

...so chicly comported that you just assumed their first baby steps had to have been taken on the deck of some great yacht...Someone asked if she might linger in New York; surely a fashion house or magazine would be happy to employ her.

$250: Price of a pair of Stuart Weitzman heels that Ivanka Trump deems “not wildly expensive”

3: Number of weeks elapsed between model Natalia Vodianova giving birth and appearing in seven runway shows

0: Relevance this fact has to the story in which it appears, “Peerless”

10: Number of women on Vogue’s best-dressed list

5: Number of women on the list who are current or former models (Kathryn Neale, Astrid Munoz, Georgina Chapman, Kelly Wearstler, and Agyness Deyn)

$165: Price of a fedora worn by Kate Hudson’s four-year-old son, Ryder, in “Sunny Side Up!”

Bazaar’s concept of “best” •  Oh, to live in such a world!  The “best buy of the day” on Bazaar’s site is a Marni necklace that retails for $1,296.  The upside?  Yesterday’s $295 cardigan from Tory Burch seems almost reasonable in comparison.

Lowest Common Denominator: InStyle, January

2: Number of pages devoted to Kate Hudson (“Her 10 best, ever!”)

4: Additional photos of Kate Hudson throughout the issue (pages 78, 112, 115, 149)

7, not counting writer Johanna Schneller: People who gush over Katie Holmes in “What Katie Wants” (The illustrious Kate Cruise Fan Club counts the following luminaries as members: Sherry Lansing, Giambattista Valli,  Diane Keaton, Giorgio Armani, Victoria Beckham, Callie Khouri, and Christopher Bailey of Burberry.)

29: Percentage of paragraphs in “What Katie Wants” in which Katie gushes about Tom Cruise or “being a wife”

Way, way too much: Amount Katie is trying to make her marriage appear sound

1: Ludicrous statement about femininity in “Figure Flattery.”  The collarbone is, according to InStyle, “arguably one of the most feminine parts of a woman’s body.” Wait, are they really claiming certain parts of a woman’s body are more feminine than others?  No word on which parts are, like, unacceptably gender-neutral.

1: Animal whose fur is suggested as a “problem solver” for upper arms in the same article (That’d be the rabbit, and there’s a shrug and a capelet crafted of its pelt.)

$54.80: Average price of the “positively affordable” items in “Deals & Steals,” which is—surprise!—actually affordable

3: Photos of Jennifer Garner in the same magenta Zac Posen dress (pages 75, 76, and 110). We love us some Sydney Bristow, and it’s a gorgeous dress, but three times?

1: Number of animate objects listed in “Designer Lust List” (Jenni Kayne says a French bulldog is a must-have.  Dogs, yes!  But pups as fashion accessories?   God, no.)

10: Steps involved in a “simple…approach to getting it right in the new year and beyond,” per “Beauty 2008: Your Master Plan”

Absolutely none: Amount of interest we have in developing a “master plan” involving a “signature scent”  and hair accessories.  Like we have nothing better to do?

42: Percent of ad pages in this issue which tout cosmetics, skincare, and haircare products

26: Words we read in the Vanessa Williams story.  They were: “Can a native New Yorker like Vanessa Williams find true bliss—and a really good soy chai latte—way out West?  You bet your sweet Buddha.”

Approximately a billion: Number of times we’ve seen the story about a New Yorker moving to L.A.  Doesn’t anyone east of the Mississippi realize that we do, in fact, have bagels on the West Coast?

Infinitely: Degree to which we were bored with this issue

Vogue: The Best Way to Spend A Lot of Money on A Little Fabric

More than once, we’ve been accused of rampant, ceaseless cynicism.  And with good reason, too!  But now that the holiday season is upon us, and the sounds of joyous carols and demanding children are wafting through the chilly air, we decided to turn over a new leaf.  We are perfectly capable of seeing the good in everyone…if we really, really try.

So we decided to trot out our new viewpoint on a visit to the newsstand.  We smiled genuinely at the strange guy chatting with the cashier about a lady he squired around the city this weekend.  His revelations were a wee bit indelicate, but we’re sure he’s truly a gentleman.  In fact, he wouldn’t even let his special friend stay overnight, since he knew her cat would be worried if she didn’t return home before daybreak.  What a prince!

