MINT Magazine: Fall 2014

Photography byJade Suganuma Model Eddy Rosales Chavez

from the

EDITOR

On the eve of publication, I’m looking back and re-reading the first issue of MINT. It’s been barely one year since the first copy of MINT was conceptualized, let alone created.

But as I’m thumbing through what was then and what is now, I’ve begun to realize that a lot can change in a year.

MINT has explored the many different facets of style and culture, from perspectives of a runway fashion photographer (Issue One), to transgender models (Issue Two), to what we bring you in this issue: decorative facemasks hiding an underlying pollution problem, religion’s influence on style, the EDM scene’s promotion of drug use, and so much more.

As you read through this issue, you’ll see that we’ve even addressed the potential for influence that a style and culture publication can have. Sometimes it’s negative—fashion magazines are notorious for insidious “you’re not ________ enough until you buy ________ or look

like ________.” But sometimes, and I hope MINT falls into this category, publications can serve as catalysts for social change. They can highlight problems within the fashion complex itself—like the sexualization and objectification of women in advertising, or the ageism that permeates the modeling, both of which are analyzed in this issue. They can spark dialogue and debate about how high supermodel salaries are, and cause you to take a second look at how Stanford style has changed over the years.

A lot can change in a year, and I’m not just talking about magazines. I hope you’ll not only enjoy MINT and all of the hard work that we’ve put into it, but, if you’re inspired, also take action with regard to the social issues we’ve highlighted.

Cheers to this MINTiversary and many more to come. xx

Ashley Overbeek

aRT DIRECTOR Emma Coleman

design editor Diana Zhao

writing directors Karina El Baze Villanueva Zabreen Khan

photography directors Sydney Maples Sharon Lee

copy editors Carly Olszewki (print) Madeline Xiao (online)

modeling directors Lillian Lao Chris Lucas

WEB Directors Jessie Alvarez Ana Carolina Mexia

FINANCIAL OFFICER Momota Imai

MINT FALL 2014

EDITOR IN CHIEF

Photography by Ashley Overbeek Sydney Maples Modeled by Uche Uba Tucker Bryant Emma Fiander Alex Martel Chris Lucas

Harper Carroll & Will Bourdage for Stanford Student Store

Bleed

C

a

r

d

i

n

a

l

By Joseph Nicolls

Ever since the University’s founding in 1891, cardinal has been one of its official colors. For a brief period of time, however, there was another symbol closely associated with Stanford. Sources are unsure where the name “Stanford Indians” came from, but it quickly gained widespread recognition and was deemed as the official mascot in the 1930s.

In this admittedly shameful part of our history, most of the clothing associated with Stanford either featured the familiar logo paired with the term “Indians,” or some representation of a stereotypical caricature of a Native American face. In 1972, following Native American students’ protest, the University dropped the “Indian” as the official mascot, and after some

deliberation, decided that Stanford’s official logo would be the shade of cardinal red that we all know and love today. In President Donald Kennedy’s own words, “the color continue[s] to serve us well… It is a rich and vivid metaphor for the very pulse of life.”

Following this decision, Stanford apparel began to feature the familiar shade of cardinal red with striking white letters, similar to what we see today. Although there are a few variations, the predominant look sold by the bookstore can be characterized through the classic Stanford sweater. After the nixing of the Indian mascot, no one tried to change the apparel’s aesthetic.

This classic look was fine, but students didn’t feel that it expressed their school pride in a creative manner.

In Presiden t Donald Kennedy’s own words, “the color con tinue[s] to serve us well… It is a rich and vivid metaphor for the very pulse of life.”

Enter the Stanford Student Store.

The counter-cultural aspect to the Student Store was present from its origin, with a mission statement that cleverly asserted, “We’re NOT the Bookstore!”

Though a lot has changed since the group’s founding in 1992, it still stands as the place on campus that expresses Stanford’s freeing and quirky school spirit.

With a new mission statement of “For Students, by Students,” the store is at the forefront of student fashion. Diligently working on new brands and reworking

old ones, the Student Store is responsible for all kinds of slogans and gear explicitly associated with Stanford, such as the infamous “Party with Trees.” In the months to come, keep a close eye out for “Work Card, Play Card” tanks and tees popping up around campus.

Regardless of any history or degree of reverence, one thing has and will remain true about Stanford: One color unites our past and present. This holds true for any student on campus, regardless of character or background. We all bleed cardinal red.

Lance Hilderbrand x Stanford Student Store

Will Bourdage, Julie Ni, Harper Carroll

Abbey Bertelston & Chris Collins for Stanford Student Store

E

lectronic dance music, more popularly known as EDM, is the rising modern music movement in American pop culture. Although it initially began in 1980 as an underground style, it is now penetrating the mainstream, as “the EDM industry is worth approximately four billion dollars per year.” However, this number does not include Rehab International’s reported $484 billion that the United States spends annually on the abuse of and the addiction to ecstasy, an amphetamine-based synthetic drug otherwise known as “MDMA” or “Molly” that is most often associated with the EDM scene.

Electronic music was the first genre to embrace the Internet, as DJs were the first group of artists to offer free singles on social media websites and music blogs. The Internet thus allowed DJs to revolutionize the music industry by creating immense profits from concerts and festivals, rather than traditional album sales. As a result,

E At the demand for live music events has surged, but the demand for ecstasy has increased as well, as many adolescents in particular choose to participate in recreational drug use at such events. In fact, 65.1% of people who have ever used ecstasy first used it at a rave. General criticism supported by such statistics, however, often dismisses the EDM genre altogether, without attention to nuances.

EDM is unique from other music genres because its culture thrives off of the acronym ‘PLUR,’ representing the values peace, love, unity, and respect. This value of togetherness causes adolescents to feel connected, and MDMA intensifies this effect. Therefore, the combination of the developing adolescent brain, the biological effects of ecstasy, and the culture of electronic dance music create a dangerous recipe for an addiction to the electronic scene among young adults.

S LEEP

R AV E R E P E AT Adolescent Addiction to the EDM Scene

by Carly Olszewski

Photography by Yoojin Rhee

OP INION The Adolescent Brain

Because the brain typically continues to develop until age 25, “more than any other age group, adolescents are at risk for substance addiction,” as well as “permanent intellectual and emotional damage.” Adolescent brains are continuously strengthening neural connections and refining judgment skills, so they are more susceptible to outside influence from drugs. Additionally, adolescents hold an increased desire to take risks, to explore social rules, and to break them, which is exemplified in their tendency to practice “hazardous driving, unprotected sex, and substance abuse,” such as ecstasy.

Not only are many adolescents unaware of ecstasy’s risks, but also the risks are not yet fully understood. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, all that is currently known about MDMA is that it can affect mood, sexual desires, sleep, sensitivity to pain, and memory loss. After just one use, ecstasy can alter one’s sensory receptors, and it affects each person to a different severity. This is because although Molly pills are claimed to be ‘pure,’ they are often cut with varying amounts and strengths of MDMA and other amphetamines. For this reason, “MDMA,” “Molly,” and “ecstasy” are one in the same.

What is advertised is not the composition. Regardless, many adolescents still find ecstasy appealing, and they are not heavily concerned with its potential detrimental effects.

Such disregard for harmful consequences supports journalist Paul Manning’s idea of “normalization,” suggesting that drug use among young people is becoming so common that it will soon be unacknowledged as a “deviant” activity. This prevalence is because adolescents lack knowledge about ecstasy, so their minds hold an intensified curiosity and view drug abuse as even more appealing. A similar argument can be made about EDM. Although it is becoming a more popular music genre, it is still considered an ‘underground’ style. Adolescents may believe that preferring EDM is a ‘deviant’ trait, further enhancing its popular appeal. Using ecstasy at a live electronic event can then be considered the merge of two deviant qualities, which is why an average of 76% of people who go to raves have also used ecstasy at some point in their life.

p e a c e l

o

v

e

u n i t y respect The Addictiveness of Ecstasy

Ecstasy’s ability to grant people a false sense of reward causes users to feel satisfied with their lives.

Because “dopamine does not reach peak levels until adulthood,” chemically manipulating one’s natural supply of dopamine while the brain is still developing is what can cause ecstasy to become an addictive act. After MDMA’s effects wear off, drug users’ brains lack serotonin, often leaving them feeling depressed and slow for several days. As a result, they crave more dopamine and the happy sensation that it causes; they can’t wait for the next rave. This character is sensible because ecstasy is not considered a ‘lifestyle’ addiction, meaning users do not depend on it daily. If people use ecstasy, they typically use it at an electronic event, and once they use it once, they are not likely to stop. This fact is what defines MDMA addiction as different than other forms of drugs. According to Martin Silberman’s book Aspects of Drug Addiction, an addicted person is defined as “a person who…has become dependent upon a drug…and has an overpowering desire for its continuance, but who does not require it for the relief of organic disease.”

This definition can be further specified in relation to ecstasy, as it appears recreational users crave it specifically in a live music setting.

