NY Mag: ‘Does Kim Kardashian belong on the cover of a fashion magazine?’

Kim Kardashian is the cover girl for New York Magazine’s Fall Fashion issue. The cover tagline is “Does Kim Kardashian Belong on the Cover of A Fashion Magazine?” Which is meta, considering they put her on the cover of their fashion magazine. They actually did an artsy photo shoot with Kim too, and they did a long-ass interview (go here to see the complete NY Mag piece). Will you forgive me for not caring enough to read the whole seven-page interview and lovingly extract excerpts from the junk? Because I really don’t care that much. Just skimming the NY Mag piece… it seems like they don’t care much either, or at least they don’t care about alienating the Family Kardashian, because the first part of the piece reads like a greatest-hits of Why and How People Dislike The Kardashians. The moral of the story? “There’s a sense that everything is for sale, and nothing should go un-monetized.” That really is the gist of it – it’s less an interview with Kim and more about Kim’s relationship to the fashion industry, and how real fashion people shun her:

Recently, Kim has been making inroads in the fashion world. She comes by her fashion interest honestly, having started out as a wardrobe stylist, and she and her sisters own a popular chain of clothing boutiques called Dash and a one-off “lifestyle boutique,” in Las Vegas, called Kardashian Khaos. They have clothing lines at Sears (Kardashian Kollection) and QVC (K-Dash), as well as nail polish (Kardashian Kolors) and makeup (Khroma Beauty, launching this winter). ShoeDazzle, an e-tailer Kim co-founded in 2009, has raised more than $60 million in venture capital. As a model, Kim has appeared on the covers of W and Harper’s Bazaar and l’Uomo Vogue. Elizabeth Taylor was her glamour icon, and Kim spent $65,000 on jewelry at Taylor’s estate sale last year. “I love designing,” Kim tells me. “All morning I was talking to my sisters about different designs.”

[The second time Kanye showed in Paris] though, Kim was with him in Paris, though not publicly his girlfriend. Kimye, as the tabloids call them, could be poised to become a fashion power couple. And yet Kanye, for all the criticism, has still been greeted with considerably more enthusiasm by fashion’s gatekeepers. Marc Jacobs is known to be a Kim fan, but his is a decidedly outlying opinion. In May, it was reported that Wintour “hates Kim” and had banned her from the Met Costume Institute Gala (which Kanye did attend); Kardashian’s rep denied this was the case. Soon after, Wintour’s muse André Leon Talley told a crowd that “not even Kim Kardashian could take away from fashion.”

While the attacks may derive partly from a good-faith aesthetic response to some of the clothing she wears, at least as much of it seems to stem from an aversion to non-eating-disorder body types and a broader snobbery and classism. Fashion likes to celebrate and appropriate street culture and even trash culture, except when it doesn’t. Neiman Marcus did the previously unthinkable when it recently announced a collaboration with Target for the holidays. “To go from luxury to mass, or high to low, has become acceptable and even desirable,” says Ed Filipowski, a prominent fashion publicist. “But when you start mass, either as a product or personality, the doors to luxury don’t open easily; the keys to the kingdom are held tightly. That’s what makes it luxury.”

Kim and Kanye brightly stand on opposite sides of the line between fashion’s dos and don’ts. With Kim, says a fashion executive, “I think she sees fashion as another means for making money. I don’t think she’s ever going to want to go to a fashion show for her love of clothes. She’s going to want to get paid for going to that show.”

The boundaryless ambit of the Kardashians is the precise obverse of the fashion world, with its exclusionary fences and rigid caste distinctions. Fashion is androgynous, anorexic, self-punishing, full of security-blanket snobberies. It wants to be transcendent, above mass commerce. It hates sex, even as it sells it (coldly). It hates flesh. Kim Kardashian—a sexpot with curves and a prodigious behind, a sybarite as well as a full-on capitalist—is an affront to everything it holds dear. It’s hard to imagine a model who converted her looks into a business empire being perceived as anything other than impressive—an entrepreneur—but for this world Kim may be the wrong kind of model.

What would Kim need to do to gain acceptance? “Quit all your other jobs,” the executive says.