Anyway.  Peering at the colorful covers of our favorite magazines, one jumped out at us immediately.  It was Vogue’s December issue, and we were instantly touched by the way the issue was striving to include the concerns of everyday women in its fashion editorial.  Why, just look at this cover line:

Cocktail dresses that don’t cost a fortune

Aw, it’s adorable when an elite (elitist?) publication works to speak to us little people.  We ought to give them credit—this one-and-a-half page article in the 430-page December issue really forced the staff to break out of its comfort zone of ultra-luxe fashions!  It was so sweet of them to even consider women like us that we forked over $3.99 without hesitation.  At home, we quickly flipped to “A Dress for Less,” which we were sure would be super-helpful.  It took just five minutes to read the entire article, and we definitely appreciate Vogue being so considerate of our busy schedule!

Allure's Interpretation of Dressing Cheaply Varies from Ours

Know what’s even better than arbitrary fashion rules? Appending heavy-handed assumptions about sexuality to the clothing in question!  Why just scrutinize an outfit when you can cast aspersion on someone’s character, too?  Allure’s “Life of the Party,” December, covers all those bases in the guise of helping us discern what, exactly, we’re supposed to wear to holiday parties with nebulous dress codes.  (Festive casual?  What the hell?) 

Here’s some priceless guidance from stylist Kate Young:

And I love dresses by Kate Moss for TopShop.  They’re really fancy but still fun and slutty—in a good way.

Oh.  Whew.  Well, as long as they’re slutty in a good way… We really, really wish Allure had pestered Young to expound on this point.  The word “slut” has such negative connotations, but Young is saying to be “slutty in a good way.”  Is she telling us to eschew society’s standards?  Is she urging us to embrace our sexuality?  Does she want to jettison such labels altogether?

Who knows?  There’s no evidence Young herself has any clue, as she elucidates her slutty-in-a-good-way aesthetic:

Deep, plunging necklines are OK, as long as the amount of cleavage you’re showing is tasteful.

So a plunge neck is fine if it doesn’t show too much décolletage...which is kind of the point of a low-cut top. And where does the “slutty” part come in again?   We couldn’t tell you, but we could point you to part where it becomes clear that using the term “slutty” was just for shock value.

I don’t like backless for cocktail parties, though.  There’s something too risque about it...

And the appalling part:

...—in a way that low-cut in the front isn’t.  It shows you’re definitely not wearing a bra, and it invites men to walk up and touch you.

Right, because not covering our bodies from head to toe is a direct invitation for men to approach us and touch us!  It’s totally our fault for dressing that way if a man we don’t know feels ENTITLED to paw at us!

Here’s the unspeakably ludicrous part:

You know how a woman in lingerie is sexier than a naked woman?  It's the same sort of thing with this.  A backless dress just means business.

Business, eh?  We’re guessing she doesn’t mean the kind that takes place in boardrooms.  How lovely to imply that women with bare backs sell their bodies for cash!

You know, there’s a lot of talk about reclaiming negative words and repurposing them as emblems of strength.  If Kate Young was trying to do that with the term in question, we’d applaud her efforts.  But throwing out the word “slutty,” stripping it of meaning with the “in a good way” disclaimer, and then using it to propagate outrageously judgmental, outmoded, and flat-out incorrect standards doesn’t do anyone any favors. 

Least of all us—we have a holiday party coming up, and we still have no idea what to wear.

Lowest Common Denominator: Marie Claire, December

0: Number of cosmetic procedures Nicole Kidman claims to have had in “Nicole Kidman Spills…”

0: Amount of credibility that statement holds when compared to the cover photo and this particularly jarring shot (Remember when she actually had pigment?)

$37,990: Price of the YSL Downtown Croc Tote, the most expensive item featured in “Shopping Deconstructed” (The article attempts to answer the burning question, “How can a bag cost more than med school?”  We get the how, but we’re still wondering about the why.)

4: Of the seven cars featured in “Primp My Ride,” the number that cost less than the YSL bag (Hence the reason we’re still working on the why.  A bag that costs more than a car?  Is that ever necessary?  Forty grand for a purse is just plain vulgar.)

