Mags: UK Vogue – ageing gracefully, thank you

My mind is prematurely ageing – thanks to Sex and the City The Movie, books like Helena Frith Powell's To Hell in High Heels: how to age gracefully, disgracefully or not at all, Nora Ephron's I Feel Bad About My Neck and Maggie Alderson's Gravity Sucks, Hillary Clinton running for president, the return of the 90s supermodel and a bunch of magazine editorial dedicated to helping older women merge gracefully, stylishly and wrinkle-free into their 40s, 50s and 60s (journalist Pamela Robson has written a series of little books on looking good as you pass through each decade, but more on those in a future post), I currently have the mentality of a 47-year-old. I am 27.

At this point, anyone over the age of 27 has permission to throw something at their computer screens. I don't have to read this stuff, after all. But it's hard not to get caught up in the world of ageing when you're being visually assaulted at every page turn and glossy cover. Really, this is a good sign. For so long (since at least the '60s) the world has bowed down to youth like it had earned respect, fuelled by the cash-hungry global marketing machine that invented a whole new demographic (the 'tween') to better cater for the wants, needs and spending habits of the trend-conscious young and their (perhaps overstated) persuasive ability to influence mum and dad purchases.

And now, while Gen X is heavily pregnant, balancing the demands of corporate and home life, the baby boomers are happily reaching retirement age, their savings and super funds and homes insurance against the poverty their elderly predecessors have been stricken with (to the point where you can sponsor an elderly person like you would an African child). And they are spending big, and running big business, and editing magazines. As a result, or maybe because we just got tired of seeing Lindsay Lohan’s face, never have older women been more relevant or visible or celebrated.

This month's UK Vogue, superbly edited by Alexandra Shulman, who is fast becoming one of my favourite editors, so refreshing is her down-to-earth, transparent and self deprecating attitude in the fickle world of fashion, is devoted to 'ageless style'. The magazine has succeeded in bringing together a group of women for whom style is in the genes representing all age groups – from 18-year-old model Jourdan Dunn to Margaret Thatcher, 82. It's the kind of issue you will relish, such is the delicacy and refinement with which the topic is handled. The visuals are stunning (as are the women) and the editorial lyrical and poignant, with a diversity of voices (young and old) and an essential message of female empowerment through fashion (though, being Vogue, we are given certain sartorial rules to stick to, such as in the ‘Forever in blue jeans’ denim feature).

As ageing and style are such subjective concepts, Vogue offers us a range of women to whom we might relate (of course, they are of a certain privileged caste). To that end, there are several first-person features this issue, with each woman offering insight into a time in her life when she experienced a sartorial awakening of sorts.

Kapka Kassabova writes about how the falling of the Berlin wall led to her first true shopping experience (a real novelty at age 16) but concedes that despite the material deprivation that marked her childhood, her parents’ love was the ultimate luxury. Polly Devlin, 67, talks about leaving the English countryside to take a job in New York City, when her sartorial standards, and self confidence, changed dramatically (for the better, it seems).

Sarah Harris writes about denim and why a woman need never give it up (such is the diversity of styles and washes available now); Linda Grant takes us back to 1968, when she was a wayward schoolgirl and fashion marked a time of change and Jean Shrimpton was a style icon; fashion editor Lisa Armstrong relates her experience of working in a world where what you wear is paramount in ‘Perfect Pitch’ and talks to several other fashiony types about their thoughts on fashion, taste and style and maintaining a certain level of sartorial credibility (I love this line: “But yikes, you have to know what you’re doing to fool around, particularly once you reach the mystical point of being a grown-up (roughly speaking, that’s when your daughters or your friends’ daughters hit their teens)”); Chloe Fox talks to Mary Quant, Bella Pollen and Amy Molyneaux, designers from three different generations, about partying and branding; Candida Lycett Green gives us a comprehensive four-page feature about lace; and Jan Masters writes about beauty treatments in ‘The guinea pig generation’ (one of the better features I’ve read on the topic of ageing so far).

Perhaps my favourite feature this issue, for its inherent pearls of wisdom and wit, is by editor Alexandra Shulman. Over four or so pages, she recounts her experience of fashion and passion for shopping, using her 50th birthday as her starting point. “My wardrobe has never, not even now, after 16 years as editor of Vogue, been dictated by fashion,” she writes. “If fashion has what I like to wear on offer during any particular season, I will be the first person to rush towards it. If not, we part company, amicably.” She talks about her ‘flirtations’ with various trends but says she always returns to her default look: “While it’s important not to get stuck in a rut as the years pass, there is normally a continuum of style in the women I deem most stylish.” On ageing she says: “I don’t want to engage in a constant battle against the forces of time… You can’t win a battle against time… Instead, I choose to channel that energy into other areas of my life – friendship, motherhood, sex, work, the house.” How refreshing. But she’s a realist: “It’s a huge help to have been nice-looking but never very beautiful. I also think it’s an advantage to have always had a pretty dodgy figure… For those whose identities are completely bound up in their good looks, the diminution is terrifying.” As we know, she detests Botox and fillers but feels differently about using clothes to stay young (“I don’t want my wardrobe to become my business – I still want it to be my playground”), though concedes “the insecurity about whether you are heading into mutton-alert territory hovers determinedly.” She favours comfort, Marni, Betty Jackson, Gap and Burberry, but is also given to “Friday-lunchtime treats” at Topshop, and says her new devotion to finding and buying the right underwear is what’s changed with the passing of time. She concludes: “At some point we all think that we lose the person that we were when younger and become somebody old. But we don’t, and our clothes, and the pleasure we take in them, should reflect that.” Ahh.