[From New York Magazine]

During the “interview” part of the piece, Kim talks about how she’s Zen and chilled out now, admitting that she doesn’t read the tabloids as much anymore, she canceled her Google Alerts, and she started having the occasional drink after she turned 30. She says, “I used to be so involved with what’s going on around, what’s up with this person. I just really truly feel so much more calm now, and I just don’t care.” When asked if she would ever like to be on the cover of Vogue, she just says, “I don’t really have goals as far as, I want to be on a cover or something like that. I think my goals are more just expanding my line, and having my line be really successful. That’s the ultimate goal, I think, for me. I don’t say, ‘Oh, I want to be on this magazine or I want to do this.’ It’s all fun.” So… Kim Kardashian is more Zen about it than Victoria Beckham. Good to know.

Photos courtesy of New York Magazine.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

106 Responses to “NY Mag: ‘Does Kim Kardashian belong on the cover of a fashion magazine?’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. gee says:

    Everything else aside, she looks amazing here.

  2. dorothy says:

    The New Yorker? Really? They used to have standards. I guess everythings gone downhill.

  3. Katyusha says:

    My answer, is a resounding “NO!”

  4. autumndaze says:

    Her lips are busted… she looks awful in all of these photos of her.

  5. DanaG says:

    I wonder if the fact Kim hasn’t got any actual design experience or anything other then choosing a pretty colour has the fashion world ignoring her? I thought Sears had dropped the K line due too poor quality. Something I have been hearing a lot about there clothes. For what they are selling they are charging too much and people are finding it out the hard way. I think little Kimmy is just as self absorbed and obsessed with herself as she always has been. In the end she is always going to be known as the girl with the big butt in the sex tape who got peed on. That is how she got started and what began this “empire” and the thing about empires is that they fall. If you don’t really have a passion for anything but the money it shows and it does with Kim. Those pictures are just bad no matter how artsy they are she looks older and proves the point that no she shouldn’t be on the cover of a fashion magazine. I don’t think it was a mistake only showing her face.

  6. lucy2 says:

    Ugh I hate magazine articles like this – by putting her on there, even questioning if she deserves it, they are only feeding into the machine. If everyone would IGNORE them, eventually they’d go away.
    And yes I know, I should follow my own advice and not comment on it. :D

  7. oh dear says:

    i thought it was a rhetorical question.. guess not.

    octomom for the win!

  8. marie says:

    those pictures are awful IMO. her lips are way too inflated..

  9. Len says:

    Her expression is always so…dead..somehow from her pictures you can tell she doesn’t have any wit, any spark.

  10. Dawn says:

    No she belongs on the cover of nothing, well unless it is Hooker’s weekly. She looks horrible and like she is trying to look black using cosmetics and surgery. She is a very ugly person both inside and out.

  11. Micah says:

    Gross Cover.

    The pics are not good at all, not even by a long shot.

    Just a bunch of boring pics taken with filter/exposure/photoshop tactics.

  12. Len says:

    I do really like her hair at this length and with some retro volume.

  13. OXA says:

    I would rather see her face on a roll of toilet paper.

  14. Macey says:

    Holy LIPS!

    my word she really went overboard with the fillers in those things. They’ll soon be bigger than her ass.
    now she looks like a cross between Taylor Armstrong and Octomom.

  15. Just Sayin says:

    I would say she looks like “Amy Winehouse” in a few of those pictures, but that would be an insult to “Amy Winehouse” as she had talent.

  16. Jacq says:

    Has anyone given birth? That’s what Kim’s lips look like… You draw the connection. Her overall look is busted-ass-busted. Pathetic.

  17. Birdie says:

    She is lying through her teeth. She would sell her grandmother to be on Vogue’s cover. I don’t believe her: Oh after my divorce I am such a changed woman-shit. All of this is still damage control after her divorce, yes Kim, people won’t forget.

  18. kay says:

    Consider this: these are the best of all the pictures they took.

    I swore never to click on anything Kim & family related, but this was too good to pass up.


  19. wonderwoman21 says:

    Lmao the cover photo looks awful, she has a blank dead stare & a disproportionate face.

  20. koi..koi says:

    hell no!!
    i mean, shes pretty -boys like her- but kim does nt have that specific look/face that make models stand out…

    her fake barbie doll face belongs on the cover of a calendar to decorate mechanic’s shops

  21. ewww says:

    NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! This is just wrong on so many levels!