$20,855: Value of the five ensembles worn by reader Sarah Annibale in “Fashion Boot Camp”

26.8: Percent of the average Marie Claire reader’s household income needed to purchase those same outfits (source: Marie Claire’s media kit, registration required)

$1,385: Retail price of a Versace gold clutch shown in “Clutchy-Feely,” page 64

$650: Price of an Orlane Paris cream containing pure gold extract, as shown in “Beauty Deconstructed”

$797.80: Price of one ounce of gold (source)

5: Pages devoted to the story “Step Away from the Chardonnay!” which is an ever-so-helpful guide to “choosing your booze”

9: Number of pages of Bacardi Rum advertising located immediately adjacent to the aforementioned story (an eight-page insert plus a full-page ad)

2: Pages of alcohol advertising placed elsewhere in the issue

101: Number of readers who appear in for “101 Dresses (on 101 Readers)”

26: Median age of readers depicted in “101 Dresses (on 101 Readers)”

37.1: Median age of Marie Claire readers (source)

$1,320: Average annual per capita income in Bhutan, where fashion spread “A Stitch in Time” was shot (source)

4: Number of items depicted priced greater than $1,320, not including a “price upon request” Maxmara dress

“I think Anna is a terrific lady” • Lloyd Grove recently interviewed designer Elie Tahari for Portfolio.com, and the two discussed everything from Israel to fashion shows to Angelina Jolie. Representative of the crackling exchanges in the Q & A:

L.G.: But didn’t you used to go to Studio 54?

E.T.: Yeah.

L.G.: Did you have trouble meeting women? I’m sorry for you.

E.T.: Um, no, I’ve been lucky. I was good-looking when I was young. [Laughs.]

“I’m sorry for you”?  Such a rarely used phrase in journalism!

Anyway, the whole thing gets really vague when Tahari sort of discusses having breakfast with Anna Wintour for the first time, why Tahari designs haven’t been featured in Vogue until recently, and how the whole situation is “a bit sensitive to talk about—between me and my wife.”  Juicy!  Anna Wintour causing marital discord? Sadly, Grove doesn’t probe Tahari (who comes across as quite reticent to discuss the matter) on that point, but we did enjoy this exchange about the editor-in-chief:

L.G.: What is it with you? I saw a quote where somebody was pointing out that Vogue had pretty much ignored you, and you said, "I guess I’m not important enough for Vogue."
 
E.T.: No, no. Well, that quote was taken out of context. But look, I think Anna is a terrific lady, and I—

L.G.: Yada yada yada. I understand.

Read the whole interview here.

Lowest Common Denominator: Glamour, November

1: Celebrity slam on the cover (“Mariah’s new attitude: she’s smarter and saner—Britney, take notes!”  Oooh, burn.)

5: Musicians whose onstage facial expressions are analyzed as their “sex faces”

One million:  Approximate number of other magazines and websites where we’ve seen this exact same discussion (Related:  why is it always John Mayer in these stories?)

116: Page which contains the sentence “The pleats flatter too.”  What?   

118: Page on which Glamour advises, “Pleats add volume to your hip and belly area.  Our advice?  Just skip ‘em.”

6: Traits that “make a guy ask you out,” according to dating columnist Jake

10: Anecdotes about women being dumped in “You think you got dumped?”

$456: Average cost of rent, in dollars, for a young single woman (page 204)

1995: Last time our rent was anywhere near that low (No, really, where are these $456 rents?)

1: Pages devoted to an interview with former Pakistan prime minister Benazir Bhutto

7: Pages devoted to Mariah Carey’s home (including a full-page photo of Mariah with her mind-bogglingly vast collection of Hello Kitty paraphernalia)

21: Number of ads for fragrance in this issue

4: pages allotted to “One Spritz and You’re Sexy,” which is about—you guessed it—perfume

André Leon Talley Gets Paid to Tell Us What to Wear

Does he always dress this way around Jennifer Hudson?

Image from TMZ via Getty

Fashion Mini Celebrates Ten-Year-Old Taste

You know, it’s pretty much par for the course that a magazine has the power to make us feel bad about ourselves.  Between the impossibly skinny models, their never-seen-the-sun skin, and our apparently inadequate earning power, reading a magazine can sometimes turn into a real battle with our self-esteem.  Last night, we were reading the October issue of Marie Claire, feeling pretty good about our bank balance—until we saw that a $295 Tory Burch dress listed as a “steal.”  Suddenly, our mood darkened.  A dress that costs a good deal more than our car payment?  Oh, sure, what a fantastic way to spend our hard-earned dollars!   But was the magazine’s perspective skewed, or are we simply not bringing home enough cash to finance a fashionable life?

Fortunately for our sense of self-worth, the page also suggested a $34.95 H&M dress.  (And we aren’t really in the midst of a magazine-induced personal crisis…yet.)  Still, we have to wonder who Marie Claire thinks is reading their magazine when such disparate price points are both considered bargains, but we’re digressing.

