This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/20/heroin-chic-curse-of-catwalk-size-zero

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Heroin chic's gone, but the curse of the catwalk remains Heroin chic's gone, but the curse of the catwalk remains
(7 months later)
I am distressed by the lack of moral panic that London Fashion Week has brought with it. It's like having Christmas with only presents, and nobody worrying about consumerism, or Easter with only Creme Eggs, and nobody worrying about whether or not they were getting smaller. How will we even get to hell, if nobody is going to maintain the handcart?I am distressed by the lack of moral panic that London Fashion Week has brought with it. It's like having Christmas with only presents, and nobody worrying about consumerism, or Easter with only Creme Eggs, and nobody worrying about whether or not they were getting smaller. How will we even get to hell, if nobody is going to maintain the handcart?
Here's the thing: models are no longer dangerously thin. They still, to the untrained eye, look pretty thin. I'd imagine they're certainly thin enough to count as unattainable role models, simply by dint of the fact that, if the average body mass index is 25.9 in this country, which is marginally overweight, a model-type physique would not be a realistic goal.Here's the thing: models are no longer dangerously thin. They still, to the untrained eye, look pretty thin. I'd imagine they're certainly thin enough to count as unattainable role models, simply by dint of the fact that, if the average body mass index is 25.9 in this country, which is marginally overweight, a model-type physique would not be a realistic goal.
But there were always two lines of attack on the catwalk – the one that said the models themselves were being exploited, their need to work set against their human appetite, their youth used against them for its pliability; and then the one that found the real victims to be the spectators, also young women, to whom the parade of these mannequins was a tortuous reminder of their own normality. No industry should need a constantly replenishing stable of victims, ran the first argument; no culture should be dominated by images that engender feelings of worthlessness in its audience, ran the other.But there were always two lines of attack on the catwalk – the one that said the models themselves were being exploited, their need to work set against their human appetite, their youth used against them for its pliability; and then the one that found the real victims to be the spectators, also young women, to whom the parade of these mannequins was a tortuous reminder of their own normality. No industry should need a constantly replenishing stable of victims, ran the first argument; no culture should be dominated by images that engender feelings of worthlessness in its audience, ran the other.
I agree with the first, and in regards to the second, can't see how you'd have heroines at all (chic or not) who didn't engender feelings of worthlessness in somebody – being models, even if they are not thinner than you, they are probably more beautiful. The only way out of this conundrum would be to elect models by lottery, so that designers were never able to choose whether they were beautiful or not, nor how thin they were, and it would then be their challenge to make them look good all the same.I agree with the first, and in regards to the second, can't see how you'd have heroines at all (chic or not) who didn't engender feelings of worthlessness in somebody – being models, even if they are not thinner than you, they are probably more beautiful. The only way out of this conundrum would be to elect models by lottery, so that designers were never able to choose whether they were beautiful or not, nor how thin they were, and it would then be their challenge to make them look good all the same.
But fashion at this level isn't really about what people look like, it's more about creating art, and in doing so building the whirlpool effect that will pull the market in the direction of your other, more wearable wares. The models aren't meant to look like real people any more than the clothes are meant to look like real clothes. This lottery wheeze would never have worked. Phew. Thank God nobody suggested it at the time.But fashion at this level isn't really about what people look like, it's more about creating art, and in doing so building the whirlpool effect that will pull the market in the direction of your other, more wearable wares. The models aren't meant to look like real people any more than the clothes are meant to look like real clothes. This lottery wheeze would never have worked. Phew. Thank God nobody suggested it at the time.
In all the debates about size zero, the campaigners for normal and plus-sized models were never clear, I didn't think, about whether they were fighting for models-as-victims or consumers-as-victims, most likely because it suited their cause for the whole business to look like one amorphous mass of deliberated anorexia-creation. But the industry did pick its way through the matter quite carefully, realising that to look utterly careless would be bad for business, and yet they couldn't afford to just roll over to my models-by-lottery agenda. When the outrage hit its height in 2007, some major fashion houses banned the size zero model altogether. The British Fashion Council never signed up to that, preferring the Health Initiative , which found, following a "model health inquiry", that so long as models were healthy, you didn't need to go around calipering them the whole time to make sure they weren't being chewed up by the system.In all the debates about size zero, the campaigners for normal and plus-sized models were never clear, I didn't think, about whether they were fighting for models-as-victims or consumers-as-victims, most likely because it suited their cause for the whole business to look like one amorphous mass of deliberated anorexia-creation. But the industry did pick its way through the matter quite carefully, realising that to look utterly careless would be bad for business, and yet they couldn't afford to just roll over to my models-by-lottery agenda. When the outrage hit its height in 2007, some major fashion houses banned the size zero model altogether. The British Fashion Council never signed up to that, preferring the Health Initiative , which found, following a "model health inquiry", that so long as models were healthy, you didn't need to go around calipering them the whole time to make sure they weren't being chewed up by the system.