I’ve never found cover model Uma Thurman, 38, particularly relatable, though she comes across as endearing and fragile, almost childlike in her vulnerability and indecision, in Luke Janklow’s profile. As so many celebrity profiles are prone to do, we are led into their conversation with a paragraph in praise of Thurman’s eating habits: “Uma eats. She eats with gusto…” we are told, before the Hollywood-ness kicks in: she’s been fasting. I too would be ravenous and chow down on pasta, salad and cookies with abandon over lunch (“a woman who eats with passion”)! Uma is praised for her effortless style, which she describes as “utility survival”, her “ethereal, otherworldly beauty” and the “masculine component to her femininity”. She says growing up makes her feel more immature, exercise is a stumbling block (she’s not a fan) and though she is “clearly happy” with new beau Arki Busson (he likes ‘em tall and leggy), it took her four years to get over her marriage breakup.

Other profile pieces include ‘Soul Kitten’, devoted to diminutive British songstress Duffy (“pretty and perky with Bambi eyes and a Bardot pile of blonde hair”), who has led quite the interesting life (no overnight sensation is she: the kid did it tough); ‘Tempered Steel’, through which we get to know Maggie Thatcher, now 82, and her friend/confidant/dresser of 30 years Mrs Crawford, with a focus, of course, on her relationship with fashion; ‘A woman’s touch’, a profile of Valentino creative director Alessandra Facchinetti (divine); ‘Force Field’ introduces us to Lynn Forester de Rothschild (a formidable force in business); and several smaller style pieces through which we meet model Jourdan Dunn, Tricia Jones (of i-D magazine), actress Rebecca Hall, MA student Anne-Laure Zevi and Sisley VP Isabelle d’Ornano.

The truth is, at any age, the fashion choices (and mistakes) we make is one of the clear indicators of how we’re feeling about ourselves and where we’re at in life (a daily wardrobe of tracksuits and uggs = not a good sign, a la Britney Spears).

I’m off to embalm this edition for future reference.

Overall excitement factor: 9/10
Feel-good factor: 7/8
Eye candy rating: 5

The Stats
Issue: July 2008
Book size: 210 pages
Inside front: BMW
Back: Cartier
FOB ads: Chanel, Estee Lauder Re-Nutriv, Dior, Dolce & Gabbana, Tiffany & Co.
Editor: Alexandra Shulman
Publisher: Conde Nast
Website: www.vogue.uk

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Book Shelf: Pretty Is What Changes

I read Jessica Queller's compelling, bitter-sweet memoir, Pretty Is What Changes ($29.95; Vintage), in three consecutive sittings, in the same time it would take to watch, maybe, eight episodes of Sex and the City, devouring each chapter with equal devotion.

Queller's contemplative, often witty writing style could be compared to Carrie Bradshaw's (Queller is a real-life New York writer, who's worked on Gilmore Girls, Felicity, One Tree Hill and, more recently, Gossip Girl). Queller, too, is single in the city – at one stage hooking up with a fellow writer (hello, Jack Berger) – who has a formidable group of girlfriends and, of course, the proverbial gay friend. Only, in the non-fiction world of Queller, family – more particularly, her relationship with her mother and sister – is intrinsic to her life, with a bit of good-man hunting on the side, hastened by Queller's determination to have children before saying farewell to her ovaries...

The book begins with Queller sharing the news of her positive diagnosis for the cancer-causing gene BRCA-1 with her co-writer friend on Gilmore Girls. We then journey back three years to the death of her grandmother, Harriette, and the beginning of her glamorous mother's taxing battles with both breast and ovarian cancer. Queller paints herself as a privileged, cerebral, Jewish American girl who rails against her mother's materialism, shallowness and trivial vanities, symbolically changing her name from 'Tiffany' ("my powder-puff name") to the more acceptable 'Jessica', before the Big C strikes and their complex relationship is turned on its head (she later comes to appreciate her mother's fondness for Jimmy Choos, her unrelenting beauty regime and determination to hold onto her hair). To say Queller and her younger sister, Danielle, rallied around their mother in her time of need is an understatement: they were utterly committed to being by her bedside (and sharing her bed) until the bitter end. This daughterly devotion both humbled me and gave me insatiable mummy-cravings (thank God we're scheduled to spend time together this week!).

For me, the most compelling part of the book is the mother/daughter/sister/daddy dynamic (her parents divorced but Queller's father remained devoted to her mother) in the initial chapters, before cancer takes her mother's life and her own biomedical quest begins. The intimate moments they share and the insights into her mother's character are heart-warming – in a fuzzy Gilmore Girls kind of way – and reflective of the power, and necessity, of female friendship, as well as bloodline bonds.

