All images by Craig McDean, and courtesy of Fashion Gone Rogue and Interview Magazine
Fashionistas (and fashion photographers) love to play with gender boundaries. Too often IMHO that turns campy, like poorly-executed drag, or tasteless-pushing-offensive. These don’t.
Here’s a Monday morning kick for you – Craig McDean’s images of actress Chloe Sevigny, in character as a pre-op transgender assassin in an upcoming British show). And this, my friends, definitely avoids that glitzy, Hedgwig-impersonating trap. They take a high-fashion approach, where gender is more like an accessory. Fashion photogs out there, take note.
The provocative shots, featured in February’s issue of Interview magazine, are simply gorgeously composed. This is bold fashion done well. Bold outfits, styled by Karl Templer – courtesy of Fashion Gone Rogue.
Heads Upwards siblings only loves your wonderful article thanks a lot and please proceed
It’s interesting that only men have replied and left negative feedback. I think this only goes to show that if this expression of “hotness” makes you uncomfortable or intimidates you – than the photos are working.
@ Jessica- No, it just means she’s trying to go for shock value but it’s boring, we’ve seen it a million times. Try to think above turning this into sexism.
Love the photos and great article written by Kim Gordon.
As a doddering oldster out here in the middle of the ocean, let me assure you there is a lot to enjoy about Chloe. It’s been my opinion for a long time that there are women who appear bored because they want to be entertained. Not knowing Chloe, of course, in her case this could just be her very highly developed ‘act’ but it works in real life for many — generally young — women who don’t know any other way to get attention. They NEED comfort, you see so there is an opportunity to do well by doing good for the observant gentlemen at hand who have some ideas about how to provide that.
I’m 77 so what I’m saying may not be found in any books about modeling but I assure you it comes from some experience.
Fashion models are NOT Glamor models – two different things. Fashion models tend to be interesting, instead of beautiful. Chloe Sevigny is Hot in her own way. Conventional beauty has little to do with Hot-ness.
Good photography is in the eye of the beholder. You may not like what you are seeing, but Fashion magazine editors and their Advertisers like it just fine.
You are correct c.d., that is the way it works. I’m not “blaming” per se Chloe for not being my idea of “hot”, it’s just to my eye she’s very boring, doesn’t have any ability on camera, and basically is just doing what anyone else off the street can do.
In my beholding opinion, being a model (or a fashion celeb no less) means you put something out there that is really worth taking the time to look at on a more mass appeal. This to me looks like anything I can find on Model Mayhem. I love Craig’s work, he’s one of my favorite photographers hands down. But Chloe, again, why are we supposed to care?
Is “being different” starting to trump being really good? Are we all supposed to go out and suck because it’s “being different”? I choose to work harder at my skills, to better what I do, and find a style that’s to my own liking. “Being different” for the sake of being different doesn’t mean that it’s automatically what the world wants to have shoved in their face. That’s just my opinion of course, it doesn’t mean I’m right, that’s for the public at large to decide.