Photography by Carly Olszewski

The Addictiveness of the Electronic Culture and the Music Itself

Just as adolescents can be addicted to the neurological effects of ecstasy, it is possible that they can be addicted to the similar neurological effects of music, or even a combination of the two. Northwestern Medicine supports that “feeling pleasure in response to music is not only physiologically manifested through the feeling of chills, but [it] also biochemically induces the release of dopamine.” Furthermore, Neuroscientist Valerie Salimpoor remarked, “Dopamine is important because it makes us want to repeat behaviors. It’s the reason why addictions exist… In this case, the euphoric ‘highs’ from music are neurochemically reinforced by our brain, so we keep coming back to them.

It’s like drugs… It’s working on the same systems of addiction...” The addictive quality of music is what has caused it to maintain its international cultural role for thousands of years. In this sense, due to its addictive nature, music too can be considered a powerful drug of its own.

This claim is reinforced by the Oxford Journals: reasons for using “music and drugs [are] similar (to relax, to elevate mood, to focus, and to escape reality).” Moreover, this interacts in a unique manner with the adolescent culture, which seeks identity, communal bonds, and feelings of reward more so than other age groups. Because the EDM crowd identifies itself as a loving, caring, and peaceful unit that promotes companionship and acceptance, it is increasingly socially and neurologically appealing to adolescents, who have an insuppressible desire to belong. Because music creates bonds among its listeners, provides mathematical clarity, and causes the release of dopamine, music has a highly addictive nature.

The Dangerous Recipe

The addictive qualities of MDMA and music, coupled with the desires and mechanics of the adolescent brain, complete the dangerous trifecta that welcomes an addiction to dopamine. Due to the number of ecstasy related deaths at EDM events, ecstasy’s increased popularity is a potential hazard to adolescent health. So, is an addiction to the electronic scene necessarily ‘bad?’ It is recognized that an addiction to ecstasy is ‘bad’ due to both its known and unknown potentially damaging effects, but is a live music addiction necessarily ‘bad’? Is an electronic music addiction in particular ‘bad’?

I do not believe so. Music has many positive benefits; for instance, the American Cancer Society

uses it as a therapy due to its ability to enhance mood.

In this case, it is possible for some adolescents to be addicted to the electronic scene without being addicted to ecstasy. Other adolescents may also be addicted to the powerful unity of the EDM culture, without being addicted to ecstasy, or without being addicted to the music at all. Conversely, it is also true that adolescents’ addiction to the scene could primarily be due to their addiction to ecstasy and the entertaining playground that it provides. Regardless, some combination of these three possibilities entices young adults.

The flexibility in this relationship allows EDM to appeal to such a wide variety of adolescents, who feel free to be self-expressive and encompass their unique personal spirit in a live electronic setting. For this very reason, EDM is a powerful, growing community, and it does have its benefits.

For the Future

Because one addiction may lead to another, the EDM scene is potentially threatening to the adolescent generation. Having said this, it is unsound to deem the entire scene as dangerous. It is necessary for DJs, promoters, and electronic music listeners of all ages to be aware and informed of the addictive dopamine trifecta that the EDM culture is so strongly connected to. Whether this means that adolescents need to be better educated on drugs such as ecstasy, or event promoters need to improve their security and prevention strategies, the EDM culture could evolve into a safer musical environment, while maintaining its popular appeal and positive social benefits.

Without making some changes, this culture will not last. Popular artist Kaskade commented on this issue, stating, “Clearly, if the US Government hasn’t come up with the magic bullet to quell the problem of drugs in this country, it is not reasonable to expect an event promoter to pull this kind of trick out of his hat either.” Kaskade is correct in stating that promoters are not responsible for mitigating the drug problem in the United States; however, he fails to acknowledge that event promoters themselves are often the ones organizing the entrance and bulk sales of ecstasy at an event. Another current artist, Flume, recently critiqued, “Commercial EDM- the crowd is f*cked up kids basically. They don’t care about the music…” Maybe it’s a win-win, then, if DJs encourage their fans to enjoy a live electronic experience for what it truly is: an expressive wonderland of unity and euphoria naturally created through the crowd and the music itself.

TRENDS

Photography by Lauren Dyer

pumped

up kicks by elizabeth cusick

Typically associated with the California-cool style or considered a major faux pas, sneakers have never had much of a place in the high fashion world. That is, until now. Seen everywhere from Chanel ads to the feet of celebs and models alike, fashion’s biggest names are swapping out their heels in favor of a more practical style this fall. Brands like Dior, Marc Jacobs, and Yves Saint Laurent have taken to putting their spin on classic footwear, designing everything from fringed high tops to sequin-encrusted slip-ons. Paired with something as bold as a metallic

silver dress (à la Rita Ora), or something as simple as a distressed pair of jeans and a crop top, these shoes will work for your every mood and occasion. But if you are not looking to spend a whole quarter’s worth of tuition on a rhinestone encrusted pair of Louboutin high tops, popular brands like Superga, who recently released their collaboration with The Man Repeller, Converse, and Vans, offer options that won’t break the bank. So lace up, slip on, or strap into your best kicks and hit the ground running with this new trend.

WHO ARE YOU WEARING? a look into runway fashion

by Arianna Lombard

F

rom Miley’s pasties to the insane transformation of top models in the Marc Jacobs show, New York Fashion Week is full of surprises. It’s easy to fall star-struck to the blizzard of designers, models, celebrities, and most importantly, clothes. Many of us hope and dream to possibly wear those pieces that we swoon over online. But it begs the question, what happens to those (sometimes outrageous) pieces from the runway?

Jeremy Scott

Marina Ballerin

We often see celebrities at the Oscars or the VMA’s wearing designer gowns and crazy-cool outfits, but we never see normal people walking down the street in clothes from the runway. In fact, the samples used on the runway usually never get worn

Miley Cyrus

Jeremy Scott

after the show. They travel a sort of fashion circuit, in which the designer presents the samples to several retailers or “buyers” who order what they want, and the designer then fulfills the orders – which seems logical until you wonder about the next step.

There isn’t really a set next step. The pieces from the runway have served their purpose as shopping guides. Now, they’re used to look pretty. As simple and ingenuous as that may seem, it is the truth. Nearing the latter half of the season, the samples can be used on mannequins for retail stores, or may be used as art or prizes, if you will, for the designers. But we all know that the fashion

Chanel

industry focuses on the new and the next, with an occasional glance at the past. After the season is over, most clothing used for runway actually goes into storage, only to be brought back into the world every once in a while as a reference for new designs. They become new installments in the graveyard of last season’s ideas, and serve to remind us that fame and glamour easily fade, but greatness lives on.

Mip * ster

noun \’mip-stur\ : A Muslim hipster

By Bradley Wo

Photograph courtesy of DIR Fashion

A

fter the release of Sheikh Bake’s video titled “Somewhere in America #MIPSTERZ”– depicting Muslim-American women wearing hijabs and dressed in fashionable clothing– the term “mipsterz” became viral. The video was highly controversial.

What could have been a simple YouTube video soon transcended into a conversation about Muslim-American women, their identity, and the symbol of the hijab.

Following the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the “War on Terror,” many Americans began to stereotype Muslims, making assumptions about their beliefs and backgrounds. The hijab (headscarf worn by Muslim women) is seen by conservatives and feminists alike as a symbol of misogyny and female oppression. Additionally, Muslim women are commonly portrayed in the media as victims of their faith. They are categorized as bland in thought and appearance. This video, however, combatted those very views by presenting strong-minded women who sprinkled hipster culture into their practice of the Islamic faith.

Fashion, once again, became a tool with which these self-proclaimed “mipsterz” could express their independence of thought. The traditional hijab was paired with jewelry, high heels, makeup, and styles typically considered “street fashion” by Americans today. Unlike the plainer clothes typically paired

with the hijab, these girls wore form-fitting circus-striped long pants, mustache jewelry, and rode skateboards. It is their interest in fashion and their use of the hijab that resulted in terms like “Islamofashionista” and “hijabista.”

Much of this not only counters how Americans view Muslims, but also how Muslims view other Muslims. Most Muslim women wear the hijab to display their modesty, privacy, and morality. Yet the other facets of these mipsters’ outfits do the exact opposite, calling attention to their appearance. In their attempt to join a modern trend, it appears as if they have blatantly disregarded their religion’s rules. Due to the contrast between conservative ideals of ‘Islamic modesty’ and the seemingly commercial and superficial ways these hijabis presented themselves, this video has faced severe backlash from much of the Muslim community.

While much of the controversy surrounding the mipsters video is about the womens’ outfit selections, the video’s purpose is not to promote fashion. Instead, these women wanted to show Muslims playing, laughing, and having fun, like most teenagers. The Muslim identity cannot be distilled into one image, be it American misconceptions or the mipster ideal. Muslims span every continent, and despite sharing the same religion, they are different in their opin-

ions, appearance, and spectrums of faith. Despite a rather simple message, the mipster video’s larger impact is twofold.

The first echoes beyond the video and calls into question the meaning of being a Muslim in American society.