As the story goes, after her mother's death, Queller opts to take a test for a BRCA mutation – a genetic marker for breast and ovarian cancer. The test results come back positive, much to her surprise, giving her an 87 per cent chance of developing breast cancer and 44 per cent chance of contracting ovarian cancer. She literally buries her results in her desk draw for three months before friends urge her to come out of her denial and take control of the situation. With such damning knowledge, what does one do? Her options are vigilant regular screenings, living with the ominous knowledge that cancer could come at any time, or a controversial prophylactic double mastectomy, which she fears, as a single 35-year-old woman, will dramatically reduce her chances of finding a man to settle down with.

What follows is an emotionally and ethically challenging journey, peppered with visits to various surgeons (of varying integrity and humanity), networking with fellow BRCA-positive women, consultations with family, friends and acquaintances and short-lived romantic flings (she also returns to the comforting arms of an ex – as we do!). She develops some deep new friendships (trying situations have a tendency to create such bonds) and throws herself into cancer research after a friend offers her the opportunity to write about BRCA for the New York Times – an Op-Ed piece which becomes the precursor for the book, an incentive to get moving on the elective surgery front and sees her become the poster-girl for genetic testing/optional preventative mastectomy.

Queller's decision to have her breasts removed despite no cancerous diagnosis poses many ethical questions. Many view the surgery as an extreme and unnecessary measure; others would think a gal silly to have the knowledge and not act to prevent cancer. Queller becomes well versed in the medical and moralistic discourse (she comes to rely on the message boards on the FORCE – Facing Our Risk Of Cancer Empowered – website), submerging herself in the issue and intricacies of the surgery and cancer treatment to the point of emotional and mental exhaustion (TMI – too much information is an all-too common modern-life ailment, no?). It is with a moment of clarity that she finally resolves to have the surgery and a post-op re-construction (she chooses to downsize her large boobs to a B cup from a D cup).

In her closing chapter, Queller refers to how the creators of Sex and the City wrote and shot three different endings to the series: "Millions of women around the country watched with vicarious pleasure as Carrie got her fairy-tale ending – the unobtainable rogue prince Mr Big gallops into Paris crying mea culpa and asks her to live with him happily ever after. Others were disgruntled with the finale. Anyone who had invested years in following the travails of Carrie and Mr Big knew that they'd never really just waltz off into the sunset. One of the reasons Sex and the City had struck a chord with its audience was that it had managed to capture the complexities of modern dating life with an emotional veracity (even if glamorized by money and designer clothes)."

Though there is no neat, happy ending or prince who sweeps her off her feet, gleefully impregnating Queller before the page numbers are up (oops, spoiler), Pretty Is What Changes is a rather glamorous, middle-class account of one woman's experience of cancer (I mean, Queller is beautiful – as was her mother and is her sister – counts Calista Flockhart amongst her best friends, has written for some of TV's best women's dramadies and spends time flitting between homes in LA and New York). If it can be called a privilege, I wonder how genetic testing, if it were government-funded, might affect someone of lower social standing for whom optional surgery might be a non-option? Is genetic testing the domain of the middle-class? Also, we have greater access to research and information than ever before – but is knowledge power? Is it still the case that what we don't know won't hurt us? Is this just adding to our post-feminist paranoia? And, isn't it true that God won't give us any more than we can handle?

Queller finishes on this note – "We are living in an age in which scientific advances give us new opportunities to live. Seize them." – after telling us she's looking into artificial insamination, which opens up a whole different set of ethical dilemmas (i.e. selecting only genetically 'perfect' embroyos, as determined by biomedical testing) and, of course, content for a new book. How very Sex and the City The Movie!

Read with a cuppa and biccie on the couch, cheese and wine while shrouded in a doona outdoors, or with chocolate in bed, before passing on to your mother/sister/aunty/friend.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Mags: pretty new covers

Who could have predicted The Australian Women's Weekly would get the Catriona Rowntree wedding exclusive?

Coming soon... a review of Madison.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

P.S. Have nothing to do tonight AND nothing to wear? Then hit swapmystyle.com.au and sign up for tonight's super-fun clothes swapping event.

Mags: Teen Vogue – reluctant cover star

What would Juno MacGuff and her wise-quipping BFF Leah have had to say about this cover? 'Cause while Paulie Bleeker was the cheese to Juno's macaroni, Ellen Page and Teen Vogue are about as mismatched as her Philosophy Di Alberta dress and D&G top (sorry, I just don't get it).

Ellen looks about as comfortable as a pair of spandex hot pants – like she just ran into an ex-boyfriend wearing a stained tracksuit, sporting a nasty cold sore. Her awkward schoolboy, hands-in-pockets pose and “this is kinda painful” expression practically scream “Get me outta here!”. I feel sorry for her – and for Teen Vogue. It’s a forced friendship and neither is a happy camper.

I can see Page on the cover of Interview (she was back in March) or Paper, and she definitely would have been Jane and Sassy material, but Teen Vogue? Sure, she made Vanity Fair's Young Hollywood cover but to front a fashion magazine solo leaves her looking completely out of context – in the same way she self-consciously treads the red carpet. I’ve no doubt Amy Astley had her reservations about using Page, but the cult success of Juno – 2008’s answer to Reality Bites, The Breakfast Club and Pretty In Pink – obviously got the better of her. Will teens respond to this issue in the same way they did to Juno?