We’ve been reading fashion mags for the better part of our life (really!), which means we’ve absorbed plenty of stories about men, clothes, and money that don’t even approach our reality.  Still, we hadn’t yet read anything that made us feel like we were inadequate in our youth.  Until tonight, that is!  Who even knew that poor self-esteem could be retroactive?  Well, it’s totally possible!  How?  Well, the September Fashion Mini crowns actress Camilla Belle one of their fifty most stylish luminaries.  Then, horrifyingly, the issue confronts us with a detailed account of actress Camilla Belle’s preferences as a ten-year-old—taking us all the way back to 1997. 

Although that was the year we turned twenty-one, Belle’s means—not to mention her taste—were already well beyond our reach.  Reading her style picks, it becomes rather clear that some of us (and we do mean us) will never quite catch up with the magazine world’s favorite tastemakers.  Behind the jump, we compare our picks with Camilla’s, circa 1997.  Looks like we can blame our lack of Louboutins on our childhood!

Live Blog: Reading September's Vogue

Here goes nothing something, we hope. We’ve never live blogged before, and to our knowledge, no one else has live blogged a magazine before. There may be a reason for that. Guess we’€™ll find out! We should mention that we have not even opened the September issue of Vogue until now, nor have we read other blogs’ takes on the issue. We have no idea what to expect and only the most optimistic of hopes that we’ll be done before Conan O’Brien starts.

8:04 p.m.: Sienna’€™s eyebrows are the exact same thickness as Gwyneth’€™s are on the cover of W.  Guess we’€™re all supposed to break out the eyebrow pencil this fall.

8:05 p.m.: The cover says the issue is

Extra-extra large!  Our biggest issue ever

Which really means more ads than ever before.  Less to read, more for Vogue to tout!  Great!  Okay, enough with the cover...now we’re actually going to open the magazine.

8:08 p.m.: Serious lust for the Gucci jacket and gloves in the ad about a dozen pages in.

8:10 p.m.: Next ad spread is Hilary Rhoda for Estee Lauder.  Is she the one who kicked off the thick brow craze?  Confidential to Sienna:  Hilary’s look good because they’€™re natural.  And next, more of the Yves Saint Laurent ads with Gisele.  Love the right-hand page shot of Gisele from the waist down...we would hang that on the wall, poster-size.

8:12 p.m.: Cavalcade of celebs!  Kate Winslet for Tresor, six pages of Angelina Jolie for St. John, Halle Berry for Revlon.

8:13 p.m.: Four Prada pages with strange black plastic-looking...things.  We don’€™t get it.  Someone explain?

8:15 p.m.: We’€™ve arrived at the table of contents, page 54.

8:19 p.m.: So if Kate Moss looks like Grover from Sesame Street in that fluffy electric blue Versace coat, how will any mere mortals wear the thing?  We like the strapless dress with the opaque black tights, though.  Yes, we’™re in the middle of another 50 pages of ads and still haven’t hit the rest of the table of contents.

8:22 p.m.: Jordache is advertising?  Really?  Also, after three kids in short succession, if Heidi Klum’s actual body looks remotely like it does in this ad (besides the Barbie-like lack of nipple), we were gypped in the genetic lottery.  Sigh.  When does Project Runway come back?

8:26 p.m.: Look!  More contents!  Page 96.  Do you read the table of contents except to find a specific  article?  We usually don’€™t bother lest the descriptions actually convince us not to read something.  Like the article by Plum Sykes in this issue, which we’€™ll totally read because we hate her, but listen to the way it’€™s listed here:

Plum Sykes tackles brooches big and small in search of one that sticks

See?  We’re turned off for reasons that have nothing to do with our rampant dislike of Plum.  (Note to self:  Find out if that is, in fact, her real first name.)

8:31 p.m.: The power in our apartment just went out for no apparent reason.  We had to stop blogging to play with circuit breakers!  At least something happened...we were starting to get bored by the endless ads--Calvin Klein, Michael Kors, Bulova.  Blah.

8:38 p.m.: Soooo many ads.  Still.  The same Molly Sims Cover Girl ad we’ve been seeing for months.  Valentino’s Rock ’€™n Rose--a model covering her breasts with flower petals!  How very cutting-edge.  We’re just flipping through now in an apparently vain search for content.

8:41 p.m.:  Hey, look!  More contents on page 146!  According to "Cover Look," Sienna is wearing a cream ostrich-plume dress by Marchesa.  Would you believe we were so captivated by her brows that we didn’t even notice the feathers?  Clearly, our powers of observation need some work.

