Wednesday, December 23, 2009

jacquelyn jablonski versus crystal renn

in next month's v magazine, terry richardson captures the walk-off between 17-year-old calvin klein and proenza schouler model jacquelyn jablonski and plus size model crystal renn (a size 16). renn, a former conventionally thin catwalk model, recently published a book about her battle with eating disorders called "Hungry: A Young Model’s Story of Appetite, Ambition and the Ultimate Embrace of Curves." renn told dailymail: "I’d love to see [the fashion industry] open their eyes to the variety of women. That variety is what’s beautiful." at first glance, i couldn't help but notice how much more "slutty" renn looked in the same clothing but a friend called to my attention that renn seems to exude more confidence (save for photo three where jablonski's skirt appears to be much longer than renn's). what are your thoughts?

Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine
Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine

Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine
Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine

Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine
Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine

Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine
Crystal Renn and Jacquelyn Jablonski for V Magazine

Read more:


Anonymous said...

at first i was confused because i didn't read the post. i thought it was the same model in each shot, with the first being photoshopped.

i think the clothes look much better on the rail thin one, but the fashion industry figured that out a while ago.

also, clothes that are designed for slim curveless bodies cannot translate to bigger women. but girls dont want to buy clothes modeled by plus size women, so its a vicious cycle.

also i would like both girls phone #s

Madame Lamb said...

well put

google_account said...

I've always been a fan of fuller-figured models. There's a great site with many images of Crystal and other plus-size models here:

They're all gorgeous.

The site's forum also has thought-provoking discussions about body image and the media.

Anonymous said...

They both look the same in their outfits. Exact.

But I find it interesting how many of us attribute more sexuality to Ms. Renn over Ms. Jablonski.

Why do we want models be asexual? Especially in an industry that showcases beauty and allure.

There are deeper psychological problems being highlighted in our society when presented with these photos.

Anonymous said...

if we're talking about fashion, we're not talking about mainstream society. like painting or opera, high fashion is really geared to a narrow audience of those who are interested in it as artistic expression and/or (perhaps more importantly) those with the means to actually participate in the market. why do they want models to be asexual? because they're showcasing fashion, not sex. a sunset is beautiful but i doubt many find it sexually arousing. my point is, there are many types of beauty that don't deal with sexual appeal. if anything, sex takes attention away from the clothes. as do curves. curves are sensuous and luxuriant. a more tenuous form is subtle and elegant. for instance, look at the third pair of pictures. i find the contour of renn's right arm to be visually more interesting than the fabric laid across it. it's captivating but it's not about the clothes. in contrast, the other models figure draws less attention away from the fabric and how it's cut. compare the figural sculptures of matisse and giacometti. while matisse's full, round forms are beautiful they do not exhibit the same simplicity and elegance that giacometti's work exudes. i believe the fashion industry's propensity for displaying thinner models is an attempt to achieve a consistently elegant or sophisticated aesthetic more fitting with the "high society" in which fashion is a real pursuit. it's an unfortunate consequence that so many are misled to view these women as examples of beauty and sexuality when, simply put, they are little more than frames for the real spectacle: the clothes. if you want to make fancy expensive clothing, you make it looks fancy and expensive, not just sexually appealing.

TeresaCompton said...

What disturbs me is that people consider the curvy model "Plus sized." Most women are 12's

Skinny models should be called "Coat Rack sized"

The Anon above makes a good point about the fashion industry though. It's a business... you do what sells.

f-stop said...

This is a fantastic photo project! If only it could be published in print in the very magazines that show these clothes? When someone looks so fantastic at size 16, why do we as a culture insist on models being nearly anorexic? What does that say about our societal values?

Niloo said...

I can honestly say that I think the "plus size" model looks waaayyy better in the clothes than the skinny model. I think that we're so used to seeing rail thin models wear all the high fashion clothing that we forget that normal people can look amazing in them too!

Helen said...

The problem with the argument that fashion is merely an abstracted art form, is that unfortunately along with it, our concept of women becomes stylized and abstracted, too. Women have ended up confined in this gilded cage of fashion, being abstracted, objectified, stylized... but never accepted as equal human beings.

Recent Posts