This rare image of veiled, fashionable Muslim women has forced both Westerners and the international Muslim community to reevaluate personal beliefs about Muslims. Hijabi high fashion has always existed, especially in Gulf countries like

Kuwait and the UAE. Rather than accept Western media’s continual oversight of this trend, mipsters created this video to celebrate what has existed for so long: fashionable hijabis.

In the case of mipsters, their attempts to blend their American and Islamic heritage have led to an empowering message of diversity. Their use of the term “hipster” comes not only from an aesthetic aspect, but a conceptual one as well. The anticonformist views of mipsters encourages critical thought and discussion about art, fashion, music, and the entire image and role of American Muslims, all which challenge broad stereotypes.

Secondly, these mipsters have proven that fashion and art can serve as an outlet and mode for creative thought. Some people consider fashion a form of veiled narcissism, but it is clear that fashion has a much stronger role.

Mipsters have attempted to use pieces of clothing, not to subvert their religion, but to bolster their faith and empower themselves and others in their journey to bridge cultures and redefine Muslims. In many American communities, it appears to be working.

Photograph courtesy of Daily Beast *For more information about mipsters, please visit their Facebook group (mipsterz).

Thematic Reflections in the Fashion of

HOUSE OF CARDS

by Joseph Nicolls

Television is, primarily, a visual medium. Before the viewer sees a character’s interactions with others in their fictional world, before the character even mutters a single word, a viewer judges a character’s moral strengths and weaknesses largely through their initial physical appearance. In the case of the hit Netflix drama House of Cards, this is done remarkably through the use of each individual character’s fashion. Not only is each individual given a distinct style despite the formal political setting, but also each individual’s fashion subtly changes over time, reflecting internal changes and struggle. Arguably the most visually interesting of these examples can be found in the protagonist’s wife, Claire Underwood, skillfully portrayed by accomplished actor Robin Wright. First introduced in the pilot episode choosing a dark but understated form-fitting dress for a formal event, her character is revealed through both her stylish choice and a lack of any elaborate ornamentation. It hints at her immense confidence, due to the sheer simplicity of the outfit, and it also hints at her relationship to her husband. The first word we hear Frank Underwood say to Claire is, “stunning,” a comment on her appearance rather than any other particular subject. This creates an impression that she, rather than anything distracting, is merely an ornament for Frank’s elaborate political game. Claire Underwood, however, is not a static character. Throughout the course of the show, the viewer witnesses subtle yet drastic changes in Claire’s character.

Hints of these changes can generally

be reflected in deviations, whether permanent or temporary, from her wardrobe. Typically, Claire Underwood’s clothing can be described as almost strictly symmetrical and dark. Claire largely chooses to wear simple, dim outfits that reflect both an inner stability and iciness.

So when Claire is shown wearing an asymmetrical outfit that is explicitly discussed amongst the other characters, it forces attentive viewers to perk their ears. This occurs during one of the pivotal moments of the second season when Claire Underwood delivers a half-truth on an interview on national television, wearing a black dress with an asymmetrical neck. This could reflect internal uncertainty or doubt, or it could mean a set of shifting values.

Whatever it represents, the uneven dress conveys a sense of unevenness, later confirmed to be true as Claire expresses hesitance towards Frank’s morally questionable actions as the series moves forward.

In short, Claire Underwood’s fashion is masterfully utilized to both represent her character and hint at her feelings and emotions at a given time. Through subtle changes in her outfit, the viewer can sense a change in character before it is actually confirmed. It doesn’t hurt that the outfits themselves are absolutely glamourous, no matter how much blood may be on her or her husband’s hands.

Photograph courtesy of Netflix

H

I

G

H

FASHION F

A

C

E

M A S K S Photograph courtesy of The Wall Street Journal

Fashion, it appears, is born when imagination meets necessity. Whereas most fashion pieces’ primary goal is to cover the body and embellish the outfit, the rise of fashion facemasks in China targets a more dire issue.

With the rise of awareness about pollution, many Chinese people have begun to wear facemasks to protect themselves. To put the issue into perspective, one can look at the Air Quality Index (AQI). Stanford commonly has an AQI rating of 45, as opposed to Beijing, which averaged a 145 in 2012 and recently spiked as high as 750 last January.

Part of what makes the air so dangerous is particulate matter, including dust, dirt, soot, and smoke.

Cue the fashion industry. Much of the younger generation not only wants to stay healthy, but also wants to look good while doing so. As the consumer demand has increased, so have the options. Facemasks are now designed according to the weather, for outdoor activity, or even just for aesthetic appeal.

Nina Griffee, a Beijing and Hong Kong based designer, has combined both elements by featuring facemasks in her high fashion shoots. “I was considering how an outfit can improve your quality of life,” she says. “Clothes can do a little bit more for you than just fit you.”

by Bradley Wo

H ow

Wa s

Yo u r

S h i rt

M ad e ?

A Personal Discovery of Ethical Fashion

By Lauren Wegner

A white boyfriend shirt on zady.com is $195.

If you’re anything like the old me, you would briefly imagine yourself with deep designer pockets before quickly moving on to Forever 21, where comparably styled tops sell for less than $20. You figure that you may be sacrificing quality, but that it’s worth saving the money—college is expensive. At the end of the day, we walk away from our purchase satisfied.

Fast-forward a few months. The Forever 21 shirt has shrunk in the wash, and there is a mysterious run in the fabric despite heroic efforts to keep it away from zippers, jewelry, and sharp edges. This situation is anything but sustainable. We both may have glazed over information on zady.com that bears greater importance than a simple fabric makeup or size chart. Each piece on the website is explained from beginning to end. Our $195 boyfriend shirt? Hand dyed in a dye house in Los Angeles, overseen by the designers that picked the

fabric themselves—Cynthia Johnson and Jin Cha, founders of Cynjin fashion. Not only is this top guaranteed to outlast the comparable Forever 21 style, but it is also guaranteed that the creation process was ethical, personal, sustainable, and completed with care.

On a trip to Brooklyn, NY this summer I wandered into Bhoomki, a little boutique in the hub of the borough’s hottest shopping area. Whether it was fate, free will, or a much-needed break from the sun that drew me into the store, I left Bhoomki a changed woman. It was by no means Telemachus’ journey to manhood, but a certain rite of passage in the fashion world, so to speak. I would have walked away as ignorant as before, had I not seen the fine print on the tag of a beautiful dress that read: “ethically fashioned.” I quickly learned that all of the brands in the store were made up of either organic, recycled, or artisan fabrics. Bhoomki’s goal is to create pieces that are manufactured lo-

“ethically fashioned” The question “who are you wearing,” formerly reserved for the red carpet, has now made its way out onto the streets, where ethically conscious buyers are more and more eager to communicate the mission.

cally, or in areas where labor is regulated and workers receive living wages. Swati Argade, the founder and creative director of Bhoomki, aims to support traditional artisans, shrink the carbon footprint, and make “high quality, low quantity collections for customers, not trenddriven clothes worn for a single season.” The idea is stylishly sustainable. I was sold.

The new me chooses the zady.com boyfriend shirt ten times out of ten (pockets permitting).

The question “who are you wearing,” formerly reserved for the red carpet, has now made its way out onto the streets, where ethically conscious buyers are more and more eager to communicate the mission.

In 2013, Kate Black created EcoSessions, a conference of sorts where designers, industry, and consumers can come together and share their stories— their challenges and triumphs in the ethical fashion world. While EcoSessions works with city ambassadors to spread awareness and strengthen the sustainable community, Black’s other project, magnifeco.com, publishes stories about artisans and retailers committed to providing fashionable pieces that are not harmful to workers or Mother Earth.

For many ethical designers, it’s all about going back to the basics: arts and crafts. Carol Miltimore of Seek Collective works with a cooperative of block printers in Bagru, India to use natural dyes in fabrics. Monisha Raja of the brand Love is Mighty creates shoes using

courtesy of Bhoomki

fabrics and craftspeople from rural Indian villages, and not a single animal is sacrificed in the process. The movement grows as ethical brands pop up all over the country: Alabama Chanin of the south, Feral Childe of New York, Popomomo of Los Angeles. It may be easier for some to fork over more money to buy clothes that will last longer and foster a clear conscious. For those of us whose pockets don’t run as deep as we would hope, there are other ways to dress ethically and sustainably. Visit thrift stores and continue to give a garment of clothing life. Look for tags that read “made in the U.S.,” where labor is more likely to be regulated. Search for easy DIY projects that repurpose a piece of clothing or accessory. Splurge on one versatile piece that can be worn in many different style assembles (look to Sheena Matheiken for inspiration, she wore the same black dress for 365 days to raise money for the Akanksha Foundation, or see MINT’s article on Sarah Evan’s similar feat). To be ethical and cost efficient, you don’t have to fashion a purse out of the old Starburst wrappers you have hoarded over the years. (Although we encourage you to try!)

