Dressing to a T

So far I can say that I like Sally Singer at T Magazine way more than I like Stefano Tonchi at W. Who's with me!? Putting Mick Jagger on the cover of your holiday style issue? F-ing brilliant. Featuring Sasha Pivovarova in a style profile? Utterly charming. Including Freja in the issue after a four year absence? Totally awesome, especially since Freja finally looks a bit different and isn't playing her usual rock n' roll, tough girl role. And dare I say it with out suffering retaliation in the form of angry comments about how repetitive I am....but she even looks (feigned gasp, shock, awe) feminine. Imagine that. Must be the dress, heels and languid, soft pose because her hair is still the same messy mop. :)

Moonstruck
New York Times T Style Magazine Holiday 2010
Ph: Alice O'Malley
Styling: Susan Winget
Other Models: Eliza Douglas, Hilary Swank, Kazu Makino, Lakshmi Menon, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Mila Kunis, Sally Hawkins

Like everyone else, I was uncertain about all the staff changes that happened at T and W, but so far it seems like T is coming out for the better judging by Singer's first issue. Rumors are already swirling about W's less than stellar performance under Tonchi, and I can see why. As a subscriber, I can say with honesty that I've stopped reading my issues because the content is just so unappealing to me now. (Kim Kardashian? Katherine Heigl? Is Stefano trying to feature everyone I don't care about?) To say that I miss the old W would be an understatement. But this isn't a blog about magazines, so back to Freja!

I'm so happy that she's in T again! The company that she keeps in this editorial is pretty surprising. Save for Lakshmi, it's a mix of actresses, so I guess it's an honor for Freja to be included in the bunch? I don't know....I'm still trying to wrap my head around that one. I suspect she might actually be friends with the photographer, Alice O'Malley, because there is a paragraph about her photographic approach and how she likes to photograph her friends.

What do you think? Friends? Or just another instance of Freja's fashion star growing brighter? I guess it doesn't matter why, just as long as we have the who, what, where and when. And speaking of, I love the explanation for this editorial:

"What happens when a fierce modern beauty dons a languid nostalgic dress? Enchantment".

Enchantment indeed. Seriously, are they reading my mind? This is exactly the type of story that I've wanted to see Freja in. I only wish she had more than one shot, but one is more than none so I'll take it! Maybe my repetitiveness (though off-putting to some) is finally starting to pay off. By putting it out there in the universe enough, it's finally starting to happen. Or maybe it's just common sense that people will get tired of the same stuff over and over again, so it's good to change up your image and give people something different. My ego would have me think the former is the reason behind this all, but my rationality tells me it's actually the latter. ;) If this is a sign of things to come in 2011, then January can't come soon enough.

Image Credits: nytimes.com via tFS member MissMagAddict

Pirelli

All images from the Pirelli Calendar have been leaked. I feel a bit strange posting all of Freja's shots outright on this blog, so you can see the pictures here. (I think I have an irrational fear that the Pirelli police will shut me down, or someone will inevitably contact Google and "flag" this blog for "objectionable" content, ie nudity. Although in my opinion nudity is far less objectionable than violence, but that's neither here nor there.)

Anyway, the good news is Freja is on the Calendar cover! The bad news (at least to me) is Freja is on the Calendar cover wearing a codpiece. A codpiece similar to the one Baptiste is wearing here. In the immortal words of Homer Simpson, "Doh!" I don't really feel like there's any point in elaborating any further on my thoughts about these images. If you've been reading the blog, you'll know what I think. If you haven't been reading this blog, then you're probably just here for the pictures anyway so it doesn't really matter what I think. And anyway, I'm more interested in hearing what you all out there think.

On the bright side, this is yet another fashion accomplishment that Freja can notch on her belt: Calendar pin up girl......sort of? (Not sure how to address it since she's a female playing a male. So Calendar pin up person?) And it is great that she can play both feminine and masculine roles because that ability opens up another 50% of job possibilities to her. More job possibilities means more work. But I just hope to god Freja doesn't dig herself so deep into one role, one stereotype, one image, that she can never get herself out. I have my fingers crossed that the upcoming Chanel and Louis Vuitton campaigns can begin to swing the pendulum back towards the other side so that we can see some kind of balance and a settling at the center. Because after this Calendar, the Vman editorial, Star Girls in Vogue UK, and Think Punk, I'm looking forward to seeing some other facets of Freja. And I'm looking forward to seeing her model some clothes for once. ;) The Freja Exposure Rate is literally off the charts now after this.

Image Credits: pirelli.com originally via tFS member testinofan, before images were deleted from tFS.

Androgyny I Can Support

If you're going to do androgyny, this is how to do it. Androgyny doesn't always have to rely on tough styling, scowls, leather biker jackets, and other overtly masculine signifiers. Editors don't have to hit us over the head with these types of references. Besides, true androgyny should be able to stand on it's own, separate from masculine and feminine aides.