Page is no Natalie Portman or Camilla Belle – TV covergirls who get almost monthly exposure in the mag. While Belle, last month’s covergirl, has a “passion for fashion” and the model looks to match, one gets the feeling Page, cute and quirky-cool as she may be, has to feign her interest in Zac Posen frocks. Belle turned up to the TV cover shoot wearing “white Hudson cords, a 3.1 Phillip Lim cashmere cardigan, black Marc Jacobs patent-leather flats and carrying a plaid Jean Paul Gaultier bag”; Page showed up in “a Free City hoodie, ripped jeans and Converse sneaks.”

“In an industry in which many women expend more energy on hair, makeup and Pilates than on acting,” says Astley in her editor’s letter (funnily enough, on the morning of Belle’s April issue cover shoot she “rose early to attend a Pilates lesson”), “Ellen is refreshing.” Like a Cool Mint? “Her bemused expression suggests she would rather be anywhere else than an awards ceremony,” writes Astley. Kinda like how she might feel about being shot by Teen Vogue.

It’s clear TV has respect for Page and her decidedly anti-fashion stance ("she was adamant; no dresses!"), and I admire the mag for taking a risk on a talented kid riding the fame train, but is that affection a bit contrived? Or have I/we become so conditioned to seeing a certain celebrity 'type' on the covers of our magazines, that anything but the stock-standard pretty muse looks unusual? Sad, huh. Page is admitted into the TV “rebel role model” ranks alongside Jodie Foster, Drew Barrymore, Winona Ryder and Natalie Portman – not bad company, really.

The mag covered teen pregnancy and birth control, using Jamie Lynn Spears as a celebrity cautionary talking point, last month (ironically in the ‘prom issue’). This month the big issues are college pressure (overextended teens vying for spots in the top universities, suffering under the weight of parental and peer pressure – in America, kids are like brands with strategies, unique selling points and KPIs); cyberbullying (referencing the MySpace-related suicide of Megan Meier); and tuna sushi, a “fashionable food” with a “good-for-you reputation and status as a Hollywood haute food”, which contains potentially harmful levels of mercury (generally, TV runs a health-scare type story every month).

On the lighter, fashiony side, there’s new style blogger Andrew Bevans’ report on Belgian model/car accident victim Hanne Gaby Odiele Termote; Natalie Portman and Lauren Bush are “fashion’s new superheroes”, representing two of the “starlets, designers and big-name brands that are saving the planet with style”; Russia’s Kira Plastinina, the 15-year-old whose father bought her a chain of 30 retail stores in which to stock her “mix of funky, sequin-lined hoodies and flirty, bright-hued dresses”; Converse’s signature shoe, the Chuck Taylor, scores two pages marking the company’s hundredth year in business and clothing collaboration with Target (a company which has totally cornered the collaborative market); designer Rogan Gregory recycles a crocheted tunic into an “eco-chic shopping tote”; denim mini skirts see the light of day… again, as modeled by Aggy Deyn; the spreads channel Proenza Schouler (‘Marching Orders’), bold, bright beachy separates with a little sequin thrown in for good measure (‘Sunny Delight’), and a chic episode of Lost (‘Sole Survivors’).


The celebrity roll call includes Rihanna, Natasha Khan, Pixie Geldof, Miley Cyrus, Camilla Belle (surprise!), Rupert Friend, Anne Hathaway, Agyness Deyn, Lily Allen, socialite Olivia Palermo, Ginnifer Goodwin and Kate Bosworth (in a bikini).

‘Real girls’ are represented by Emily Fontana, 13, the daughter of designer Pina Ferlisi; Adriel Saporta, daughter of the New York City Ballet’s Lourdes Lopez (she looks like a girl you’d want to be friends with); and those lucky enough to appear on the V-Mail and teenvogue.com pages.
Beauty and Health leads in with painfully easy-breezy-chic Parisian Clemence Poesy, 25, current face of Chloe perfume and believer in pharmacy-bought skincare; there’s a story on Paul Mitchell director of strategic planning Michaeline DeJoria, 24, who champions charitable causes; Beauty Blogger Eva Chen is told by Bumble and Bumble stylist Damian Santiago that people who exercise frequently and eat lots of lean protein have healthy hair that “grows like Chia Pets’ (gold!); and golden makeup is covered over four pages (“it’s all about touches of gold”).

Entertainment-wise, Leigh Belz profiles Philly native Santogold (2008’s answer to M.I.A); celebrity sons get a run (Colin Hanks, Patrick Schwarzenegger, Jack Quaid…); actor Jonathan Tucker, who filmed The Ruins in Oz, is who ‘People Are Talking About’; Cry-Baby hits Broadway; Tokio Hotel, Ashlee Simpson, the Kooks, Panic at the Disco and Justin Nozuka get the album review treatment; Forgetting Sarah Marshall is the movie to watch; and, of course, Ellen Page gets a four-page spread (Camilla Belle scored 10 last month).

Overall excitement factor: 6/7
Feel-good factor: 5/6
Eye-candy rating: 4/5 – as usual, creative teen styling

The Stats
Issue: May 2008
Book size: 188 pages
Inside front cover: Estee Lauder Bronze Goddess
Back cover: M.A.C Viva Glam
FOB ads: DKNY, Redken, Marc by Marc Jacobs, Gucci by Gucci, Roxy, Guess, Vans, Clinique, DKNY Delicious, Dooney & Bourke, Dillard’s
Editor-in-Chief: Amy Astley
Website: www.teenvogue.com

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Mags: The body beautiful

Both US Glamour and Australian Cosmo have run body specials this month (both which have their merits), so I thought I'd preface my mag reviews with an account of my own experience of compiling a health/fitness special...