So step away from the fast fashion that mimics luxury brands. Resist the temptation to spend on these “lightning trend” items that will be disposed of quickly. Invest in craftsmanship, humanity, and preservation of culture. Help bring the art, love, and joy of fashion back to the creation process. Look for small ways to keep wearing that sweater over and over again, and most importantly, ask your friends

Oversexualized & Underrepresented

If prompted to list some of the most prominent leaders in the fashion industry today, one would likely include Marc Jacobs, Zac Posen, Michael Kors, Miuccia Prada, Narciso Rodriguez, Marco Gobbetti, Karl Lagerfeld of Chanel, and Phoebe Philo of Céline. Of this small sample of trendsetters in the spotlight, 75% of them are male, despite the fact that their brand caters and sells the majority of their products to women. Although men are often painfully drug around boutiques and shopping malls by their enthralled female counterparts, it is the men who continue to occupy the top positions in the fashion industry. As reflected by recent controversies in popular fashion brands, misogyny and objectification stifle the female voice behind the scenes, regardless of womens’ consumer power.

Take Dov Charney. Charney is the former CEO of American Apparel, the iconic brand known for its basic zip-ups, tees, and leotards. The reason for his ousting is his inappropriate and sexual behavior towards female coworkers. With five recent cases of misconduct, the American Apparel board finally recognized an unhealthy, misogynistic attitude

Women in the Fashion Industry

that did not belong in fashion industry or in any other workplace. However, Charney founded American Apparel as a college freshman in 1989. For 25 years, his sexual behavior towards his female employees ran rampant.

Why was Charney not reprimanded sooner? For example, in 2008, a sales manager filed a report stating that prior to her dismissal, Charney had made sexual advances and commentary towards her. Charney was able to settle the case for cash, reflecting a weakness in how workplace harassment is addressed. Giving Charney and other fashion moguls the opportunity to opt out of an important discussion by throwing money at the situation hides the misogyny that needs to be discussed openly.

Even in its advertising techniques, American Apparel is a quintessential example of overt sexualization in fashion. The brand frequently runs controversial nude ads or puts its young models in uncomfortable sexual positions. Despite the fact that the clothing targets women, the ads place priority on characterizing the women as sexual objects.

By favoring sex above beauty, unhealthy messages about the role of women are transmitted in the

by Emily Stebbins

photos.

In a quick comparison of American Apparel shots taken for its male and female lines, the difference is drastic. In the ad for body suits, the model remains faceless, with only one photo of the full bodysuit.

Conversely, here is a recent American Apparel ad for male jeans.

The entirety of the pant makes it into the shot, and the relaxed, mischievous pose of the model allows the clothes to shine.

The man is photographed to look strong and confident, as opposed to vulnerable and sexual like the woman.

While American Apparel serves as a blatant example of how fashion is equally influenced by both the male and female mindset, all fashion houses should not be stuck in a sexist black hole. Numerous fashion designers of both sexes produce work that reflects an appreciation and understanding of the female body, and they strive to glorify it, rather than oversexualize it. That being said, until all the “Charneys” of the fashion industry are properly chastised for their attitude and behavior, the industry will continue to hold this dark, dirty secret.

“

By favoring sex above beauty, unhealthy messages about the role of women are transmitted in the photos.

”

Photographs courtesy of American Apparel

franca AN INTERVIEW WITH

SOZZANI F

ranca Sozzani has served as an enduring critic and celebrator of fashion. Born in Mantua, Italy, Sozzani originally aspired to work in academia. However after a divorce and time spent in England, India, and Berlin, Sozzani found herself writing for Vogue Bambini. In 1988, she was appointed editor-in-chief of Vogue Italia and she remains not only editor-inchief of Vogue Italia but also editorin-chief of Condé Nast, the umbrella fashion-culture publication company, more than twenty-five years later. As Vogue Italia celebrates its fifty-year anniversary, it is unsurprising that a luminary like Sozzani has helmed a magazine for 26 years that is dedication to not just fashion, but also important issues and ideas.

When Sozzani first joined Vogue Italia, the magazine had already been working with the major Italian designers: Armani, Versace, Valentino. But her acknowledgment of the linguistic limitations of Italian spurred her to communicate through images and focus on the power that a single snapshot can exhibit. Sozzani’s time has been distinguished by her knack for discovering profound photographers (Steven Meisel, Bruce

By Amanda McLean & Bradley Wo Weber, Peter Lindbergh), her recent digital archiving of the magazine’s entire history, and a never-ending dedication to prevalent social issues.

Some of Vogue Italia’s recent photo shoots incited a sort of furor normally only prevalent in investigative journalism. “The Black Issue,” an entire issue which was devoted to celebrate diversity and all aspects of black culture was heralded as a beacon of the future, and remains Vogue Italia’s all-time best-seller. More controversial shoots such as Sturm und Drang (BP oil spill), Horror Movie (violence against women), and Makeover Madness (cosmetic surgery) were met with shock, dismay, and fiery critiques, but also widespread acclaim. Sozzani has also launched Vogue Curvy, a subset of Vogue Italia staffed with plus-sized bloggers. But Sozzani’s influence extends far beyond the fashion world: following the May/June issue of L’Uomo Vogue “Rebranding Africa,” Sozzani was awarded numerous international prizes and currently serves as the Global Ambassador Against Hunger for the United Nations World Food Program. In spite of her busy schedule, MINT was able to sit down with Sozzani, who illuminated her outlook on fashion and the world.

Photograph courtesy of John Shand Kydd

MINT: How does your magazine add something different to the fashion industry as a whole?

Franca Sozzani (FS): I guess, probably because I take more risk. It is not that everything I did was perfect, I’m sure that it’s not. Many things were probably very controversial. But I don’t think that fashion is just about shirt and pants. Of course it is partly about that – but it is also about your language and how you present yourself when you meet somebody. Fashion is the mirror of the time in which we live. Who 10 years ago was going to Topshop or Uniqlo, it didn’t even exist. So we have a different approach. We use fashion to portray messages; I think that’s very important. We live in clothes, but we are not dolls. Why be so straight – that the girls have to be skinny, skinny, skinny or fat.

Everybody is not the same. Fashion for me is a way to make everyone more confident in what they do and how they feel. It is not only about perfection – perfection doesn’t exist. Sometimes fashion magazines only want to present what is perfect, and this perfection is boring. It is better to see strange people, good people, beautiful people, less beautiful people. But people think they can’t be like those in magazines since they only see 2m high girls.

Hardly anyone looks like that when they step out the door – it would be ridiculous.

MINT: You just celebrated 50 years at Italian Vogue – what risks are left to take, what do the next 50 years look like?

FS: You know I never plan what I’m doing. It comes from differ-

ent inspirations – sometimes I talk to a person, or I notice something, hear something. Something gives me an idea and I follow that idea.

I never say to just do a little bit; I try to go deeply inside a story. It is those stories that we are still talking about, like the Black Issue – issues that are stronger than just fashion magazines. You have to live in the present and take note of what is going on around you and what may be happening in the future. You have to live day by day.

MINT: You recently digitized the Vogue Italia archives - How do you see technology playing a role in fashion in the future?

FS: Honestly I love, I really love (technology), because I think that it gives you such a spontaneous relationship with people, even if sometimes those interactions are weird or terrible in the way they talk about you, the comments or lies. But it is very interesting to see how people can really get involved (with fashion), even if its not very nice. The point is that everybody now wants to talk about fashion, and everybody talks about fashion, and everybody has a blog. But at the end, very few people are reliable. So if you want to create a blog, you should have an idea, a concept that is stronger or different than anyone else’s. Otherwise, why? Do we really need another blog? No. And at the same time, it is good to use fashion to send some other messages.

MINT: About those messages, you are known for taking lots of risks - taking issues like the Black issue and trying to instigate more diversity, especially in fashion. Do you feel

like diversity in the fashion industry has increased since you’ve tackled the issue?

FS: Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn’t. Sometimes it was very controversial and brought me a lot of problems. Like when we did the Violence against Women, people were angry because we put the captions of the dresses. But it was a fashion shoot. But for me I am a fashion magazine I am not a newspaper. What I have to do, I have to use the image to give immediately the concept and the image is made through the clothes/fashion. But I think you have to do it.

MINT: Is there any issues you wouldn’t tackle, anything you wouldn’t want to discuss with fashion?

FS: No, I thought that I should never talk about violence against woman, I did. I thought I should never talk about plastic surgery, I did. I don’t know what else, but for sure we’ll come out with something.

MINT: So it seems like your really using your role in the fashion industry as a way to bring attention to issues. Do you see fashion as an art in itself or as maybe a medium for something else?

Photograph courtesy of Ponystep

FS: No, I think fashion in terms of creativity is not an art, but as in French they say “art applique” – it means that it is an artistic approach, but after you have to find a production. Because that’s the main point of fashion – it is to wear (the clothes).

It is not only to sit, otherwise you’d become an artist and you would not become a fashion designer.

So once you accept that point of view, you have to see that fashion has to be very creative. Otherwise we would still be wearing the same clothes of the 18thcentury. Fashion has to be creative. After, of course it has to be about finding a way to be approachable by many people. I will not say by everybody because when you say that it is meant like that, you trying for the big distribution like Zara, H&M, Uniqlo, you know it’s a different market. But more than that, fashion is a way to give to everybody the possibility, to approach art. But you have to start as a creative person.

