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 ar- gument is valid, Kloeppel’s article is unsuccessful as a web- text because of it’s disorganization, lack of interactive ele- ments, 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 rhe- torical 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 com- ponent 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 success- ful 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 me- dium as Kloeppel, making cohesive the demands pre- sented 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 suc- cess 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 re- garding 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. ). 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, , Arthur Elgort, and , and by confirming the positions of Helmut Newton, Bruce Weber, Herb Ritts, and the legendary , 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. Wintour takes the pages of Vogue and turns them into her runway for celebrity events in the community. In this article, Kloeppel has focused on two events/ philanthropic encounters that Wintour is involved in, the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute Gala and the Council of Fash- ion Designers of America. Kloeppel did a great job of explaining the importance that Wintour has had on the New York City community and the influence she has had over the people that she associates her celebrity with. Wintour is estab- lished in a light of almost the top of the hierarchy in the fashion world with her co-celebrities being beneath her which in a way could be seen as being true. Wintour is an icon not to be reckoned with just as Vogue is an icon which leads into why Kloeppel showed Wintour in the light that she did. The philanthropic events that Wintour associates herself with is shown not only for her own celebrity but also for the other celebrities that attend these events and that are involved in the events. Kloeppel did a great job telling the reader about who Wintour associates herself with and why she associates her- self with those celebrities, to make her own celebrity better but Kloeppel could have done a better job at showing the

When the two events were being spoken about, it would have been more appealing to have Kloeppel show the reader what it was like to be at those events with Wintour, almost as if to make the reader a celebrity them self. This could have been achieved with videos from the events or more pictures to draw the reader in closer to who Wintour really is and how she cares so deeply for the organizations she is involved with. Kloeppel has assumed that the reader already knew about the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute Gala and the Council of Fashion Designers of America. Kloeppel does a nice job of shining the light on how Wintour possess the essence of Vogue in everything she does by choosing celebrity-centric philanthropic involve- ment because of the potential they have for promoting important matters and maintaining everything that Vogue is about. In the section of the article, Kloep- Politics en Vogue pel continues to discuss

Wintour’s celebrity-focused rhetoric, only in this case she does so in terms of Wintour’s influence in the sphere of politics. Kloeppel cites the “Letter from the Editor” section of the magazine as the primary means through which Wintour exercises her status to promote one candidate or the other, but she also uses her power as editor to promote certain people by featuring them more prominently in the magazine, whether through highlighting certain articles, or by including larger pictures of some figures more than others.

Wintour seems the recognize that Vogue isn’t the public’s main source of infor- mation on politics or politicians, but Kloeppel suggests that Wintour’s asso- ciation with politics, even as the editor of a fashion magazine, cements her status as a celebrity in her own right.

Hillary Clinton was even on the cover of the De- cember 1998 issue of the magazine.

Kloeppel cites one letter in which Wintour mentions how the magazine has featured many women from the political scene, and points out the photographers and staff that cre- ated the article about them. By mentioning the political celebrities alongside the photogra- phers Wintour has personally selected to cap- ture them, Kloeppel points out how Wintour is fusing the world of fashion with the world of politics, and suggesting that her own status at the top of the fashion world translates to political power as well.

http://www.vogue.com/magazine/article/jill-bidenbrall-the-vice-presidents-women/

Kloeppel’s focus on Wintour’s rhetorical strategies that allow her to combine the two worlds and simultaneously raise her celebrity status is valuable as a statement on the concept of the celebrity in American culture today. How the Aesthetics of the article by Kloeppel worked or did not work.

Having workable aesthetics in every a project is a key to making every- thing flow and work together as it should. A review of the aesthetics of Kloeppels review was necessary as it played a large role in the presenta- tion of the information about Anna Wintour. Kloeppel has established a key look that is present in many of her sections but more multimedia related presentations on other sections.