Last year I executed (i.e. wrote/styled) a nine-page body special for Girlfriend magazine's December '07 issue, as part of the mag’s Self Respect campaign (I know – yay for me).

When my editor approached me in late 2006 with the idea of creating a health campaign to address rising levels of obesity, I went away and compiled a four-inch thick research folder on girls, body image, obesity, eating disorders and health/nutrition. I came back to her with the words 'SELF RESPECT', believing that this concept could be the anchor for how we treat ourselves – mind, body and soul – and the editorial we'd run.

The concept behind the SR campaign was to make girls aware of their health (in the context of growing media/societal concern about childhood obesity), while being sensitive towards young women’s propensity for developing eating disorders (within the context of a celebrity culture in which Nicole Richie and her skinny frame had reached iconic status).

After consultations with doctors including Dr Rick Kausman (prominent in the field of dieting and weight management), Dr Jenny O’Dea, who has dedicated much of her research to young women with eating disorders, and representatives from Victorian eating disorder organisation The Butterfly Foundation, I developed the framework for the editorial side of the campaign. It would focus on building girls’ self esteem while encouraging healthy habits in every aspect of their lives – from eating, exercise and relaxation, to community involvement, building positive relationships, pursuing their passions, finding faith, building character, embracing creativity and giving back. This also happened to coincide with what Dove was doing with its new real-women focused beauty campaign and Self Esteem Fund.

Essentially, the motive was to strengthen the girls’ self esteem by encouraging them to see themselves as more than reflections in the mirror while concurrently encouraging healthy eating and exercise habits and featuring a range of body shapes and real girls in each issue, to balance out the use of generic size 8/10 16-year-old models in the fashion spreads.

I’m not sure how successful the campaign was/has been, though we did get a lot of positive feedback.

The most recent Mission Australia Youth Survey found body image to be the number one concern of young people, above family conflict, coping with stress, school or study problems, suicide, the environment and emotional abuse. This is terribly depressing – some young people are so distracted by their outward appearance and thinking about their bodies/food/exercise that it may inhibit their development in other parts of their lives, stopping them from reaching their full potential.

Smart, discerning young women are not exempt from this (read Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters?) – in fact, they’re more likely to develop disordered eating and exercise habits because they become so well versed in the language of diet and, through social conditioning, part of a pervasive, accepted discourse in which women are applauded for losing weight (great willpower/control!) and warped behaviour (wow, she exercises like a demon!), even after giving birth. I, for one, have certainly not escaped the trappings of rigidly adhering to strict diet/exercise practises in order to control my body (and, to some extent, my life). I remember reading diet stories in Dolly when I was 14, studying a Cleo body special when I was 17 and dedicating myself to the exercises shown and, even now, it's rare for me to read/review a magazine which doesn't offer some new way to improve oneself via a change in diet.

I think the media, particularly women’s magazines, celebrity weeklies and the tabloid press (here’s looking at you, Daily Mail), can shoulder a big chunk of the blame for the vexed position we find ourselves in. Sure, the fashion industry has a preference for using girls on the catwalk who look like they’ve never had a decent meal, and shows like The Biggest Loser use weight loss for entertainment value, but the constant barrage of editorial around celebrity bodies, weight loss/diets, and even well-intentioned ‘love your body’ stories, have the cumulative effect of perpetuating and feeding our body angst – the focus is rarely off our outward appearance. Women, it seems, are really not more than the sum of their body parts.

In this world, self improvement is all about managing your weight and choosing the right clothing for your body type. Even when women are being celebrated for their different body shapes, the message is still ‘you should be thinking about how you look’. Controlling your weight and shopping for your body shape is promoted as a means for increasing your happiness – forget working on your character, your values, your contribution to the world at large: if you can just keep a lid on your penchant for peanut butter, you will soon see results.

The thing is, anyone with half a brain knows you have to eat nutritious food and exert a decent amount of energy to stay on the safe side of the BMI scale (which I think is flawed as a measurement of overall health, anyway). Though, as a nation, we clearly need more education on nutrition and health, I think most young women know their good fats from their French fries. There is a place for health and nutritional education and information (I like to get mine from magazines like Australian Healthy Food Guide), just as there is for sound relationship advice and money management tips. But women's magazines, and the glamorous women who work on them, are aspirational – and the aspirational body/figure they tend to promote looks a lot like Kate Moss.

Yes, women's magazines make health and nutritional information accessible for women who really need it – many get encouraging letters from readers who have been inspired to take control of their health and lose weight. But there also needs to be a message about weight loss not being the key to happiness. Show me a skinny, carb-deprived woman who's smiling and I'll give you a hundred bucks (Nicole, Mary-Kate et. al. could barely muster the energy for a smile, surviving as they do/did on Starbucks coffee).