8:44 p.m.: Dillard’€™s bought eight pages of ads and the only notable thing about them is the dog.  Cute pup!

8:46 p.m.: Okay, this Taryn Rose ad?  New heights of ridiculousness.  The model is wearing a short, low-cut dress with a fur stole and leopard-print heels.  Not so weird...except that she’€™s apparently standing outside a medieval cottage with a wooden door pruning her garden.  (No, that’s not a metaphor--she’s holding a pair of clippers in one pink rubber glove-clad hand and a long-stemmed bud in the other.)  Also?  Not a single flower on any of the plants in the photo.  Ads that make no sense make us wince.  We’€™re idealists.

8:50 p.m.: Guess what?  More ads for crap we can’€™t afford!

8:51 p.m.: Teri Hatcher in lingerie for Badgley Mischka.  The good: There’s actually a tiny crease in the flesh of her bare stomach, as if she’€™s at a normal body weight.  (Ha!)  The bad:  Her face looks more youthful than when she was on Lois and Clark.

8:55 p.m.: Another page of contents, though we’re pretty sure by now this issue contains nothing but more tables of contents and ads.  Lots and lots of ads.

8:57 p.m.: An ad for Sarah Jessica Parker’s Covet.  Just go away already.  We are not interested in a perfume that will supposedly compel us to COMMIT A CRIME and break a window in order to snatch the basketball-sized bottle of chartreuse liquid.  Still better than the TV commercials for the stuff, though.

9:01 p.m.: Christy Turlington!  A supermodel!  How very novel.

9:02 p.m.: Hey, Gap, we see Selma Blair and Lucy Liu featured in your current campaign.  They’€™re lovely people, we’€™re sure, but is that the best you can do?  If you were trying to land hip and relevant actresses for your ads, you’re a few years behind with those two.  Also, why did you destroy any charm Sarah Silverman might have had?  She looks like a malformed emo Annie Hall in this picture!

9:05 p.m.: Editor’s letter, page 208...interrupted by fifteen more pages of ads.  Sorry, Anna, what were you saying?  Making the September issue is like making a movie?

9:08 p.m.: We spoke too soon--twenty more pages of ads, including a repeat of an ad for ShopVogue.com.  How many times will that one pop up, we wonder?

9:13 p.m.: Anna Wintour says that Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez, the designers behind Proenza Schouler, “live a very downtown and bohemian life.” So $375 tanks are what pass for “bohemian” in Wintour’s world.  Yikes.   

9:13 p.m.: Sienna Miller looks far better in the ads for Tod's than she does on the cover.  Dare we say, with these photos, we almost understand the hype.

9:15 p.m.: Tony Blair is on the cover of Men’s Vogue.  So if you want to appear on a magazine cover, you only have to be young and good-looking if you’re a woman!  Sure, Blair’€™s got plenty to talk about...but so does, say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and we don’€™t expect to see her on a fashion mag any time soon.  Or ever, really.

9:22 p.m.: Ad for Ports 1961. “€œOtherworldly”€ is the kindest way we can describe this look.  A sad contrast to the Lily Cole for Bloomingdale’€™s spread immediately preceding this.

9:25 p.m.: Stretch!

9:25 p.m.: Ad for Le Mystere No. 9, the bra for women with breast implants.  No, really.

9:27 p.m.: Six pages promoting fur!  Hope Anna Wintour’s prepared to get another cream pie in the face at the Paris shows this fall.  The ad calls fur “the natural, responsible choice”--natural, sure, but responsible?  How’s that?  Is the use of fur somehow keeping the tragic overpopulation of minks in check?

9:39 p.m.: Time for “Life with Andre”!

9:44 p.m.: We aren’t the most fashion-savvy person by any means, but we still hate when we’re confused by Talley’s fashion references.  He’s like the couture version of Dennis Miller.  Like this:

Back on the thirty-seventh floor, what her corduroy coat was to her elegant Schiaparelli side, the fire-engine maxi, worn over a bird-of-paradise black evening column and accessorized with a black leather visor right out of The Wild One with Marlon Brando, shows her fresh Claire McCardell side.

We’re guessing he doesn’t subscribe to the belief that high fashion should be accessible to everyone.

9:51 p.m.:  Um, our power just went off again.  Not fun this time!

9:52 p.m.: A Valentino ad between pages of “Life with Andre.”  The slicked-back hair and red lips are very 80's Robert Palmer video.