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR This section‟s title page represents the introduction to the article, as if one were actually opening the first page to Vogue itself. Interestingly, the page opens backwards, as if the reader is being set up to investigate the relationship between Anna Wintour, Vogue, and the public eye from an alternative, more analytical perspective. This animation solidifies the notion that this article will investigate rhetoric based in the most influen- tial of all fashion publications. CELEBRITY AS RHETORIC The opening animation for this section of the publication is particularly echoic of the themes detailed in the writ- ten section itself. The opener shows the famously sunglassed Wintour moving rigidly down the red carpet, as if it were of second nature to her. An artistic interpretation/sketch of paparazzi blurs the background and draws full attention to Wintour‟s animated self and the red carpet, rep- resentative of her famous Vogue platform.

POLITICS EN VOGUE Visually, this section‟s title is on a page featuring Anna at a po- dium, flanked on either side by symbols of the democratic and republican parties. This picture places Wintour in the position of the politician, and while the article doesn‟t suggest that she has any political aspirations, it does argue that she sees herself, and rhetorically represents herself, as a politician‟s equal, in terms of both influence and celebrity status. On the page that contains the article, there are only two photos, one of and one of . In the article, Kloeppel describes the prefer- ential treatment Wintour gives to those associated with the POPULAR PHILANTHROPY Democratic party, and interestingly, Kloeppel makes the The opener for the “Popular Philanthropy” section exhib- same editorial choice, choosing to feature two female politi- cal celebrities, both Democrats. I‟m not sure if Kloeppel is its Wintour‟s classic „poker face‟, the personality of her making a political statement herself, or if she is simply mir- mysterious personality. Like all other sections, illustrated roring what Wintour did in the magazine. Either way, in red with several tones from the grayscale, this section Kloeppel is aligning her article with Wintour‟s magazine, showcases media‟s traditional color schemes (i.e. early newspapers or periodicals). The opener illustrates which is furthered by the article‟s overall tabloid design scheme. Wintour‟s famously undistinguishable facial expression In conclusion, Kloeppel ends rather poetically: “It’s not what you say. It’s not even how you say it. Perhaps it is who you say it with that matters most in our celebrity-obsessed culture.” The text itself ends on a high note, but, visually, Kloeppel flops. The goal of this review was to create a web text that successfully communicates Kloeppel’s argument. Kloeppel’s well-documented references qualify “Anna Wintour: The Truth Behind the Bob” as scholarly writing. Kloeppel’s web text is strengthened by her multi-media sources; her works cited includes YouTube videos, articles, and books to make her argument.

Works Cited

“Anna Wintour.” Photograph. Haute News. Haute and the City, 24 December 2010. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour and Daughter at .” Photograph. Reiss Fashion, March 2011. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour and David Letterman.” Photograph. Fashion. , 25 August 2009. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour: Diet, Exercise, and Fashion Style!” diet-weight-lose.com. Diet- Weight-Lose. 2011. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour and .” Photogragh. Style. The Frisky, 4 May 2009. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour in Zebra Jacket.” Photograph. Fashion. BionicBong, 29 April 2011. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna Wintour on the Telephone.” Photograph. Anna Wintour. Irispancy, 1 September 2009. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Anna’s Army.” 26.media.tumblr.com. tumblr, n.d. Web. 13 November 2011.

CFDA. CFDA Poster. 2011. New York City. WWD. Web. 13 November 2011.

Elgort, Arthur. All the Vice-President’s Women. 2008. Vogue. Web. 13 November 2011.

“Fashion’s Night Out.” Photograph. Fashion’s Night Out. Fashion Rules, 02 December 2010. Web. 13 November 2011.

Kloeppel, Tara. “Anna Wintour: The Truth Behind the Bob.” Kairos 16.1 (Fall 2011) n. pag. Web. 10 November 2011.

Leibovitz, Annie. The Extraordinary Hillary Clinton. 1998. Vogue. Web. 13 November 2011.

Leibovitz, Anna. Splendor in the Grass. Vogue June 2009.

Meisel, Steven. Patterns. December 2007.

NYC & Company. Vogue and CFDA: Poster. 2009. New York City. Creativity-Online. Web. 13 November 2011.

Ritts, Herb. “Helena, Claudia, Naomi, Christy & Stephanie.” Vogue April 1993.

Roadside Attractions. Poster. 2009. Wikipedia. Web. 13 November 2011.