Anna Wintour: the Truth Behind the Bob

Katie Coon Marisa Kurtz Tyler Goodson Christina Karem Anna Wintour: The Truth Behind the Bob Kloeppel’s original article—Anna Table of Contents Wintour: The Truth Behind The Bob Pg 3: Letter from The Editor Pg 4: Celebrity as Rhetoric Pg 5: Language of Fashion Pg 6: Popular Philanthropy Pg 7: Politics en Vogue Pg 8: Aesthetics Pg 9: Conclusion Pg 10: Works Cited THESIS Kloeppel’s article outlines how Anna Wintour uses celebrity driven rhetoric to further her own celebrity, and while her argument is valid, Kloeppel’s article is unsuccessful as a webtext because of it’s disorganization, lack of interactive elements, and it’s navigation difficulties. Letter from the Editor “Letter From The Editor” serves as more than just a premise upon which to introduce the work of the author. The “Letter From The Editor”—where the author’s professor explains and examines the academic environment in which her students completed scholastically rigorous course projects, where she illuminates the highly successful outcome of her student’s rhetorical and multimedia skills through the outcome of such projects, broad- casting Tara Kloeppel (the author of the piece to follow) as exemplary of such. The “Letter From The Editor” serves not only to promote authorial credibility (as it does successfully), but also to present an important component of the medium, a component at the heart of her student’s argument, the editorial letter present in every successful magazine. As the “Letter” begins, Greer—the author of the introduction and professor of Women in the Nineteenth Century at UMKC—jumps right into the pool of credibility and makes a “Wow” worthy splash as soon as the article begins. Greer does this by presenting the demanding academic designations of her course. Greer presents well-shined aspects of her students course work, including struggles en- countered, furthering Greer’s reader trust as she presents honest sharings. Greer gives the reader a snap shot of her teaching environ- Using a highly knowledge- ment, which the reader finds impressive and idyllic. Greer able experienced and in- establishes, through means of the course description, that formed voice, Greer pre- this article will not only pinpoint a woman in westernized society who has sents her editorial letter as garnered public the thematic of Vogue respect through means of successful rhetorical skills, but that the author (Kloeppel) will exercise her own rhetorical skills to prove so. By the end of the first paragraph, Greer has already provided two key evaluations for which she wishes the reader to evalu- ate her rhetorical success (i.e. a meaningful example of a “woman rhetor” + rhetorical and persuasive skills). Greer presents her foreword through the same multimedia medium as Kloeppel, making cohesive the demands presented in her introduction as successful components of her predecessor. Greer’s “Letter From The Editor” sets the tone for the article to come; it provides the reader with a lens of high scrutiny upon which to examine her student’s argument. By doing so, Greer not only reinforces the success of Kloeppel’s rhetoric, but exemplifies the “cyclical” relationship present in her student’s article. Just as Kloeppel adheres to and ex- ceeds beyond the requirements of Greer’s course, her success in doing so reinforces her credibility and the impor- tance of such rhetorical elements, exemplifying the same support-structured cycle that appears in her argument regarding Wintour, her rhetorical success, and her celebratory power. Sincerely, Christina Tyler Marisa Katie The main purpose of Celebrity as Rhetoric is to introduce the readers to component through which the author will uncover to back up her larger argument. Specifically, the author seeks to inform the reader of why and how Wintour uses her “celebrity” to gain credibility as the editor of Vogue. The author establishes the claim that just as Wintour is the face of Vogue, Vogue is, in turn, the face—or identity of—Wintour herself. This dual-identity establishes credibility for one just as much as the other. This influential relationship generates popularity alongside refined credibility in the eyes of the media and in the public eye for both entities alike. The author attends to her audience by using persuasive, informal academic writing—the same style of writing presented in vogue—creating her own highly distinguishable and assertive voice, as Wintour does, through which to relay her argument. The author incorporates the voices of other distinguishable individuals enlightened in the idea of the celebrity. Essentially, the author does so to back-up her argument, thereby gaining reader support and establishing ethos, just as she argues Wintour does as her means of success as a fashion icon. The author is well aware that her readers will recognize the name “Wintour,” an example of logos fortified by her incorporation of quotes. For example, the author calls Wintour a “household name,” also utilizing this logical