Also, the feminine relationship with food is far from a simple hungry = eat something equation. It’s inextricably connected to our emotional state (stressed? Pass the chocolate! Sad? I can't look at food), our social conditioning (what’s your family’s or friends’ attitude to food?), female competition (a friend loses weight and you feel jealous) and self esteem (eating to excess to hide from the world; limiting calories to feel a sense of control). Food, for most, is a psychological, as well as physical matter. Yes, it is the role of the journalists working on women's magazines to take sometimes obscure and complex concepts and make them palatable for their readership, but telling us what to eat and how much to exercise is but a small piece of the pie.

I think this is where magazines like Frankie and Yen get it so right – who cares what your body looks like; what’s going on in the rest of your life? We really need to emancipate ourselves from the relentless barrage of media images intent on making us feel discontent. Whether that means refusing to buy celebrity weeklies or any issue of a magazine that promises you a better body, is, of course, up to the individual. And, unfortunately, celebrity body specials tend to be best sellers (after celebs without makeup, of course).

It’s sad that most young women aspire to look and be like Kate Moss, who’s a sylish lass, for sure, but doesn’t have the kind of depth of character/intellect we should aspire to. Heck, even a well-honed sense of humour is often overlooked in favour of developing Jennifer Garner biceps, Jennifer Aniston's lean physique and Jennifer Lopez's butt.

It’s important that there’s dialogue around this issue. Why is so much of our self worth tied up in how we look? How can magazines make women feel better about themselves without ‘body love’ style campaigns? Has the feminism movement failed to move us from objects to whole beings? Do we manipulate our bodies to please men, other women or ourselves? Who, exactly, are we exercising for?

After I wrote up the Girlfriend body special, putting all my efforts into thorough research, presenting readers with a comprehensive guide to eating and exercise (as well as emotional health) and cute styling, I couldn’t help but feel a sense of guilt – the feeling that some girl, somewhere, would use the information to embark on what could become a lifelong dedication to staying in shape via label reading, meal planning, portion control, salad making and regimented exercise.

Rant over.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Images: Girlfriend magazine December 2007

Mags: In defence of beauty eds

Sydney Morning Herald writer/blogger Sam de Brito (All Men Are Liars) recently posted a tirade titled 'Canaries in the cage: beauty editors', taking aim at magazine beauty editors and beauty bloggers.

de Brito, who spent three days in makeup for a 'Weekend as a Woman' experiment (thereby fully qualifying him to speak on behalf of women), is concerned that beauty editors are "cheerleaders for deception, telling readers they 'can't live without' or 'must have' certain products", in order to buy into the idea of perpetual youth and vanity over health. He says beauty editors are propagandists who aid the beauty industry in "creating a demand where none would naturally exist" and "perpetuate the myth that you can't be happy or whole without these products."

He goes on to say that the beauty editors he spoke to "honestly think they're helping the sisterhood feel better about themselves", which he thinks is crap because "you can look after your appearance naturally and cheaply" by placing mashed-up avocados on your face. His post ends with a lengthy quote from Body & Soul (Sunday Telegraph) columnist and Feeding Your Skin author Carla Oates, who speaks with wisdom but also has her own (organic) agenda:

"How wonderful for women to pursue realistic beauty goals - aspirational and fun, but achievable - and spend their money on really improving their health, self esteem and skin by seeing a naturopath, taking a dance class, eating well, investing time in relationships and bestowing only pure, fresh ingredients on their skin. Mass market cosmetic companies would pay millions to be able to preserve the potency of nutrients found in fresh fruits and vegetables. But it's impossible for two reasons. Firstly it's far far more expensive to use natural, organic ingredients (synthetic chemicals are often far cheaper to use) and, secondly, it's impossible to preserve them without using a host of nasty preservatives and chemicals. You are far better off rubbing the flesh of a fresh papaya or avocado on your body in the pursuit of good skin - it is a real vitamin boost! For centuries women looked after their own skin, yet over the years we have relinquished this role and handed over the health of our skin to big companies that often don't have our health in mind and are doing a poor job. Mass market cosmetics are akin to fast food - for the health of your skin, it's best to cook at home! Or seek out ethical skin care companies that use only natural ingredients."

Funnily enough, it is commonplace for beauty editors to run the odd story on organic or at-home skin care (particularly in the teen category), and organic beauty products, like Juice Beauty, are really taking off, though I doubt your average career woman has time to mix a batch of rolled oat exfoliant to slap on her face before bedtime. The products on offer on department store cosmetics floors, Priceline and supermaket stores (the "fast food" of cosmetics, as Oates says) cater to our hectic schedules by providing all the necessary ingredients in one handy tube. It's our choice as consumers as to whether we want to pay $10 or $100 for that tube.

I am a former beauty editor. And possibly the country's top consumer of women's magazines. Yet I'm very low-maintenance. My daily skin-care regime consists of washing my face with an Olay cleanser (bought from the supermarket), moisturising with Olay moisturiser containing SPF (supermarket), applying Blistex (supermarket), brushing my teeth (Colgate; supermarket) and moisturising with Nivea body lotion (supermarket). My day makeup is usually a little dark M.A.C or Napoleon eyeshadow applied with a fine brush, curled lashes (no mascara), M.A.C Blushcreme on cheeks, a bit of bronzer powder to keep from looking corpse-like and lipgloss if I could be bothered (I don't wear foundation; my skin looks better without it). Once I week I give myself a pedicure and paint my nails and if I have an event coming up, I might unleash a little St Tropez fake tan. That's it. Oh, and I may try out the occasional product that lands on my desk for a bit of fun.