9:57 p.m.: Okay, shameful confession time.  We started to read “The Gift,” an article about Nabokov, but then we looked at the clock and realized we’d never finish it before The Hills begins.  Some priorities we have.

10:01 p.m.: Audrina’s going out with that freak JustinBobby again?  Nabokov can wait.  Yes, we are filled with an appropriate amount of self-loathing.

10:05 p.m.: Gwen Stefani looks hot in the ad for L.A.M.B. perfume, even if the stuff does smell an awful lot like Clinique’s Happy.  Bonus points for affixing the ad and sample with an adhesive strip so it’s easy to remove.

10:07 p.m.: The ad for Payless shoes includes the word “bootine.”  Please, please tell us that is not a real word.  We’re making a stand right now—we will fight to prevent that word from entering the vernacular.  “Bootine”?  That’s just stupid.  Even “bootlet” would be way better, assuming we need to start inventing words for every possible permutation of shoe.  Which we don’t.

10:11 p.m.: Note on The Hills:  We are so, so glad we are no longer 21 and single in L.A.  We wouldn’t go back if you paid us in free magazines for life.

10:12 p.m.: According to their ad, Lord & Taylor sells the perfect clothes for playing croquet on the lawn of your mansion with kids dressed in breastplates and doublets.  Great!  We were looking for exactly the right outfit for our next event!

10:17 p.m.: We’re pretty sure we’ll never actually wear teal, yellow, and purple together, but that Kate Spade ad makes the color combo look incredible.  We want those red knee socks something bad.

10:23 p.m.: Another reason we can’t abide Plum Sykes.  On the “Contributors” page, she says she’s most looking forward to the onset of fall because she plans on 

“Getting Michael Kors’s uberchic little black minisuit and wearing it to lunch as soon as Labor Day is over”

Is she the only person on earth still adhering to the rules about which colors you can wear in which months?  Or at least the youngest person alive who won’t wear black in the summer?

10:29 p.m.: Rebecca Romijn’s face looks like a doll’s in the ad for Bebe, and not in a good way.

10:33 p.m.: Best part of the “Letters from Readers” about the Keira Knightley-and-elephant photo shoot from June?  This sentence:

Twelve of us, plus guide, braved the elements to camp in the Kalahari and Moremi Game Reserves, often besieged by hyenas, elephants, and rampaging hippos—not to mention a killer lion or two.

Wait, these people were trekking in the wild, and the animals were besieging them?  Come on!

10:45 p.m.: Taking a quick break, be right back.

11:15 p.m.:  We’ve returned.  Checking out “The Magic Touch.”

11:29 p.m.: Still strangely fascinated by “The Magic Touch,” chronicling a woman’s journey to India where she performs therapeutic massage on leprosy patients.

11:31 p.m.:  Did we say Sienna Miller’s brows were thick?  They’re nothing compared to the model in the Vera Wang ad.  Wow…just…wow.  We have no words.

11:36 p.m.: Just finished the story.  Guess how it ends?  Surprise!  The Western woman goes to help the needy, but they end up helping her change!  Oops, sorry for the spoiler!  Also, there’s this:

I could face almost anything—even India’s crazed rickshaw drivers, waiting just beyond the village gates.

That’s the worst thing she has to face?  Rickshaw drivers are the terrible fate she’s been dealt?

11:43 p.m.:  Jenny Lewis of Rilo Kiley in “Talking Fashion.”  Considering the rest of page 422 features the usual suspects—Katie Holmes, Kirsten Dunst, Cate Blanchett—this is a good thing, even if Jenny’s minidress is horrid.

11:47 p.m.:  William Norwich attends a party thrown by Jessica Seinfeld.  This can’t possibly be interesting or relevant.  On to the next story!

11:49 p.m.:  So we skip the gratuitous society party story, and what do we get?  An endless ad for Juicy and the same ShopVogue.com ad we’ve already seen twice!  It’s like the magazine knew we were skipping something and decided to punish us for it!

11:51 p.m.:  More Vera Wang ad pages, these ones dedicated to her line for Kohl’s.  We’re pleased to report that these pics feature utterly normal eyebrows, meaning Wang has her finger firmly on the pulse of…well…wherever there are Kohl’s stores.  (Though we doubt the ultra-thick eyebrows are going to fly anywhere outside of fashion circles.) 

11:54 p.m.: Stephanie Seymour! 

12:12 a.m.: Oh, the folly of this description!

Your more simplified life is in your hands.  YSL bag, $1,895.

