Vogue was vaguely disappointing this month...
As usual the other week I was beside myself with excitement to get my hands on the latest issue of Vogue (AUS) - as I'd finished and ripped to shreds every June edition magazine in print by about the 12th of April last month - the cover this month was fresh AND warm.
Featuring buttery yellow print, Louis Vuitton's TO DIE FOR embellished leather top and broderie anglaise collar, and a seemingly all-grown-up version of,
Australia's little, darling Delta, [vomit]
not that I have anything against soap-opera turned pop singer slash do-gooder types in general... She just tends to make me nauseous.
BUT she looked great! the cover was minimalist and edgy compared to the usual
golden barrel-curls and sparkly sweetheart necklines
that dominate delta's world.
So in short, YES, I was excited to read up and see what she had to offer.
Too bad they didn't just stop at the cover. To put it nicely... it was bad.
Awkward, boring and vaguely macabre. Despite the efforts of Therese Rawsthorne, Carla Zampatti and leather royalty Bally, there was not one redeeming feature about this shoot...
except maybe the fact my boyfriend showed some interest in taking the mag to bed with us.
So I'm not going to share the pictures with you, if you want to see them you can go elsewhere.
Instead I'll share with you some of the things that DID make vogue worth the $8.50 I paid for it!
This photo of Joan Smalls posing in not one, but three Chanel jackets.
My best friend's engagement ring in pendant form on pg. 74
[Chanel white gold and ceramic set with diamonds]
The advertising images from the Chanel Bombay campaign
who but Karl could make Indian so sexy?