Venus In Furs
Vogue Italia November 2010
Ph: Steven Meisel
Styling: Karl Templer
Other Models: Alla Kostromicheva, Andrej Pejic, Iris Strubegger, Iselin Steiro, Michael Tintiuc, Tomek Szczukiecki

This editorial is the perfect example of that, and it's the first time I don't mind Freja being lumped in under the androgynous category. The pared down, natural appearance of each model is allowed to shine, and this minimalistic approach is quite successful at getting down to the essence of what makes each person androgynous. When the models all look so similar, when they're all in skewed positions with limbs akimbo, and when they're allowed to interact and play off of each other, the line truly becomes blurred between male/female and feminine/masculine. A person who doesn't know who these models are would have a very difficult time discerning between the women and the men. And that is the true definition of androgyny: being neither distinguishably male nor distinguishably female.

I really feel like this is the first editorial where I've been able to truly see and appreciate both the feminine and masculine aspects of Freja's face, and indeed all the other models' faces as well. From shot to shot Freja looks different, and that's what a good photographer can do. A good photographer doesn't have to rely on tropes or stereotypes to make a point. A good photographer smashes those things, and gets down to the basic essence of it all. There is nothing signaling to us the viewer, telling us that we should see these models in a particular way. So now it's up to us individually to see what genders and gender signifiers we want to see. This openness is what I appreciate and what allows me to see these models both in new ways and in ways they're usually meant to be seen.

Another thing I love about this editorial is how the models and the fashion don't seem to overshadow each other. Since I'm interested in models more than fashion, I have a tendency to overlook the fashion sometimes. But in this editorial the lack of clothing enhances the fashion for me, ironically enough. I find myself paying as much attention to the fur and leather as I do to the models. Models and clothes are working in tandem to create one huge, glorious bacchanal of bodies. And now that I think about it, it's so fitting that in a fashion story about fur and leather, the models should all be in their own natural skins. Another brilliant and subtly obvious touch. Obvious because you immediately see the raw nakedness of the bodies. But subtle because it takes you a minute to realize that the only thing being featured here is skin, be it animal or human. It's a little creepy when you think about it that way, for it's quite literally skin on skin in more ways than one (especially when the bodies are piled on top of each other). But that's classic Meisel. Even when things seem pretty straightforward, there's always an off kilter element underlying the simplicity. And considering the fact that there are so many naked to nearly naked bodies intertwined together, this story doesn't feel particularly sexual to me. It's more desexualized since gender is wiped away, and this gives us the freedom to appreciate the clothes and the bodies for what they are. It's funny how something that seems so overtly sexual at first, can become the opposite with a deeper glance.....at least for me.

These eccentricities and complexities are what distinguishes between the good, and the great. I don't know if this editorial and cover will stand the test of time, but what I do know is that it's the first piece of work that's made me excited again. The second I saw the cover, even before I saw this editorial, I knew I just had to have this. I think the last time I felt this way was with Freja's last VI cover, so I guess there's a theme here. Anyway, I just have to remember that this is what it feels like when things are great. When we don't have to settle for mediocrity. When we don't have to strain to find nice things to say just so we can be diplomatic. It's comforting to know I can have this instantaneous and unbridled reaction of excitement again.

Image Credits: zfashionblog.wordpress.com

Identification

Freja Beha, the Rock N Roll Star
i-D Magazine Spring 2010
Ph: Emma Summerton
Styling: Edward Enninful

After seeing Freja's i-D cover, I have to admit that I didn't have high hopes for her editorial inside. Well, I was most definitely pleasantly surprised by the lovely, albeit too short, only-girl story. Just four shots; all of them upper body ones with one profile shot. They're almost like a series of portraits, and that's what I think is so interesting about them. We haven't seen Freja in a story like this, so it's great to see her continually expand her fashion portfolio and her ability to converse with the camera.

With a story that's set up like this, I really think it's intent is to bring focus to the details of the clothes, rather than the full head-to-toe looks. At least, those details are what stood out to me enough that I ironically ended up wanting to see the runway looks in their entirety anyway. Like, I saw the intricacies in the Louise Golden piece and I just had to see the whole thing for comparison. The details made me appreciate the whole look....and the same can be said for the model.

By focusing on the natural charisma and grace of Freja's face (the details) this editorial makes us appreciate all her abilities as a model (the whole package). Earlier on I asked the question "Androgyny or femininity?" Well, here we have the perfect example of how easily and effortlessly Freja can traveling between both poles. This editorial is a great model profile piece in that it provides the girl with a vehicle by which to display her full skill and range in subtlety and emotion. To be able to carry this off successfully, you have to be a model who's well versed in all facets of human emotion and who's able to convey them with a slight alteration of the mouth here, or a slight arch of the brow there.