  22. jamminatorr says:

    Ugh the soft focus makes her lips look even worse, how is that possible?

  23. mln76 says:

    My own feeling is she’s winding down I mean w/ this summer of bonafide A-list gossip no one really cares about her the way they did 6 months ago. A Kimye marraige or baby wouldn’t be as huge as it might have been pre TomKat divorce/K-Stew ‘trampire’ scandal.

  24. libby says:

    she looks like an older version of her former self well beyond 20 years her current age!! what is she doing?? all the surgery, botox, fillers…just awful! it will take more and more photoshop/filters to get her to look pretty. she is losing it fast.

  25. anne says:

    Absolutely not – maybe for the porn industry. She’s short and huge butt – in the “real world” she would not be desireable by designers.

  26. Steph says:

    Kim is a naturally pretty woman, so the fact that I think she looks HORRIBLE in the title picture is surprising to me. She looks very pretty (but a bit unprofessional try hard)in the rest of the pics though.

  27. Elizabeth says:

    I love the line about talking to her sisters all morning about design. I can do that too, Kim, but it doesn’t make me (or you) a designer.

    I also love her claims that she just doesn’t care about the magazine covers, etc. anymore. What a liar! She’s playing a role (different one now that she’s with Kanye, different from when she was with Kris Humphries), always playing a role geared towards selling something. Same old, same old.

  28. TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

    No No No Dana G has the whizzbang at Sears that recruited Lardassian ever been identified. Hooker wear at Sears a new low. The only place her picture belongs is on the side of a dumpster right next to the sign that says: Lift Lid, Insert Trash Here.

  29. Katie says:

    Those are some seriously unflattering pictures.

  30. idk says:

    She is pretty, but a horrible model. Her poses look beyond fake and unnatural.

    With regards to her being a “designer”…she just approves everything, she doesn’t actually design anything. Just like shoe dazzle, she is a silent partner. Robert Shapiro came to her with the idea, and she just signed her name to it, she doesn’t design any of the shoes, or do anything for the company. Just like with Dash, she does nothing for that either.

    Also, has anyone ever noticed how she changes personalities based on who she’s dating? She morphs into her boyfriend. She doesn’t know who or what she really is and has no idea how to be natural or to just be herself.

  31. Gisby says:

    “and they did a long-ass interview” ???

    She has a WIDE ass or a BIG ass, not a LONG ass. Do some research.

  32. catt says:

    Her cheek implants and lip fillers are REALLY obvious on that cover shot. Ugh.

  33. Lindsey says:

    “I don’t think she’s ever going to want to go to a fashion show for her love of clothes. She’s going to want to get paid for going to that show”

    ^^^^ THIS ^^^^

  34. Nikzilla37 says:

    I like the points about fashion culture and how Kim seems to defy those standards but other than that, what a lame article.

  35. DANDILION says:

    Someone say sex.. then animation will return to her cold soul dead eyes..

    There’s nothing behind your eyes
    The windows to the soul
    What’s beneath you skin
    A dead heart still beating
    The cold stare of dead eyes
    A look into demise
    Within decay you rest
    In pain and emptiness
    Do you wish for more inside than this
    Broken life
    Do you hate what’s within me and what I feel for you

  36. yeouch says:

    Oh, give me a break. I would bet the farm that her lack of popularity among the fashion elite has everything to do with being a talent-free famewhore star of a sex tape and nothing to do with her body type or size.

    But, how nice that the magazine was able to come up with some other explanation for why they can’t stand her. I wonder if that’s what she tells herself, too?

  37. Stubbylove says:

    It’s obvious NY Magazine only did this for controversy to sell their fashion issue – they just wanted to piss people off and get them talking about the mag. Pathetic move.

  38. Tanya says:

    she just isn’t as striking without all of the hair she used to have. funny how that is…. technically, she should be…but it’s just not the same….

  39. mar says:

    these pics are HORRIBLE!!!! She looks like a suburban house wife, and not a hip one for that matter.

    I really do not understand why the media will not stop shoving her down our throats.

    I do not like her, I do not admire her, in fact Im starting to get a little sick of celebs because of her,I would much rather know what people that have talent like to do, eat, breathe. She is the most POINTLESS celeb of all time, I actually spent the past 2 minutes on her which makes me sick.

    • TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

      Great comment No one has ever fully explained what the Lardassians have over the media that they are shoved down our throats; this is the same media that lampoons the Palins (deservedly so) but then collaborates with this famewhoring family. I’m missing something and has anyone in the media been called out for making trash bags like this “famous?” Just asking.

  40. randand00 says:

    Her mouth looks like a puckered ass with a bad case of hemmorhoids. Not to be rude or anything…

  41. skuddles says:

    Fashion mag? Nope. Porn (fetish) mag? Absolutely.

  42. Morganism says:

    Her cheek implants are rediculous and her slug lips aren’t doing her any favors either.

  43. Elisha says:

    Peggy Bundy! She looks more like Peg Bundy than Katey Segal.

  44. Mooshi says:

    She has the emotional depth of a muddle puddle.

    I just don’t get it. There is nothing substantial or interesting going on in her brain.

    She bores me to tears. I tried to watch one of her shows, and I wanted to stick a pencil in my eye.

  45. palermo says:

    She always looks so vacant, nobody is home inside that head

  46. Samantha says:

    Jeremy Renner just branded this skank and her equally pathetic family as ‘ridiculous people with zero talent’.Following that brilliant remark,Mr Renner has officially won me over!!!!

  47. dlc says:

    I do think the author of that article made an interesting point when they said that fashion uses sex, but hates it and flesh.

  48. The Original Mia says:

    Everyone has said it, so I’ll throw mine out there. NO! N-O! Nyet!

  49. faye says:

    No she she shouldnt be. Her fashion sense is TERRIBLE.

  50. skilo says:

    The only Magazine Kim should be on or in is a porno-mag. Maybe Busted Looking Hooker Monthly or something.

  51. Aubra says:

    According to Andre Leon Talley, no…lol

    ETA, found the interview where he and a designer/stylist shade her!! LMAO:

    On Kim Kardashian not attending the Met Ball and why dressing her would bastardize Rucci’s brand:
    Andre Leon Talley: What’s shocking to me is how important the red carpet is. At one point I thought it was ruining [fashion] but I don’t think that anymore. I dont think any celebrity can take away from fashion. Not even Kim Kardashian could take away from fashion…Though, of course, Kim Kardashian didn’t come to the Metropolitan Met Ball but [her boyfriend] Kanye West did.
    Ralph Rucci: And see that’s the thing: Many people who I think are the celebrities, other people don’t think are the celebrities [implying that he doesn't think Kim Kardashian is a celebrity.]

    Robin Givhan: So would you ever dress Kim Kardashian?
    Ralph Rucci: No, I think that’s bastardizing yourself [as a designer].

  52. MsMileHigh says:

    HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! She looks awful in the pics! She looks totally bloated and jaundiced. HAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!

  53. erika says:

    Kim K is a wee bit dumb.

    That’s all.

    Really! she’s got the booty, bombshell, coconuts, I get it. But the woman has nothing but recycled AIR between her EARS! I don’t expect everyone to be a poet laureate/magna cum laude but she just CANNOT EXPRESS A SIMPLE THOUGHT!

    “…Literally. It’s like, SO cute! OMG! Literally, that is the cuuuuuutest top ever! Literally, it’s the cutest thing ever. OMG….BIBLE IT?

  54. Ginger says:

    She seriously looks like a drag queen on the cover photo…what has she done to her lips??? Scary!

  55. yellowshaba says:

    Kim is the definition of fake. Fake pretty, fake reality, fake designer, fake sister, fake relationships, fake arse, fake fake fake..the worst part is she gets paid to be this fake, but where is her dignity? Only in her wallet…I so not envy her for anything

  56. original kate says:

    vienna sausage lips.

  57. Camilla says:

    Oh please they will try and spin this and say that fashion shuns her because of her body type. Nope they shun her because she is trash and not a celeb worthy of their time. Anna had Adele on her cover and Adele is a gorgeous woman, but she also has talent. They’ve had beyonce on there covers more than once and she has a curvy body as well, but she has has talent. The reason fashion shuns kim k is because she is transparent in her aspirations and complete trash. I am so over her and her excuses

  58. dj says:

    Her eyes look vacant in these pictures. She looks like a blow up doll. Please learn to close your lips (if you can Kim).