Otherwise, it’s a waste.

MINT: Do you think the fashion industry has a duty to address certain issues? You’re known for addressing controversial concepts that other magazines shy away from. Do you think other magazines should be more vocal in trying to show different viewpoints, people, or aesthetics?

FS: The magazines depend on the editors. It is like the collection depends on the designers. All of us, we are different. We have a different approach. Sometimes, people they try to convince you that if you wanted to try to sell more copies that you should be easier and at this point you go more in the marketing way. So you do like a magazine has to do, a beautiful girl, a beautiful dress and one is about coat etc. For me it is about women, because the real protagonists of fashion are women. They get dressed, they wear the clothes, so there is not one woman. There are thousands of women. And that’s why I like to see things in different ways. But, it is easier to get only models - you pay the girl, get a dress, and take pictures. But I think searching for personal attitude is much more important.

MINT: When you look at the fashion industry, there are a lot of up and coming designers from America, from England. It seems like there’s not as many

Photograph courtesy of Amsterdam Fashion

coming from Italy, just because there are so many well-established houses. Could you give us some designers that inspire you?

FS: But you know, this is a mistake! I’ll tell you, because what’s wrong with Italy in the fashion week this is really what’s wrong; you’re not able to support our talents in the schedule. We have a lot of young talents that are doing very well, and are very well known in England and other places. They started in Italy with us. In the last 10 years we have done a lot for the young designers like Nicholas Kirkwood, he started in Milano. J.W. Anderson, Simone Rocha. So of course after they become British or whatever, they go back to their country. But the main work to discover them was made in Italy. Because for me, it is not that you should be Italian. For me, what’s important is that you’re a creative person. What we ask and what we try to support in Italy is in terms of quality, because

in Italy I think we still have the ability to teach a lot to other countries about how you can produce quality merchandise. But, we cannot say ‘oh you should be Italian’ to be the winner of a contest – today it doesn’t work like that. For instance we have very good young designers, we have Stella Jean – she chose the second name from her mother, she’s known in Italy as ‘Stella Novarino’, so she’s an Italian designer. So, we have Gabriele Colangelo, we have Aquilano Rimondi, we have ‘au jour le jour’ – they choose again a French name but they are Italian. We have Fausto Puglisi, we have a bunch of new and very good designers. But it’s not in our DNA, I don’t know why, to present this young talent. As soon as you go to London, they have won access and support. They are much better than us in media. But in the quality of the work and discovery, we really do a lot of work.

The Peter Pa n Effect Fashion Wants You to Never Grow Up

By Arianna Lombard

W

e all have an expiration date that serves not to confine our vitality within a sequence of numbers, but to limit our beauty to a pre-set standard. According to the fashion industry, this limit is set at about 25 years old; after surpassing this meager age, a person is no longer in possession of their youthful attraction. This may be reasonable to some, but what we do not realize is the effect that this extreme beauty standard has on society, including residual ageism.

In a world where sixteen is the prime age for women to begin their modeling careers, there’s no room for “aging with grace.” Many models, including the likes of Celia Ammerman of

America’s Next Top Model Cycle 12 (who was kicked off at age 25 for looking too old), have been excluded from the industry before even having a chance to make their mark, merely because of their “excessive” age. Now, opposing arguments may include Tyra Banks (age 40) and Adriana Lima (age 33). However, these women—and many others—are still involved in the fashion industry if only for their name and reputation. Even celebrities like Kim Kardashian (age 33) can only model as a personality. How does this translate for women of all ages at home?

Even as a young girl, I remember my mother telling me to stop making weird faces, or else

courtesy of Universal Studios

my face will be scarred with ugly wrinkles. In high school, many of us are told that our current appearance is the most attractive it’ll ever get.

“Will you still love me when I’m no longer young and beautiful?"”

We’re eternally blasted with songs that have lyrics such as “Will you still love me when I’m no longer young and beautiful?” We’re groomed at a young age to appreciate our youthfulness to an unreasonable extent, to try and guard it and protect it as much as we possibly can, because once we lose it, we’re worthless. We lie about

turning 30, we buy age-rewinding concealer at 17, we try to find love at 13 (before we’re too old and ugly to find love), all the meanwhile segregating society into two factions: the beautiful and the old.

This trend, however, may be reversing. In the fight to promote healthy body images, many companies have been using un-retouched images, hiring models of all body types, and in some instances, even those that are older than the conventional age. You can find women in the second halves of their lives as faces for J. Crew, Dolce & Gabbana, and Céline. Some of these models are even in their late seventies. The industry is beginning to make a new statement: You can be both old and beautiful! So maybe we don’t have to “live fast” and “die young” after all.

REAL BEAUTY

BY EMMA FIANDER Photography by Jacob Nierenberg

Shopping. Everyone has unhealthy addictions. Mine happens to be fashion magazines.

Shiny covers bursting with color, glamorous models glaring up from glossy pages, elegant stories, women, and fonts– it’s enough to make a girl swoon. Nothing can compare to the excitement of coming home to find the latest Vogue sitting on the kitchen table, just begging to be devoured. It’s delicious.

It’s a trick.

Magazines are awful. They lure prey in with a clamor of headlined promises, seduce one with

ALCOHOL. drugs. caffeine.

pretty pictures and fresh takes on old stories, then slam the trap shut and feast as the victim decides to take the offered advice to buy some new clothes trailed with insecurities.

Magazines are not the only culprits to ever feast on the flaws women create about themselves.

This is a crime that is committed by nearly every piece of publication produced by the fashion and entertainment industries, from advertisements to billboards to music videos. The idea of embracing one’s natural beauty has all but been erased– or at least, it might be, if it weren’t for a certain skin care company by the name of Dove.

Dove is the grandmother

of advocating for natural beauty.

Launched in 2004, their Campaign for Real Beauty wanted to reveal how far from natural the women who graced the pages of magazines really were. They released billboards, print ads, and commercials with “real women” instead of models photoshopped into oblivion. Dove also produced a series of videos about the way women perceive their own beauty in comparison with the idea of beauty as portrayed by the media. One of these videos, “Evolution,” was quickly catapulted into Internet fame as it showed just how much a model is altered, both before and after the picture is taken. It exposed to the world the unhealthy practices of the fashion industry.

“Evolution” came out in 2006. I was ten at the time, in fifth grade. I had recently convinced my mother to order my very first magazine subscription, Girl’s Life. I just knew the secrets to becoming pretty and popular were hidden between those pages, and I wanted to arm myself with as much knowledge on those subjects as I possibly could before entering middle school.

It didn’t work. It turns out, to be “magazine” pretty, you have to buy makeup, you can’t wear glasses, and every pimple on your face has to vanish. It was a long list of demands that my broke, blind, blackhead-ridden eleven-year-old self simply could not meet. The worst part of it, however, was that even though my friends all seemed to achieve the look I desperately coveted, they were still unhappy with their appearance.

I never truly aspired to look like the girls in the magazines. As Internet-savvy as I was, and because of the timing of the “Evolution” video, I knew those girls weren’t real. I knew the images I saw on those shiny pages were retouched in a way real life will never achieve. All I wanted was to look as pretty as the girls I saw in every day life. I thought they were stunning, yet none of them seemed to agree. They still believed in the girls in the magazines. I was chasing after a look made by girls who were chasing after a look made by computers.

It was a dangerous chain.

Even if photoshopped pictures of models did not directly impact my self-confidence, my second-hand contact certainly did. Because if these gorgeous girls who I saw

every day considered themselves ugly, what did that make me?

Worse, what sort of irreparable damage was coming over those girls as they strove to be skinnier, smoother, and shinier?

Teenage girls struggle with body positivity. Whether it’s their face or their hair or the number of inches between their bones and the surface of their skin, they are always able to find something about their appearance that is less than ideal. This isn’t anything new. Insecurities are a part of growing up, right? Except when said insecurities are magnified and exploited by a multi-trillion dollar industry set on tearing these girls down in order to increase profit, it is no longer some trivial rite of passage that will strengthen the girl in the long run. It is alarming, harmful, and unsafe.

“

I was chasing after a look made by girls who were chasing after a look made by computers.

cial brand. Unilever also produces Slim Fast diet bars and Fair & Lovely, a skin-lightening product. It is an irrelevant argument; Dove’s activities are its own, and it has no control over other Unilever companies.

Dissatisfaction also stems from the fact that, at the end of the day, Dove is still trying to sell a product. The Campaign for Real Beauty is just a big marketing ploy to foster good feelings with the brand and therefore increase the amount of consumers who buy Dove. While it is probably true that the campaign is a marketing tactic, at least it is a positive one.

They are promoting their products in a healthy way when they really don’t have to. started the Campaign for Real Beauty and had just digitally altered their models like everyone else, they would still make a profit. It is a refreshing approach.

Dove has been promoting the natural look for a decade now, and in doing so, Dove has paved the way for other companies to start doing the same.

