the whole editorial, scanned by diorette, is available here.
what do the latest uk vogue editorial and the balmain advertisment have in common? in my opinion both show the difference between androgyne and transgender at the best. because there’s no androgyne representation here, but a transgender expression. that’s emmanuelle alt’s general lesson learnt by lucinda chamber, who styled this editorial. and that’s daria’s peculiarity: she walks in the transgender path, not in the androgyne. she holds feminine and masculine at the same time, there’s a dynamic gender game that is different from androgyne linear shift into opposit gender. look at the picture above: you can see signs both of masculine and feminine. those signs belong both to styling and to daria’s body language. it’s like daria the person has both feminine and masculine characteristics and she can use them in a different degree according to the purpose of the editorial. so to say, she can play the femme (cavalli ss09 campaign for instance) and she can play the boy. usually ‘they’ make her play the femme cos it’s more commercial and easily appealing, but usually ‘they’ forget she can’t reach the heterosexist level of femme (see pirelli, see ‘in love’ etc.). better: they might not forget, but general audience doesn’t pay too much attention to details, to the so called return of removed (masculine).
ok, i can’t write more right now. i’d just like to compare this editorial to previous ones in order to better show what i mean. there’s material to talk about for a row of posts! meanwhile let’s enjoy a wordless comparison with a 2006 italian vogue editorial by steven meisel feauturing amanda moore.