The Sunday Times piece on Rachel Zoe has already gotten loads of attention from reporters - probably because in it, Rachel claims she's "more influential" than Anna Wintour. We thought it was more interesting that writer Lynn Hirschberg wrote, point blank, that Harvey Weinstein asked girls in his movies to wear Marchesa. Anyway, some may see Rachel Zoe as arrogant or delusional, while others note in most ways, she's absolutely right. But what hasn't been mentioned yet is that this Sunday, in another magazine supplement, Anna Wintour talks back. In yesterday's Telegraph Fashion Supplement, the Vogue editor writes about the unique job of a stylist, and notes, "Although I was for years a fashion sittings editor, I was never particularly good at it. Which is not to say that I was untalented, but that I was always conscious that there existed, high in the stratosphere, stylists whose gifts I simply did not have... you cannot be taught how to be a great fashion editor. Either you've got it or you haven't." Whether Anna thinks that Rachel has "it" isn't stated in the piece, but let's remember, she did commission Marina Rust to do a three page feature on the stylist last year. Also worth nothing from the Telegraph's Anna essay: "One thing that strikes me is the degree to which the fashion editor's visual perspective is governed by his or her earliest years... so although fashion is completely implicated in the transitory - clothes are here today, gone tomorrow... in a great stylist is a deep pool of memory and longing. It's down there that the extraordinary images swim from." Amazing and sad, if true.
The Sunday Times piece on Rachel Zoe has already gotten loads of attention from reporters - probably because in it, Rachel claims she's "more influen