With the title bearing Freja's name, it's clear that she's supposed to be the star here and she most certainly delivers even within the limitation of four short pages. I love that she can be strong and dominant, showing us different aspects of her personality here. But she can just as easily be a mere clothes hanger, if the situation calls for it, letting the clothes take focus as was the case in her Vogue UK editorial.

I feel like this is a theme that I continually re-visit: how Freja moves freely about along all these different spectrums. Androgyny/femininity, high fashion/commercial appeal, strong/demure, etc... If I've learned anything from all the time that I spend analyzing and dissecting Freja's career, it's that in order to be a good model-nay a great one-you have to be able to be all things to all people but never lose the essence of your being in the process. It's quite the tall order, but all the tops girls can do it/have done it. Think Raquel. Think Daria. And people believe modeling is easy....well, it doesn't seem so easy to me.

Image Credits: Scans by yala_agni @ Fashion_Screen LiveJournal, style.it, vogue.co.uk

Androgyny or Femininity?

Which characteristic made you a fan of Freja's in the first place?

A comment by reader Miranda on this post got me thinking, and now I'm curious to know, what side of Freja were you drawn to first? And what side remains your favorite? I've made no qualms about my preference for her feminine side, but I also realize that some of you probably only got to know Freja when androgyny dominated her career landscape. So the million dollar question is: Androgyny or femininity?

I made the classic and callous mistake of assuming that everyone felt the same way about the topic as I did, but many of the comments regarding Freja's i-D cover have proven me wrong and shown me that there are a fair number of you out there who prefer her androgynous side.

Perhaps our preferences are just a result of whichever aspect we encountered first? I'm generalizing of course, but it seems like the old school fans love the girlishness while the newer fans love the toughness. The old timers remember the impish teenager from Denmark with the wonderful smile while the newer fans reveal in the brooding New Yorker dressed in head-to-toe black. Despite all my mumblings and severe overuse of the words androgyny and femininity in one post, I do have a point here.

Regardless of what we prefer and how we all came to be known as fans....all these things-these differences-just provide more proof as to what a special model Freja truly is. It's really amazing that she can attract such a wide array of fans based on two characteristics that sit on opposite ends of a spectrum. That speaks to a true and very rare modeling talent. She's the chalice that holds all the different ideals that we use to make the measure of a good model. And I really can't think of another one who has such different appeals to different people. But at the same time, her personality and uniqueness are not lost, but in fact seemingly magnified. It's really quite a paradox and this is what keeps me so intrigued. For with each chapter of Freja's career the paradox seems to grows stronger. Her recent surge in work has increased the scrutiny of her off-duty persona and life. I feel like she has become more "known" than ever before. (Or maybe just more obsessed over. It's a fine line.) Yet at the same time, her work continues to display this wonderful diversity and versatility whereby we'll see her looking demure on the cover of VI one month to looking tough on the cover of i-D in another month. Or we'll see her going from slick and sleek in Vogue UK to 80's glam in W Magazine. All the while you always get the sense that you're looking at something that's utterly Freja-ish.

To be so malleable and yet so distinct is quite a feat and something that Freja's is never given enough credit for. So maybe the answer to my question isn't either or....maybe it's both?

A Change in Perception

Something hit me yesterday when I noticed that Freja didn't re-book Rick Owens or Gareth Pugh this season. There's a change a foot and I think it's in the way people are perceiving her look. I get an overall sense that she's being styled more femininely this season when compared to the past 2-3 seasons. Does anyone else feel it too? And her first time appearance at shows like Anna Sui and Oscar de la Renta, and re-appearance at shows like Carolina Herrera seem to confirm my suspicions. Couple this with her absence at two of the most tough and androgynous shows and the notion is nearly inarguable. All of this is too much for coincidence.

Needless to say, I'm thrilled because I've talked about wanting this femininity to return numerous times. People forget that when Freja started out she wasn't all tough, broody and dressed in head to toe black. She was playful, full of levity and rocking some of the best feminine looks on the catwalks. It's nice to see that the industry is finally rediscovering this side of her after a few seasons of relegating her to the de rigueur androgynous model role.

But I have to wonder what caused this change in perception? It couldn't just be the hair, right? I refuse to believe that something as important as a model's image hinges on something as fleeting as the length of her hair. (Hmmm....but this is fashion after all--an industry based entirely on outward appearance.) Perhaps it's partly attributable to Meisel? When I think back to Freja's career over the past few seasons, these are the only two differences I detect that make this season different from the other ones. Anyway, just something interesting that I wanted to point out. Thoughts? Agree? Disagree?