American Eagle’s lingerie brand, Aerie, recently took up the call. Aerie launched its Spring 2014 line with the Aerie Real campaign. The idea is that they will feature real, un-retouched women in their ads. Additionally, the Aerie website offers online shoppers the ability to see what any bra would look like on a model their own size. The pictures are also conspicuously less hyper-sexualized than competitor brand Victoria’s Secret, which is certainly a welcome change of pace.

”

That is why Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty is so important. By featuring women with imperfections, they are sending the message that there is, in fact, more than one definition of beauty.

Unfortunately, Dove’s campaign did not keep everyone satisfied. The campaign has gone under fire more than once. Dove is owned by Unilever, the company that also owns Axe, a misogynized, overly-sexualized commer-

Image courtesy of Dove

Perhaps the most encouraging part of Aerie’s push for natural beauty is that their target demographic is girls aged 15-21. While Dove tries to appeal to a much broader audience, Aerie’s focus on high school and college women is able to deliver the message with a greater impact upon young and impressionable girls.

Of course, the models in the images are still, well, models. They are still conventionally beautiful women who are far from imperfect. Nevertheless, it feels like a victory, albeit a small one, to see a model who actually has a stomach roll or two when she’s sitting down.

There exists a gaping hole in the fashion world. Fortunately, it is labeled, and has already begun to attract attention. Helping women reject the beauty standards set by the industry and instead embrace their natural look is a battle that is just beginning. There are so many more avenues yet to explore. What about women with tattoos or scars? What about women of color celebrating their own cultural beauty? What about women with disabilities? The current movement for the natural look in the fashion world has only barely scratched the surface, but at least a mark has been made.

The rebirth of

Electronic Jazz

by Carly Olszewski Electronic Dance Music, more commonly known as EDM, is a broad title that encompasses an overwhelmingly diverse music genre. Within the EDM dome lie many subgenres of electronic music, such as disco, trap, trance, dubstep, and progressive house, just to name the common few.

However, this past year, a certain style has reemerged known as electronic jazz, or jazz/hip-hop.

You may know of this genre from the popular song “Jubel” by Klingande, but since then, millions of other songs have been released that incorporate a unique jazz/ electronic combination.

Check out MINT Magazine’s Soundcloud for more playlists.

If you like an upbeat, powerful saxophone rhythm s i m i l a r t o “J u b e l , ” t h e n c h e c k o u t t h e s e s o n g s : 1. “Brighter Days (Bootleg)” - Bakermat 2. “Ella” - Wollymammoth 3. “Sometimes” – FlicFlac & the Bizardboys 4. “Hotel California (Steezmonks’ Remix)” – The Eagles 5. “New Orleans” - Naxxos If you like a calmer hip/hop sound created with heavy drums and jazz samples, then try these: 1. “Basin Street Blues (ProleteR)” - Ella Fitzgerald 2. “Chillaxin by the Sea” – Gramatic 3. “Summer Light” – Mr.KiD 4. “Nobody Knows feat. Adam Elmarakby” – This Is Sky 5. “Timber” - Promenade Jazz

Fashion & Art Joint Editorial

By Marin Reeve & Lauren Wegner

W

hat is fashion? For judge Zac Posen of Lifetime’s Project Runway, the question requires little thought, and he whips out his frequently recycled assertion that “fashion is the marriage of art and commerce.” But don’t let his nonchalance and gap-toothed grin fool you! Posen’s signature statement (second only to the renowned “hot mess”) too optimistically paints fashion as the harmonious joining of two extremes. In reality, the tension between a designer’s creative vision and the practical demands of the market fuel a restless debate about fashion’s identity as either an artistic endeavor or a bastardized commodity. If it is indeed a “marriage,” it is far from happy.

Those, like Posen, who believe that fashion maintains artistry even as merchandise may find ammunition in the similarities between fashion houses and fine art studios.

Both have historically produced one-of-a-kind works for high-paying patrons that boast of quality, splendor, and originality, despite their commercial intentions. The businesses of painter Peter-Paul Rubens and fashion designer Charles Worth, for example, evoke a parallel. Rubens headed a successful painting studio in 17th century Antwerp that produced portraits, biblical depictions, and other signature works for commission. Worth, similarly, who rose to prominence in 19th century Paris as the first iconic fashion designer and would eventually become known as the father of haute couture, ran a reputable fashion house that produced custom dresses of superior craftsmanship and exclusive taste for a loyal clientele of rich Parisian women. Though the creations of both bent to the money and thus the taste of a client, they have nonetheless been worthy enough to preside in art galleries.

Even this summer, the Metropolitan Museum of Art acknowledged fashion’svalidity as a creative achievement when its renovated fashion wing presented a spectacular inaugural exhibit entitled “Charles James: Beyond Fashion” that urged the public to perceive fashion as

il ustration by Sarah Wymer

Zac Posen

“fashion is the marraige of art and commerce�

art. James, known as America’s First Couturier, famously reintroduced flamboyancy comparable to that of Dior’s New Look into the female wardrobe after the sartorial asceticism of the inter-war years, and the name of the exhibit referred partially to the novelty of his styles. Across its 4,200 square feet, the exhibit boasted a selection of extravagant gowns, dramatic lighting, and high tech display systems.

Robot arms projected light onto sections of focus, and an iPad in front of each dress virtually stripped the garment from the mannequin. Visitors watched the program pull apart James’ masterpieces to reveal what lie underneath: wires holding up yards of silks and velvets at impossible angles with unlikely methods of draping. Exposed, each piece was presented as a work of mathematical precision and an impressive defiance of traditional fabric manipulation. With the zeal commonly afforded by a great artist, The MET highlighted the creative process of Charles James the architect, engineer, designer, and, ultimately, the artist, pulling out all the stops to stimulate wonder, curiosity, and even envy of the fortunate so-

cialites who once donned such works of skill for more than their monetary value.

The retrospective exhibit of Armani’s workmanship featured at the Guggenheim Museum at the turn of the century; however, it garnered a markedly more hostile reception than that of James’, and it was darkened largely by the fact that Armani was still alive and selling during the show’s debut. While we may appreciate an iconic James gown for its own sake 60 years post-creation, glorification of a brand we may have the opportunity to purchase at our local mall smacks strongly of a camouflaged advertisement. And therein lies the most potent defense for those that condemn fashion as a primarily commercial endeavor— pret-à-porter, or “ready to wear,” styles. For every haute couture look, there exists a watered-down version made for sale. In fact, critics commonly speculate that the former is created to ensure the successful sale of the latter. In devising such a product for mass con-

dresses by Charles James

sumption, both materially reproducible and broadly appealing, much of the organic artistry is corrupted.

Like a Katy Perry song about Friday nights, restrictive jeans, and failed one night stands, contrived to resonate to the social-centric teenager target demographic, ubiquitous knock-off clothing concerns itself less with esteemed critique than it does with profit.

In the face of numerous domestic disputes, the happy “marriage” Posen stipulates may be reached through an understanding of fashion’s diversity. Fashion is neither the vision of a designer nor the purchase of a factory-made garment, but a vast network of transactions between designer, retailer, and consumer, driven equally by the creative whims of powerful individuals and the preferences of the proletariat to which they must inevitably cater. It is the problem and privilege of clothing the body, and every process from mass advertise- ment to custom design. To determine the relationship status between art and commerce within one facet may prove fruitful, but to classify fashion as a whole,even with such an imprecise term as “marriage,” is a gross oversimplification.

ARE MODEL SALARIES TOO HIGH?

BY DIVINE EDEM

Photograph coutesy of Fashion Gone Rogue

“We have this expression… w e d o n’ t w a k e u p for less than $10,000 a day” Linda Evangelista expressed this to Vogue in October 1990 when discussing the new era of the supermodel.

In August 2014, Forbes released its annual ranking of highest earning models within the last 12 months and the numbers were astounding. Gisele Bundchen stole the top spot with a staggering $47 million, which is almost six times the amount of the runner-up, Doutzen Kroes who earned a still superb $8 million. Is the status of being a supermodel worth the numerous multimillion dollar deals distributed amongst the elitist of the elite in the fashion industry?

From the eyes of the models, fashion designers, and retailers, it most certainly is. Nowadays, being a model is more than just booking campaigns and showing up for photo shoots and commercials. It is about building one’s brand into a business that is highly marketable and beneficial for potential employers.

To become a major influence in fashion, one must utilize his or her immense exposure in areas that range from the fashion week runways to the magazines read by millions of people.

Gisele Bundchen is arguably the most recognized and successful model of our time. Her ability to show her prowess in both commercial and couture elements of fashion commands the attention of some of the largest retailers and most notable fashion houses in the world. Bundchen’s association with Ipanema, a shoe company based in Brazil, which includes her own flipflop line, contributes largely to the company’s increasing financial success.

Her shoe line has generated $250 million in revenue, accounting for 63% of the Brazilian company.