Sure, it’s a great-looking bag, but how would it simplify our lives?  By depleting every single red cent from our bank account.  Life would be rather simple if we owned nothing but a fabulous bag!

12:17 a.m.:  This may be attributable to the fact that it’s late, but we just cannot stay focused on an article about “the fear of chic.”  (That would be “Dare to Wear” on page 461.)  Our lack of interest may also be due to the fact that it’s a fundamentally ridiculous idea.

12:22 a.m.:  From “The Sloppy Syndrome”:

Writer Anne Stringfield, who often attends events in Zac Posen, Dolce & Gabbana, and Giambattista Valli, has been known to toss a cardigan or a jean jacket over her dresses, or wear her glasses to “kind of undermine” the look.

We wear glasses everyday.  And often, cardigans, since the air conditioning in our office is set at a temperature that could keep dairy products fresh.  Guess we’re undermining our own look completely unintentionally!  Reading Vogue is always such an eye-opening experience.  What insight will it bring us next?  Ooh, nail-biter!

12:29 a.m.: Is it completely immature that this made us laugh out loud?  From “Sweet Reverie” on page 486:

“I dreamed of a pair of gold earrings with hot-pink rubies and yellow sapphires,” she [jewelry designer SatBir Kaur Khalsa] says.  “I’ve never woken up in the middle of the night with such passion.”

12:31 a.m.:  We are going to have nightmares about the Lanvin ad (similar to these)--if we ever finish reading this damn magazine and get to sleep, that is.

12:34 a.m.:  You know how lingerie ads usually feature women lounging around their homes in a matching, ornate bra and panty?  Well, La Perla’s ad has a woman lounging around her DECREPIT WOODEN ROWBOAT in an intricate set.  At last, a realistic depiction of how we women wear our fancy lingerie!

12:39 a.m.:  Article about Rainer Werner Fassbinder.  We have no idea.

12:41 a.m.: From “Ask Mrs. Exeter”:

First Nan Kempner and then Pat Buckley; our most fearless national exemplars of taste have been disappearing at an alarming rate…

Which is funny, because this page is adjacent to an ad for Dockers; and sad, because by “disappearing,” the author actually means these women have died.

12:44 a.m.: Dear Tumi, about those yellow bags featured in your ad?  Yes, please!  We’ll take one of each.

12:46 a.m.:  Back to Mrs. Exeter.  The question asks for advice for women of “a certain age,” and Mrs. Exeter replies:

I discussed your letter with some best-dressed arbiters over 30…

Is over 30 synonymous with “of a certain age”?  We know the fashion industry has a skewed view of aging, but that’s ridiculous.

12:50 a.m.:  No one’s actually going to buy the fringed, feathery dresses in the Nina Ricci ad, right?  Right?  We have a sneaking suspicion that someone’s going to show up at the Emmys in the white one, which looks like an old blanket that went through a shredder.

12:52 a.m.:  More Vera Wang.  How many collections does she have, anyway?  Average-size brows in this one, too.

12:54 a.m.:  And we thought we’d be done by now.  We have 300 pages to go.  Sob.

1:01 a.m.:  Andre Leon Talley’s tribute to Gianfranco Ferre was almost moderate…until this paragraph:

I spent many a night with him in Milan, too, previewing his collections—a rare thing because he was not prone to let people into his inner sanctum of design or his private life.  We shared risotto meals in the best restaurants, along with his favorite cousin and former public-relations director, Rita Araghi.  And it was his generosity that often led to a madcap spree.  After his shows, he would allow the supermodels Naomi Campbell and Linda Evangelista and his favorite editors, including yours truly, to hitch a ride back to Paris on the corporate jet.

It was expecting too much that Talley could get through an entire article without a touch of self-aggrandizement, wasn’t it?  Sheesh.  Not even the dead escape!

1:05 a.m.:  A Dior promotion featuring “New York socialites and style mavens” Tinsley Mortimer and Ferebee Bishop.  Oh, good, they needed more exposure.

1:28 a.m.: Plum Sykes, at last we meet again.

1:52 a.m.:  It’s taking forever to get through this Plum Sykes thing.  Probably because we’re exhausted and we keep having to go back and re-read, and also because it won’t end.  This must be the world’s longest article ever about, of all things, brooches.  Of course, it’s also about, of all things, Plum Sykes. 

The trouble is, pin-wearing is alien to me; the last person I knew who wore them on a daily basis was my grandmother Madeleine.

