Comments on: Rich Moms are Bad Moms: Vogue Italia’s “Vagaries of Fashion”

By: Toya0523

Toya0523 — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:23:00 +0000

not only is this “vintage” fashion but notice the headphones??? its not old

By: Jawnita

Jawnita — Wed, 04 May 2011 23:00:19 +0000

Yes, a small amount of fashion history knowledge might lead you to believe these are vintage photos, but a more thorough grasp of fashion history makes clear these are, in fact, recent pictures *referencing* vintage styles. It’s subtle, but it’s there.

By: Gillian

Gillian — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 06:25:00 +0000

Anyone ever consider she’s the girlfriend and dad’s just popped out, left her with the kids and not yet returned? *tongue in cheek*

By: Undifferentiated Groups of Asians as Ad Props » Sociological Images

Undifferentiated Groups of Asians as Ad Props » Sociological Images — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 05:49:26 +0000

[...] other examples of non-Whites used as props, see our post about a fashion spread in Vogue Italia and this photo from NYLON magazine. 23 Comments Tags: cultural [...]

By: Blub

Blub — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 20:57:14 +0000

this is a 2005 spread I believe. Rather infamous one too…. it created some controversy because the maid was not a professional model but an actual maid at the NYC hotel where they did the shoot

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:05:46 +0000

these are not recent photos, you have to be blind to not notice that, this is from BEFORE second hand smoke laws were around, It looks to be about the 70′s when these were taken, because trust me this is not italian fashion of the past decade let alone right now. And as we all know the 60′s and 70′s were not friendly to blacks (for lack of a better international term). This was still the time of blacks as a maid or ‘servant’ of some kind, and was not seen as horrible and extremely racist. Please take into account the time this is set in and not to assume. Sociologically its intriguing to see how fashion and high class women are portrayed in these spreads. Discuss the time and don’t complain about how its wrong by todays standards.

By: Kylie

Kylie — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:31:26 +0000

The child in the first pic is not smacking the baby. The child’s attempting to comfort the baby because the mother is not really present. I LOVED Claire’s interpretations. I kind of like these pics, because as a mother, I think there’s this rebellious, sinful girl inside of us, even when we’re at home with the kids, that just wants to wallow in our own pleasures and vices- although we don’t actually do this, the pictures are kind of expressing something we can’t express for ourselves. That’s probably part of the reason they excite outrage- those things we deny in our own character can bring out our most judgmental reactions. I think it’s clever marketing, because we’re all looking at it aren’t we?

By: bryn

bryn — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:06:29 +0000

wow u guys r taking this wayy to seriously

By: postroad

postroad — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:02:33 +0000

I don’t give a hoot about her concern for her kid, her drink, her smokes, oher outfits. She is too thin so thank god no nude shots of her.

By: revulu

revulu — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:44:33 +0000

i see the pictures as representing a state of mind: young woman who dreads the impending doom of motherhood -with the promise of disfigurement, forced selflessness, and other adult matters- tries her hardest to ignore it and continue the party lifestyle.

Its funny how all your readings of a fashion shoot seem unable to go beyond the literal representations of the babies and the girl and the vices.

photographs are metaphors, remember?

By: beejeez

beejeez — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:34:25 +0000

Good grief, people. The pix are a joke, a gag. They’re not “intended to provoke discussion,” they’re not a statement on motherhood. They’re a way to make the reader laugh while checking out the duds. Jeez.

By: josephine

josephine — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:56:19 +0000

I think it’s supposed to be ironic…kinda camp.

By: Iheartfashion

Iheartfashion — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:25:20 +0000

I can’t imagine why Vogue Italia would want to vilify high fashion, as that is where their advertising dollars come from, so I don’t think that’s the intended message of the editorial. I think the shoot is obviously intended to provoke and to promote discussion, and is probably just controversy for its own sake and not part of any greater trend or message about motherhood.

By: Reanimated Horse

Reanimated Horse — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:11:41 +0000

To clarify my perspective – I think it’s assumed that the photographer or creator could not be indicting fashion. But to me it looks like he or she is putting fashion down with all the other bad qualities – saying that the kind of people who spend lots of money on designer clothes are the kind of people who don’t have morals shared by the artist.

By: Reanimated Horse

Reanimated Horse — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:08:56 +0000

The situation seems aware of itself in the photos. It looks like an indictment of the things we find horrifying, including excessive glamour, the racism, the neglectful parenting. If it’s art, then it’s OK for me to see it that way. That’s my perspective.

Also, I’d like to say that the baby is a brilliant model. I don’t know how they got the kid to do something artful in every shot but it’s better than a lot of adults.