From the eyes of the average working-class citizen, supermodels’ salaries are absurd. It is puzzling that one can earn so much money from taking a picture, something millions of people do for Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter for free. People such as teachers, engineers, and doctors who work very demanding jobs that change lives earn between tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars, while supermodels who simply get fitted and walk the runways earn as much as $20,000 per show. From this perspective, it does not seem fair that models earn millions for hitting the jackpot in terms of their highly sought after appearance.

Yes, models put their bodies through physically demanding schedules in terms of fitness, traveling, and work hours. Yes, a model’s career tends to be fairly short-lived in comparison to careers of teachers and doctors. But that should not equate to piling loads of cash into their bank accounts for being part of an industry that consists of much more than just the model.

Models are not the ones who have to work countless hours on all of the elements required for fashion shows, editorial spreads in magazines, and commercials. The people behind the scenes, for example, the bookings editor and creative director, make estimated averages of $105,000 and $191,000, respectively. Even Anna Wintour, the editor-in-chief of American Vogue and one of the most respected icons in fashion, makes $2 million annually. The woman who can essentially make or break the career of a model in this industry does not have a comparable salary. The difference in pay between a high grossing supermodel and a high grossing editor is far too wide.

In the end, money and what a person does with it will always be a matter of personal opinion. Despite the effortless looks displayed in the magazines and runways, models do work hard to perfect an art that faces tough criticism. But the question “are models’ pays too high?” will most likely remain if models continue to be viewed as most essential to the revenue and success of fashion companies.

#NewBloomiesStanford

B

by Karina El Baze Villanueva

loomingdale’s has been a popular attraction at the Stanford Mall since 1996, but the store is looking to make a striking second first impression. Complete with its own hashtag, the reopening aims to bridge the classic New York City essence of Bloomingdale’s flagship store with Stanford’s cutting-edge spirit. As CEO Tony Spring puts it, Bloomingdale’s Stanford is where “technology meets humanity.”

With 125,000 square feet distributed across 3 floors, the new store is significantly more compact than its San Francisco and New York City counterparts. However, the building’s expansive, fully encompassing windows allow the store to almost exclusively use natural light and feel deceivingly spacious. According to Dana Zeldin, store manager, the modest size makes this store one of the easiest Bloomie’s to navigate.

The space is undeniably beautiful. Palo Alto’s vivid greenery serves as an idyllic backdrop for the store’s New York City- inspired black accents. With porcelain pillars, polished cement floors, LED lights, and tasteful modern artwork placed throughout, it is both contemporary and refined.

However, Bloomingdale’s Stanford boasts much more than a convenient structure and revamped aesthetic. The store is fully equipped with tablet technology and an online application, “Tap Into Bloomingdale’s,” designed to mimic the customer’s in-store experience. The home menu lists each apparel, home, and lifestyle category as presented in the store. Every dressing room has its own tablet, allowing customers to call employees, check size availability online, access the full New York City store, and even do a self-check out. Each employee is also empowered with a tablet to facilitate communication between associates and clients. Additionally, each floor hosts 22-inch monitors and 2 extra tablets for customers wandering through the store. #NewBloomiesStanford— the perfect marriage of high-tech and classic. MINT encourages you to check it out for yourself.

1 New Message: You Just Got Hacked

By Elizabeth Cusick

Be

sm

ar

t,

an

d t ak e t he se st ep s t o g ua rd yo ur inf o.

Photography by Jacob Nierenberg

For most of us, having online accounts, social media profiles, and apps on our phones is both common and essential. We enlist Venmo to make paying friends easier, Instagram to flaunt our latest whereabouts, Facebook to stay up to date on other people’slives, and Snapchat to make sure everyone can know what we are doing at all times of the day. We trust our photos, emails, documents, and calendars with a “cloud.” We have formed a dependent relationship with our devices. An obsession with sharing, and a desire for convenience it seems, has replaced the concept of privacy. However, do we ever stop to consider just how much we’re putting out there?

And further, what would happen if our accounts were broken into and all of that information leaked?

Up until a few weeks ago, the idea of hacking had never crossed my mind. I had heard about the 4.6 million leaked Snapchat emails and usernames, yet I continued to sign up for new apps. I willingly gave out my phone number, email, and name, and I often used the same passwords for multiple accounts. I had never stopped to consider the security of any of my information, never mind consider that someone would try to hack into one of my accounts. That is... until it happened.

With the boom in technology, a growth in hacking and cyber attacks have seemed to accompany it. Big corporations like EBay and Target have recently been victims of cyber attacks that not only compromised their businesses, but also put the personal information of millions of their customers at risk. More recently, the iCloud accounts of several celebrities, including Jennifer Lawrence, were broken into, and their (very) personal photos leaked to the world. Cyber attacks, however, are not only reserved for big companies and high profile celebrities, but they can happen to anyone if we’re not careful. So its time to start thinking about just how much information we willingly entrust to the Internet and to our phones, and what we can do to protect it.

Although there are no guarantees when it comes to the online world, there are some things you can do to help amp up your security within it. So stop rolling your eyes at two-step-authentication, and read the following steps to help keep you and your personal information safe.

Tips to Guard Your Information:

hen Stanford started to force its students to use twostep authentication last year, many of us rolled our eyes and complained about its inconvenience. Having to type in your password to get a text message to submit a code just to get into your own email didn’t really seem practical. This extensive process, especially when you forgot your phone and have a paper due in 5 minutes, seemed to cause more harm than good. So why do we have it?

:

W

Don’t put so much out there. Rather than using 1. an app to pay for Starbucks,

paying with cash can be safer.

. Create secure passwords.

Use a combination of let2 ters, numbers, and symbols that have no relation to your life. . Create different passwords for different accounts. If one account gets hacked, your other accounts will still be secure.

3

. If something doesn’t seem secure, and they 4 ask for your phone number,

name, and email, it’s probably not a smart idea. . Be knowledgeable. If there is a breach in the da5 tabase of one of your apps, and you think your information could have been involved in a leak, change your passwords and username.

. Read the security and privacy policies. Yes, 6 reading the security policies

is probably the last thing you want to do, but being aware of how a company manages and protects your information is crucial.

. Use two-step. It can be annoying, but adding 7 an extra layer of security onto

your accounts (especially ones as important as email) is one of the best ways to keep your information protected. . Add a recovery email that can help protect your 8 account in case it gets broken into.

. Sign out of your accounts when you’re done using 9 them. That way, if someone logs into the same device after you, they can’t snoop around.

. Finally, take your security seriously!

10 Anyone can be the victim of a

hack, at any time. Don’t wait around for it to happen to you.

Interview Dont’s 1. Low necklines 2. High hemlines (pro tip: Sit down in your dress when testing for appropriate length!)

Stanford Women in Business, or SWIB, is Stanford University’s premier resource and launch pad for women looking to pursue a career in business. As part of its mission to combat the challenges women face in penetrating the professional world, the organization offers “What to Wear” workshops, where students can gain insight into the dos and don’ts of dressing for success.

Naturally, MINT took some notes for you.

Text by Tess Bloch-Horowitz Edited by Karina El Baze Villanueva Photography by Sharon Lee Modeled by Jessica Ancajas Catherine Goatze Maddie McClung Emily Carrolo Molly Mitchell Ali Eicher Emily Xie Rhiannon Tomtishen Tess Bloch-Horowitz Lizzie Jeffrey

3. Chipped or bright nail polish 4. Tight clothing 5. Anything uncomfortable. The last thing on your mind during an interview should be your outfit.

Business Formal Do’s 1.Knee-length dresses or Blouse/ Skirt combo 2. 1-2 inch pumps 3. Neutral colors 4. Simple jewelry 5.Understated makeup

Coffee Chat Do’s 1. Keep it basic: jeans, flats and a sweater 2. Add some color: print scarves, statement jewelry

Business Casual

tech/startup

Do’s 1.Jeans, preferably dark 2. Silk or chiffon blouse 3. Flat or low shoes 4. Classic sweater or blazer 5. Trendy jewelry

CAREER FAIR Do’s

1. Business casual 2. Clean and pressed clotheslooking put-together is key!

Info session Do’s

1. Tech/startups: business casual tips apply!

2. Finance: throw a blazer on to give you instant polish.

Business Casual FINANCE Do’s

1. Simple dresses

2. Silk blouses and pencil skirts (pro-tip: Feel free to ditch the blazer. Looking relaxed is key) 3. Colored or patterned accents 4. Statement necklaces

Autumn Playlist compiled by Justin Hsuan

In the movie Synechdoche, literature profesor Elke Putzkammer is asked to give her opinion on the beginning of fall. She says, “If the year is a life, then September, the beginning of fall, is when the bloom is off the rose and things start to die.

It’s a melancholy month and maybe because of that, quite beautiful.”

For her, autumn represents a sense of rebirth, a time of new beginnings. I have curated a playlist, with songs from a wide variety of genres, based around the central theme of new beginnings. New beginnings arouse a mixed bag of emotions, spanning from excitement to wonder, anticipation to anxiety, melancholy to desire, and ambition to nostalgia. It is my hope that listening to this playlist will provoke all of these emotions and will provide you with a better understanding of the nuances of the beautiful autumn season.