Since then, the issue is settled by coincidence and the news cycle – last year, Samantha Cameron was at the Erdem show where a model appeared who did look a bit cadaverous. Consequently, photo agencies had the first lady's sombre chops poking out behind a pair of jutting shoulder blades, and the story "Sam Cam not impressed by size zero" was a shoo-in. Nothing so fortuitous has happened this year. Heroin chic has been replaced by the less controversial "tired chic" – makeup artists at the Ashish Gupta show were going for a "beautifully tired" look. They wanted the models to look like "space farmers", they clarified.Since then, the issue is settled by coincidence and the news cycle – last year, Samantha Cameron was at the Erdem show where a model appeared who did look a bit cadaverous. Consequently, photo agencies had the first lady's sombre chops poking out behind a pair of jutting shoulder blades, and the story "Sam Cam not impressed by size zero" was a shoo-in. Nothing so fortuitous has happened this year. Heroin chic has been replaced by the less controversial "tired chic" – makeup artists at the Ashish Gupta show were going for a "beautifully tired" look. They wanted the models to look like "space farmers", they clarified.
Some fashion people disagree, and say that the average size of a model has fractionally increased; that's almost impossible to falsify. Well, I hate to use a word so prosaic as "impossible" about this kerazy business, but I would properly love to see someone try to discover the aggregate body mass index of London Fashion Week via a freedom of information request.Some fashion people disagree, and say that the average size of a model has fractionally increased; that's almost impossible to falsify. Well, I hate to use a word so prosaic as "impossible" about this kerazy business, but I would properly love to see someone try to discover the aggregate body mass index of London Fashion Week via a freedom of information request.
Fashion may have undertaken some basic self-regulation and kicked out the girls at the farthest edges of emaciation, but I feel moderately safe in saying that nothing has changed except the conversation. If you tried to construct a Venn diagram of "tired", "on heroin" and "thin" for the modelling aesthetic, it would be all intersection and no circle. The look is still the same. The models are still the same, except they're five years younger. The story of body weight has been an ultimately fruitless search for a victim, which briefly united a set of opinions that would never otherwise be seen dead together.Fashion may have undertaken some basic self-regulation and kicked out the girls at the farthest edges of emaciation, but I feel moderately safe in saying that nothing has changed except the conversation. If you tried to construct a Venn diagram of "tired", "on heroin" and "thin" for the modelling aesthetic, it would be all intersection and no circle. The look is still the same. The models are still the same, except they're five years younger. The story of body weight has been an ultimately fruitless search for a victim, which briefly united a set of opinions that would never otherwise be seen dead together.
The branch of feminism that holds it to be important for all role models to be realistic for all women was briefly united with respectable opinion that takes a visual reference to drug use as a deliberate insult. The people who hate the spectacle of wealth, the frivolous spending on outlandish pointlessness, but are not quite priggish enough to be honest about what they're objecting to, found their underdog on the catwalk itself, images of beauty that in another era (also in different clothes) could just as well be images of starvation, and underline the inequality that this carnival of spending subsists upon.The branch of feminism that holds it to be important for all role models to be realistic for all women was briefly united with respectable opinion that takes a visual reference to drug use as a deliberate insult. The people who hate the spectacle of wealth, the frivolous spending on outlandish pointlessness, but are not quite priggish enough to be honest about what they're objecting to, found their underdog on the catwalk itself, images of beauty that in another era (also in different clothes) could just as well be images of starvation, and underline the inequality that this carnival of spending subsists upon.
Twitter: @zoesqwilliamsTwitter: @zoesqwilliams
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.