At the moment, at the age of 27, I'm starting to think about facial preservation, so I'm wary of the sun and getting good nutrition (I fear looking haggard before my time – I'll take Nigella's face over Madonna's any day). I would like to have the odd facial (they have done wonders for my aunt, who, at 41, looks 31) but rarely find the time, and when I reach my 30s I'll probably consider investing in products containing AHAs and the like to keep the wrinkles from setting in too soon (this stems from my own vanity and because I don't want to buy into Botox). My mother's routine has always been very simple, too – and she looks fabulous (no Botox) at 56. She swears by sorbolene, vaseline, Nivea creamy cleanser and Clinique Dramatically Different Moisturiser (though I personally don't like/buy into that product). And she eats a well-rounded diet and gets daily exercise.

What de Brito doesn't consider is that most women will read the beauty sections in magazines with a critical eye and not take product suggestions as gospel. It is a given that advertiser products will be given preference over non-advertisers (particularly when there's only enough room on the page to feature five products). It is also a given that if you smoke, drink to excess, eat crap and survive on no sleep, your face will display signs of wear and tear.

As in any profession, there are very good beauty journalists (Suzanne Wangmann of Sunday Magazine/Notebook, for example) and there are bad/lazy beauty journalists (obvi not naming names) who are happy to regurgitate press releases/the same old stories month after month, kowtow to advertisers and live for the freebies, champagne and canapes. Those who take their jobs seriously see beauty as a science (a good beauty ed. must have a basic grasp of biology and chemistry) and their role as gleaning the best and latest information for their readers.

Fact of the matter is, beauty advertising is what bankrolls magazines – for the most part, it's what pays everyone's salaries. And 'product mentions' are part and parcel of the business (though some of the more esteemed magazines won't package up editorial product mentions with ad pages). While most mags will run puff pieces about the new miracle product from a big-name advertiser or profile the celebrity behind the latest perfume launch, and none (with the exception, perhaps, of Frankie, which doesn't run beauty ads) will say a bad thing about a product, a good beauty section will also contain stories tailored to the reader.

Beauty editors, as working journalists, have access to experts in the field – dermatologists, scientists, nutritionists (and, yes, health and beauty are inextricable) – which means readers essentially get consultations for free. Now days, unfortunately, many experts are aligned with beauty companies (or selling their own product line), rendering their opinions somewhat one-sided, but a good beauty journo will endeavour to write up a balanced story containing several opinions (given word-count limitations, this can be tough), as well as research from a number of sources.

Most beauty editors come into the role by way of advancing from junior magazine positions. And as it's a varied, demanding and time consuming role, which sees an editor attending launches (during and after office hours), organising shoots, testing product, visiting ad clients and writing copy (unfortunately, there's often little time left for this part!), the beauty beat is an excellent fertilising ground for future editors. Yes, it's also fun – and you are spoilt rotten – but you can't really hate a girl for landing a plumb job?

Many beauty editors donate time to worthy causes like Look Good, Feel Better, send product to women's shelters and bestow gifts on staffers suffering emotional issues. Though some relish (and even live for) the fancy launches and being snapped for the social pages, most would rather be at home with their families or kicking back watching TV. None of them, I'm sure, want to make women feel bad about themselves. They are employed to do a job, and if they were not beholden to advertisers, could do their journalistic skills real justice. But such is the nature of magazines.

I do find all the current reporting on Botox and cosmetic surgery unsettling, as it has the affect of normalising these procedures (just as showing skinny model after skinny celebrity normalises, um, skinny), but am smart enough to make up my own mind. Just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't mean I have to. I also know, as most women are aware, that true beauty comes from within – good self-esteem, thinking of others and being grateful for what we have.

As Wangmann wrote in her recent story 'Truth in Beauty', of the 175,000 Australian women aged 18 to 55 Nivea interviewed last year, most rated looking healthy and natural as the most important aspect of visual beauty, while being "caring and compassionate, happy, friendly and optimistic" were ranked as the most important indicators of inner beauty.

The Dove Beauty campaign has been a real turning point for the beauty industry and for beauty editors. Finally something positive to write about! If beauty editors can balance the fluff and puff with substance – talking to real women about their concerns, helping them address them in a meaningful way and starting a dialogue about what drives us to seek perfection – then I don't think they can wear the blame for feeding female insecurities.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Girl Stuff: Out, damned spot!

Two of my gorgeous friends, both in their 20s, are currently suffering from facial acne. And they're none too happy about it. Not only does waking to a face full of pimples make you feel crapola, it's also hard to digest the pity stares you get from your clear-skinned comrades. Cue bad self-esteem and social angst.

Both girls have bumps on their cheeks and hairline. Unlike the pimples you get as a teen, which can usually be tamed with a little topical treatment cream, your typical case of adult acne needs to be fought on a few fronts – dietary, hormonal, superficial and lifestyle. A fancy skin-care pack from your department store ain't the answer. Oh no.