Trouble indeed!  Why not take two and a half pages to figure out how to put a pin on a dress?

1:54 a.m.:  The exciting conclusion?  She successfully wears brooches in public.  Let the ticker-tape parade begin.

1:58 a.m.: And now an essay about gloves?  That’s it.  We refuse.

2:00 a.m.:  Handbags too?  And scarves?  Is anyone’s life really so settled that they have to work out their issues with accessories?

2:02 a.m.:  After all that navel-gazing about accessories (which, you know, we didn’t even bother to read), we are thrilled to find a piece about textile technology.  This may be the best article ever.

2:04 a.m.:  Six hours in and hundreds of pages left to go, and we haven’t even read all the articles.  We can’t decide if we hate ourselves or Vogue more.

2:14 a.m.:  Is it bad that we’re finding YouTube more compelling than Vogue at this point?  At least watching the thousandth spoof of “Chocolate Rain” isn’t putting us to sleep.  Uh…textiles…right.

2:17 a.m.:  Forget fabrics.  We’re going to gaze upon these red T-straps by Ecco for a few moments.  Where can we buy these shoes?  ShopVogue.com!  Well, that worked out nicely for everyone, didn’t it?

2:20 a.m.:  We’re no longer sure what we meant by that comment three minutes ago.  We remember the shoes, though, even in our sleep-deprivation-induced delerium.  Shoes pretty…Oooh…

2:22 a.m.:  The model in the Jean Paul Gaultier ad is wearing four different plaids and some sort of logo on her chin.  We’re pretty sure he doesn’t actually intend for anyone to dress like this in public. 

2:25 a.m.:  We just skipped the movie reviews entirely.  But then, we usually do.

2:29 a.m.:  Yeah, we’re skipping a lot at this point.  Even when the issues aren’t 840 pages long, we normally reach a point in a magazine where we simply lose interest and start flipping, even when we reach an article we’re interested in.  We suspect it’s because we always read magazines from front to back and never go directly to specific pieces we want to read.

2:31 a.m.:  Has anyone ever fallen asleep at the computer while blogging?  How’d that work out for you?

2:42 a.m.: Flipped ahead a few more pages and voila!  Another piece written by Plum Sykes, this time about a hairstylist’s “private Manhattan atelier.”  Sounds swank.  We’re guessing Plum is going to have some sort of struggle with her appearance, but she’ll eventually overcome it after discussing it at length in minute detail.

2:53 a.m.:  All right.  We’re waving the white flag.  Uncle.  We surrender.  Vogue, you win.  You are just too massive.  We’ve been overpowered by your size.  We said we were going straight through to the end, but that will only happen now if we can type and read with our forehead on the keyboard and our eyes firmly shut.

For the record, we made it to page 660.  It only took seven hours (less with breaks) and four cans of Diet Dr. Pepper Berries and Cream.  Now, if you’ll excuse us, we’re going to bed.  But don’t get too comfortable, Vogue—we’ll be back to finish the job.

Scoping Out September Issues: Marie Claire

The issue weighs: 1.4 pounds

Issue thickness: an eminently manageable three-eighths of an inch

Who’s on the cover: A surprisingly attractive Ashley Olsen, sporting an indigo Vuitton gown and heavy eyeliner

Why she’s on the cover:  Because she and her sister are launching yet another clothing line, this one called Elizabeth and James, as well as a second collection from The Row.  Which means people are actually buying pricey clothes designed by Mary-Kate and Ashley, which means their Wal-Mart collections were just a launching pad, which means these two are almost certainly going to take over the world.  Brace yourselves.

Who bought the back cover: Emporio Armani Diamonds, with an ad featuring Beyonce.  We have no idea what this stuff smells like, but this ranks as one of the most uninspired ads ever.

Cover line that made us cringe:

Shocking!  Female suicide bombers

Way to make a serious topic sound like tabloid fluff.

Number of ad pages between the cover and the table of contents: a mere 17

Total number of pages: 284

How many of those pages are ads: 168, almost 60 percent

Subscription cards: Our issue had only one, and it was bound.  No pesky flyaways?  Nice.

Cosmetic samples: 3 scent strips—Ralph Lauren Romance, Donna Karan Cashmere Mist, and Sarah Jessica Parker Covet.  Enough!  Our nostrils are on fire.

Is it portable?  Oh, yeah.  This edition is no larger than the average issue of Vogue or InStyle.  We’re ripping out the fragrance strips, though—this thing reeks enough to attract bees.