SONGS Autumn in New York” by Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong “Into the Mystic” by Van Morrison “(Sittin’ On) The Dock Of The Bay” by Otis Redding “Thinkin Bout You” by Frank Ocean “I Got You (I Feel Good)” by James Brown “September” by Earth, Wind, & Fire “New Beat” by Toro Y Moi “Purple Rain” by Prince & The Revolution “Changes” by 2Pac “Pyramids” by Frank Ocean “Girl from the North Country” by Bob Dylan & Johnny Cash “Gravity” by John Mayer “I Left My Heart in San Francisco” by Tony Bennett photography by Ashley Overbeek and Lauren Dyer

Check out this playlist on MINT’s SoundCloud page: https://soundcloud.com/mint-magazine-2/sets/

CHILD MODELS how young is too yo u n g ?

We see them everyday.

Babies giggling and clapping as the cameras zoom in on their experiences with Gerber’s or Pampers. Smiles splatter across commercial catalogues for department stores, such as Macy’s and JC Penney.

For generations, young kids have been displayed on magazine prints and commercials, advertising joyous and upbeat emotions in comfortable clothes. But what happens when it is not only GAP beckoning for those innocent faces? What happens when those once joyous smiles transform into demure, adult expressions?

In 2011, Thylane Blondeau shocked the fashion industry and its consumers when she posed for the editorial spread of “Cadeaux” in Vogue Paris, styled by Tom Ford. It was not the heavy use of makeup and jewelry or the risqué factor garments on display that turned heads. It was the fact that she was ten years old, and yet donning very adult looks, ranging from deep low-cut dresses to topless altogether. As suspected, several critics sent backlash to the magazine for allowing Blondeau to be displayed in this demeanor in as such a young girl. Surprisingly, however, some critics ignored the juxtaposition of a ten-year old posing like she’s a woman, and mainly praised her arrival as the modern Brigette Bardot, the legendary French model.

Fast-forward to March 2014.

Blondeau returned to the fashion world with a bang by landing the

Photography by Andrea Lim

model thylane b lo n deau , ag e 1 0 , poses for cadeau x

photo courtesy of Cadeaux

coveted cover of Jalouse magazine, a trendy French fashion book. The cover was much more toned down compared to her previous work, featuring the young model in very light makeup, a demure expression, and a knit sweater. What stands out on this cover is not that the magazine dubbed her the “new Kate Moss” but the bold hashtag “bornin2001” which makes light of her tender age. This hashtag raised eyebrows because it ignited discussion about the growing use of child models who were directed to model as if they were twice their age.

The influx of young models stems from the idea of becoming the next big celebrity. Modeling careers tend to have very short lifespans. Models are seen as replaceable as soon as the vision of a designer, editor, or photographer changes. Tapping into the very early stages of youth allows fashion houses to mold and develop children in order to assume credit for discovering the next Gisele or Naomi, resulting in more publicity and a better reputation for the brand. From the perspective of the model, the agent, and the modeling agency, starting the career off fairly young results in the prospect of attaining successful careers. The model has a longer period of exposure and more time to utilize the fresh face fashion designers adore and crave.

The recent spike in hiring young models has prompted several organizations to raise awareness about the dangers of entering the modeling industry at such a young age. The CFDA announced in 2012 a stricter guideline that recommends designers not hire models under the age of 16. The CFDA places this guideline under its Health Initiative project which aims to prevent potential eating disorders and unhealthy body practices.

The Model Alliance, an organization that promotes the rights of American models, succeeded in passing the Child Model Act which includes child models under the list of “child performers” for the State of New York’s labor laws. These laws place restrictions on designers, setting standards for the number of hours young models can work. They also work to improve the development of young models through initiatives such as allowing educational tutors on set.

In the real world, there is such a thing as too young. But let’s face it; the modeling sector of the fashion industry is based far from reality. Acknowledging limits on age would result in designers and casting directors reexamining and revising what the industry currently thrives on. In their eyes, it is the loss of unattainably thin body frames, the loss of big bright, innocent eyes, and most importantly, the loss of what is now the majorly exclusive “look” of fashion.

On

Sartorial Identity, Gendered Clothing, and

Cargo Shorts

with

Sarah Evans who wore the same Little Wool Dress for an entire school year

Marin Reeve (MR): First, do you want to tell me the story—Why you decided to wear the same dress for a year and what that entailed?

Sarah Evans (SE): I’ve always had a complicated relationship with clothes, because I like them a lot. I notice clothing, and I find certain kinds of clothing really aesthetically pleasing. Since I was little, I used to design clothing in my head. I would usually use a large portion of my allowance on clothing.

Eventually, this was something that I became really uncomfortable with, especially when I was a freshman and sophomore learning about the impact of clothes on the environment and the social issues that surround clothing.

The first couple years of college, there’s a lot of pressure to present yourself in different ways. I was exhausted from all of that by the middle of sophomore year, especially because I was in computer science. There was a lot of implicit pressure to dress like a man, but then there was also pressure from other places to be an attractive woman. So I was just like, f*ck it, I’m going to wear the same thing every day! And it worked surprisingly well.

I got a wool dress from Ibex. It didn’t smell a lot. I would wash it maybe once a week. In the wintertime I wore it with more underclothes, and in the summer I just wore that.

MR: Did you put energy into accessories, or were you set on practicality and getting your mind off of outfit crafting?

SE: It was inevitable that I still crafted outfits.

There was this one light purple turtleneck that I thought looked good underneath this dress. But it gave me a way of narrowing the

Photography by Ashley Overbeek

photo by Ashley Overbeek

MR: How did people react?

SE: I was actually just talking to a fairly close friend who didn’t notice until Spring quarter. Most people don’t see you every day, so they’re like, oh, she just wears that a lot, or maybe she has two of them. And if you wear different shirts, you can definitely throw off at least guys. I had zero people in eight months ask me, do you wear the same thing every day? Reeve: Why did you stop? Evans: It got warm. I started in the summertime, but I was still super gung-ho, so the warm was okay. Wearing the same thing every day stabilized my sense of self in a very funny way. It pulled a lot of my self-awareness inwards and helped me develop more of a core sense of self that was separate from what I was wearing. Once I strengthened that, then I started wearing other clothing.

MR: What’s your relationship with clothes now?

SE: I’ve always had an affinity for uniforms. When I was in third grade, I spent all my clothes money on five matching skort and t-shirts that were lime green. So I think that my relationship with clothing is characterized by pendulum swings between asceticism and reveling in feminine flamboyancy. I’m closer to the middle now. I’m going through a phase where I always wear cargo shorts, even under skirts, because I had a purse stolen recently.

It really bothers me that when I look at men wearing clothing, even if they’re super gender-fluid, clothing on men always looks natural to me. It looks functional. Their pockets work. It’s higher quality. I feel like men are almost never found in clothes they’re uncomfortable with, whereas it’s very often you see women wearing short shorts because they wanted to feel sexy.

Women’s clothing doesn’t seem native to their bodies. So when I got my purse stolen, I was like, f*ck this sh*t, I’m always going to wear cargo pants.

I’m always going to have what I need in a convenient way. I’m doing it right now. I learned how to sew over the summer. I was thinking about putting a reinforced strip on the inside of a skirt that ends at the outer thigh where you can have a hidden zipper pocket.

MR: Would you recommend your dress project to someone else?

SE: That would be a weird thing to recommend, because people’s relationships with clothing are very different. For me, a lot of the first two years of college was trying to develop past adolescent self-awareness, and it definitely helped me deal with that. It was also empowering to not be obsessive about weird cleanliness standards that we have. I’ve stopped washing my hair with shampoo, which is a really popular thing on the Internet, but I think it’s empowering to occasionally do weird self-maintenance things and figure out that it’s actually okay not to follow the rules.

“people’s relationships with clothing are very different”

bandwidth for that kind of thought, because there weren’t as many options.

They mined us like coal from a quarry of hopeful souls Cupped us in hand like silly putty And promised to make gems of us.

They fitted our minds for pinstriped futures.Glued a golden chisel to our palms and Told us to carve success out of test scores They spoon-fed us Scantron sheets Until we tested positive for six figures because turning potential into product Is like turning coal into diamonds: All you need is time and pressure.

A schedule can look like a straitjacket if you Wrap yourself tightly enough in it.

But we are the stones that refused the builder.

We swallow textbook pages and spit out paper cranes.

When we touch type until the ability To Feel abandons our fingertips And we forget what it feels like to touch We remember That we are more than fallen leaves on November’s pavement; Slaves to the season free-riding on a lazy breeze We are more than battery-operated Success stories with safety-pinned smiles.

The vocabulary of our inspiration can’t be Found in the glossary of a textbook Our minds move in rhythms that Snap the strings of that hang from our curricula And our laughter stains the air a shade of Gold no alchemist could impersonate Because our breath is an interruption That makes a mockery of monotony.

We are living reminders That if it’s not imperfect It’s probably not poetry.

Text by Tucker Bryant Photography by Sydney Maples Modeled by Megan Good