statement to set Wintour apart from other magazine editors in the fashion world who, she claims, “are far from” such celebrity recognition. The author—through an informative, knowledgeable, and highly distinguishable voice—engages in conversation with established pop writers and, through her rhetoric, reads as if she were is of the same scholastic recognition as they, who are common commentators in celebrity affairs. The author uses the idea of celebrity (i.e. that of Wintour’s) to discuss the “changing face of ethos-based rhetoric”. The author enlivens cultural issues, such as the influence of fashion, and links such trends to the dominant voice of Wintour, establishing the “cyclical” relationship that exists between Vogue, Wintour, and the public eye. The author, however, does not address any opposing views or objections The author enlivens cultural issues, regarding this argument, which one might argue is biased. such as the influence of fashion, and For the author’s purposes, the immense fame and links such trends to the dominant popularity of the icon who is Wintour is already public knowledge, as is the mass influence shed by her rhetoric voice of Wintour, establishing the in Vogue. Stating the other side of the argument might “cyclical” relationship that exists underscore the author’s credibility, as there no argument between Vogue, Wintour, and the or point-of-view with the potential of de-celebritizing public eye. Wintour or undermining her mass influence. The author sets up the presentation of her text on the page as if it were written in Vogue, or any other pinnacle of rhetorical presentation (i.e. The New York Times). By doing so, the author reinforces her ethos by recognizing the form in which Wintour’s rhetorical celebrity unfolds. Because the author’s text is presented in a multi-media form (the same virtual form utilized by the majority of recognizable modern publications in addition to their printed form), the appearance of the virtual medium establishes the rhetoric as worthy of intellectual consideration, as it appears in a highly accredited academic journal. The visual metaphor that accompanies the author’s Celebrity as Rhetoric is a means of presenting the commonplace between ink (or rhetoric) and Hollywood (the celebrity). Finally, the author’s ‘word-shot’, appearing medias-res in the first paragraph, not only presents the how of Wintour’s rhetorical success, but sets herself up to explain why. As a web text, the Language of Fashion does not function effectively. I would have liked to see Kloeppel incorporate images or links to these Vogue contributors so that users could explore the strengths of the magazine. For all of Kloeppel’s logical strengths, her webtext is mostly just text. New media writers need to capture attention-deficit users with interactivity. Kloeppel’s groundbreaking ideas are literally lost in a sea of almost unreadable size eight font. Therefore, we have formatted our reviews to demonstrate the effectiveness an interactive web text. The main purpose of this journal section is to argue for Wintour’s place as the pinnacle of editorial fashion. Kloeppel argues, as editor-in-chief, Wintour established Vogue (http://www.vogue.com/magazine/) as the “it place.” Kloeppel’s use of citations legitimizes her argument. For example, “Alberta Olivia and Norberto Angeletti describe Wintour’s approach in In Vogue: The Illustrated History of the World’s Most Famous Fashion: By hiring photographers of the caliber of Annie Leibovitz, Steven Meisel, Arthur Elgort, and Patrick Demarchelier, and by confirming the positions of Helmut Newton, Bruce Weber, Herb Ritts, and the legendary Irving Penn, the Wintour team transformed the pages of Vogue into a cavalcade of art, originality, and sophistication, and the magazine itself into not only an inspirational but also an educational entity. (258)” Describing Wintour among these other fashion greats allows Kloeppel to establish her idea of celebrity. Thus, Kloeppel persuades readers that Wintour blurs the line between her professional and personal life creating a perpetual cycle of celebrity. Kloeppel expects the reader to have a basic understanding of the fashion industry even if they do not recognize some high profile names. In this way, Kloeppel does not have to elaborate on Wintour’s basic responsibilities in the magazine. Vogue’s collections, fashion, culture, and parties are implied. The author even includes Barbara Walter’s interview naming Wintour as the Most Fascinating Person on 2006. By citing so many legendary names, quotes, and occupations, Kloeppel transforms any previous reader knowledge about Wintour through her textual argument. Unfortunately, a strong textual argument is not the most important ingredient in a successful web text. Popular Philanthropy Kloeppel has shown Wintour in a new light in the Popular Philan- thropy section of her article on Anna Wintour. Kloeppel has given Wintour the image of someone that has gone beyond the pages of Vogue and into the community.

Load more