stephanie seymour on instagirls vs supermodels
The likes of Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid are ‘completely different than we were,’ says the OG supermodel.
What makes a model super? It's question that's dogged fashion ever since Naomi Campbell, Cindy Crawford, Christy Turlington, Linda Evangelista and Tatjana Patitz appeared on the cover of British Vogue back in the 1990 and one that's become increasingly frequent since the advent of social media turned the industry on its head. Can it be measured in Instagram followers? In reality TV ratings? How about in just, you know, being a really good model?
A couple of months ago, former model Rebecca Romijn suggested that Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid, with all their fame and magazine covers and runway shows and all round general modelling, are not "true supermodels" because of their social media origin stories. "No one has proven yet that numbers of followers translates to revenue," she told Entertainment Tonight. "I know a lot of people -- legitimate fashion people -- can't stand it."
For Stephanie Seymour, OG supermodel and former i-D cover star, however, the time has merely come for a new term. "They are completely different than we were," she told Vanity Fair at the amfAR Inspiration Gala. "Supermodels are sort of the thing of the past. They deserve their own title." Her suggestion? "Bitches of the moment!".
Seymour is well placed to offer her opinion, of course. As well as featuring alongside Campbell, Crawford, Turlington and Patitz in the iconic 1989 nude by Herb Ritts for Rolling Stone, she quite literally wrote the book on looking good, releasing Beauty Secrets for Dummies in 1998. And while KeGi have faced plenty of stick for their perceived lack of 'legitimate' modelling prowess, it's refreshing to hear someone acknowledge that times and industries change -- even if she's not quite ready to hand over that title just yet.
Text Matthew Whitehouse