On Monday, November 17 during a conversation series at the Metropolitan Museum (post-Paper mag spread: that spread that set out to “#breaktheInternet – with pictures of Kim Kardashian posing both formally suggestive and completely nude), Anna has spoken.
Although the Kanye-Kim Vogue cover numbers are still a complete mystery and most probably did not #breaktheVogueCover (considering the fact that they and others predicted their cover would outsell Vogue’s biggest selling cover), Anna Wintour indeed did break [people’s screw-faces] with her diplomatic and unexpected reply about the pleasure of having Kim be on the cover of the magazine.
This confused many celebs and models who look to the magazine as a one of iconic status-a serious frame reference from its cover throughout the pages. So to see the likes of a Kim Kardashian on their cover of the revered thick, perfume-laden, shiny magazine to be saved and thrown into their expensive handy-dandy magazine racks was nothing less than a culture shock [for many Vogue subscribers].
Rumor had it that Kanye and Kim paid for and finessed their way into American fashion print royalty and insisted their friendship upon Anna Wintour by way of securing a spot on the red carpet of her yearly Metropolitan Museum Gala shin dig [prior to snagging the cover].
Although their surface/superficial popularity may have clouded the (social)psychology behind [their needing to understand and know]: You rarely get what you ask for/tell the world about… It’s only when you are demonstrative of what you want and you make (create) it, then take it…it becomes yours (or who, or what it is you want to be).
Tell the world what you “want” and you and the universe will have fight their withholding it from you. Keep it to yourself and just do it-the universe will conspire to bring it to you.
It is speculated that Kimye’s obsession with being seen as entertainment’s American royalty at any turn and realm in entertainment is extremely important to them, so many felt they bought their way onto the cover with insistence and with the notion its subscribers too, secretly shared the same re-wedding sentiments and bliss as they (Kim and Kanye).
Nothing was further from the truth when the April 2014 cover came out. And although many of its celebrity/model subscribers spoke publicly about it, Wintour, then, defended her decision to allow the couple on the cover.
But this time (just recently) Anna, the “Regina George” of the fashion world elaborated by turning over this backhanded compliment:
“The first celebrity that I put on the cover of Vogue was Madonna, and that was considered completely controversial at that time, too.”
“Kim is part of the establishment. I think if we just remain deeply tasteful and just put deeply tasteful people on the cover, it would be a rather boring magazine! Nobody would talk about us!”
Welp. They say fair exchange is no robbery.
Gone, are the days of being rich and/or famous on talent, ability, and skill alone and having gotten you there. Entertainment industry is indeed an “industry” truest to the dictionary definition [by which over less than the past ten years], the doors are wide open for being famous for being famous-period. Therefore-the ability to step into arenas where once only your ability, skill, hard work, and talent secured a place for you; fame too, can place and keep you due to the wider audience for it + the bigger market and “talent” for simply being famous (and willingness to do anything for attention and to be ‘famous’…)-not to mention-it’s cheaper to produce (than it is to pay the skilled, seasoned, and talented).
“I’m a fashion model and I’ve been working for 28 years and when you get a Vogue cover, it’s a build in your career, a stepping stone to achieve that.” –Naomi Campbell
Wintour knows the game all too well and even had this to say about Kim Kardashian’s sister Kendall too, who just secured a spot into world of fashion and just recently been appointed the face of the legendary Estee Lauder (cosmetics) brand—a spot that many-a hardworking (talented, beautiful) models who too, most probably hate, envy, and not to mention (for years-have worked hard to be considered for) but…may not be as “beautifully talented” enough at simply being “famous.”
“What a fantastic decision that was! They have a wonderful brand that’s very traditional American, and they decided they want to shake it up and reach a different audience. Now and again one has to do things like that. I think it’s partly of the excitement of being a journalist. I hope another Kim Kardashian comes along this year!”
She’s smart. When you’re a brand (and especially a legendary brand), if you are in any way tuned with what’s happening around you-then you know that everything “mediocrity” to minute (pronounced: minoot) is winning. And your “hardworking,” “talented,” “skillfull” self with all this ability and/or experience have to find way to ride ways (and waves) of what’s mediocre and winning…then filter your and savvy ability through it (in order to win, too)…Or you’ll lose…
You gotta always know what’s really going on…It’s never about what you think, feel, or hope (or what people will have you believe about you or a thing). What’s really going on is the right answer. And you can’t let your ego or who people got your thinking you are (or even what you know yourself to be) lead or fool you (when it comes to an “industry”).
It was painfully obvious that Oprah thought (considering what she is best known and respected for) she was going to build this network filled with all things “spiritual” and deep 24/7/365…No. The gain (and truth in things) is typically always in the opposite of what’s loud and on the forefront.
No matter who you are, your talent/skill/ability/or whatever you’re best known for, (nowadays) a completely spiritual network was just NOT going to work. She saw her ratings plummeting and she had to get with the program (literally)-by putting up programs like all the other networks: reality shows, scandalous shows, etc…and thennnnn interject her vision for spirituality and family programming etc.. Now she’s thriving. Lesson: It’s not always about “you.”
You see, on paper and around the eyes other folks, people will claim alllllllll day what they prefer, subscribe too (and support, like and love)–all things positive righteous, right, famous or seemingly popular (or “on”). But it’s never what they tend to in private (trust me, I know this)… I’m winning from behind people’s frontfaces–yet, they’re back here with me. My numbers here on this blog will astonish you. Newbie in the game-first year out the gate at that.
I’m not quietly and secretly sinking over here…So I’m not out there and have to “play famous” or retweet you for reciprocal shine and fake praise for marketing and advertising. My works here…is the pull in that regard so…I have to continue to be here…I’m too busy too play that game right now. And only one year out the gate-I don’t need to. Besides, I’m too much of a sincerity glutton. I deal with what’s real and true. Period.
I know you “like” me-my numbers tell me so. I appreciate and am cool with that. So I continue to do what I do for you–and am winning high (on the low)… 🙂
So like I said: Fair exchange is no robbery. Backhanded compliment or no, Anna Wintour knows what she is doing and is a very smart woman. Take notes. (And welcome to the new world of the entertainment “industry” as defined by The American Heritage Dictionary):
A clear indication of the way in which human effort has been harnessed
as a force for the commercial production of goods and services is the
change in meaning of the word industry. Coming from the Latin word industria, meaning
“diligent activity directed to some purpose,” and its descendant, Old French industrie, with the senses
“activity,” “ability,” and “a trade or occupation,” our word (first recorded in 1475) originally meant
“skill,” “advice,” and “diligence” as well as “a trade.” Over the course of the Industrial Revolution,
as more and more human effort became involved in producing goods and services for sale, the last sense of industry
as well as the slightly newer sense “systematic work or habitual employment”
grew in importance, to a large extent taking over the word. We can even speak now of the Shakespeare industry,
rather like the garment industry.
I blog, but I teach what I learn (or know from experience or observation)-what I can, when I can 🙂