Using my former practising beauty ed. knowledge, beauty tomes and some lovely webby resources, I've come up with some solutions for saying ciao to the acne in your (or your friend's) life:

DIETARY
While it's popular to dismiss what you eat as the cause of your skin's woes, there's no denying that what you feed your body will be reflected on your exterior. It just makes sense. Recent research published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has shown that acne sufferers who go on low-GI diets see improvements in their skin's condition, while others noted that their skin condition worsened when they consumed certain 'trigger' foods, like chocolate, greasy take-aways and soft drinks (if your skin flairs up after a day of carefree chowing on chips and Cola, there's your answer right there).

Dr. Nicholas Perricone, author of The Clear Skin Prescription, says acne is a systemic inflammatory disease, therefore the best place to start is your diet. He says: "In addition to eating foods that are rich in antioxidants (nature's natural anti-inflammatories), you must avoid pro-inflammatory foods. Foods that are starchy – bread, potatoes, chips and sweets – cause inflammation at a cellular level that leads to a clogged pore, the first step towards an acne lesion. Therefore, what you eat is a direct cause of your break-outs, and you need to stop the cycle. Start a supplement regimen that includes antioxidants, a good multivitamin with zinc, the B vitamins, and essential fatty acids [omega-3s and omega-6s found in oily fish like salmon, unsalted nuts, pumpkin seeds, etc.]"

Coincidentally, an anti-inflammatory diet will also help lessen the onset of wrinkles (whee!) and appearance of sun damage (bonus!). In short, a sensible diet will definitely aid in your quest to clear you skin – the added benefit of which will be improved overall health. Plenty of fruit and veggies rich in antioxidants, low-GI carbs, low-fat protein (fish, turkey, chicken), essential fats and hydrating water will help. For comprehensive dietary info, read this piece at BeautyEditor.com.au.

HORMONAL
Diet alone will not cure your skin woes. Depending on the severity of your acne, you may also need to go on a course of antibiotics (doxycycline, tetracycline, erythromycinor), or, if you're not averse, an oral contraceptive. Oral contraceptives reduce the amount of male hormone in your system, which has the affect of decreasing sebum (oil) production. Diane 35 and Brenda 35 are popular Pill brands for reducing acne. The oral retinoid treatment Roaccutane, though very effective, has caused some controversy due to reported side-effects, such as depression.

Of course, you can't self-prescribe, so see a doctor or skin specialist. Oral treatments should be used in addition to diet and cleansers, etc., to maintain clear skin (i.e. not an excuse to skip on removing your slap before bed when you're overtired).

SUPERFICIAL
Back in the 90s, when I was experiencing teen acne, I used to scrub my face with a gritty, grainy mixture procured from The Body Shop. I thought this wonderful stuff would unclog my pores and clear my pimples. In fact, it had the opposite affect – it just aggravated them. While exfoliants have developed to the less abrasive acidic variety now (I couldn't buy one containing, say, salicylic acid back then), they should be used weekly (or twice weekly, as instructed), with a gentle hand. I personally recommend Olay's Total Effects Cleanser for blemish prone skin (cheap as chips from the supermarket), which contains a mild dose of salicylic acid to tame breakouts. You can use it everyday or just when your skin's freaking out.

It goes without saying that you need to keep your skin clean to avoid pore blockage. You'll need a gentle cleanser that won't dry your skin out and a topical treatment cream containing benzoyl peroxide (dries out affected areas and kills bacteria) or salicylic acid (unclogs pores and breaks down blackheads/whiteheads), which can be bought over-the-counter at a chemist. You'll also need oil-free moisturiser to stop your skin from drying out (over-dry skin will compensate by producing pore-clogging oil) and a topical treatment cream to apply to target areas containing salicylic acid, benzoyl peroxide, azelaic acid or resorcinol (I keep OXY 5, which contains benzoyl peroxide, in my cosmetics bag for emergencies).

Topical retinoid creams are increasingly popular for the treatment of blackheads and whiteheads. They're based on Vitamin A and cause the skin to peel, thereby unblocking pores. They can be irritating and make your skin more sensitive to the sun, so proceed with caution (use at night).

Your skin can also be aggravated by the products you use, so look for the words 'non-comedogenic' (translation: non-pore-clogging) on the labels of your cosmetics and skin-care products (foundation, blush, bronzer, moisturiser, cleanser...), and make sure they're oil-free. You don't want to ruin all your hard work by clogging up your skin with nasty cosmetics. Mineral makeup products are popular amongst girls with sensitive or acne-prone skin.

LIFESTYLE
It goes without saying that adequate sleep, stress management, outdoor activity (while protected by SPF), regular exercise and love/hugs/smiles will go a long way towards healing your skin.

Recommended reads: The Skin Type Solution by Dr. Leslie Baumann and The Acne Prescription by Nicholas Perricone.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Girl Stuff: Hey, grumpy; hey, frumpy...

I love a scientific scapegoat to explain my sometimes erratic/nonsensical/repugnant behaviour. And here's a new one. Researchers from Duke University, North Carolina, who questioned men and women about their sleep patterns, have found that women suffer much more when deprived of sleep. Those women who slept poorly, says The Daily Mail, reported more symptoms of depression, hostility and anger – in addition to a thickening of the arteries, which can lead to heart disease, and higher levels of fibrinogen, which can lead to blood clots/stroke – though men with sleeping difficulties showed no increase in these conditions.

"The study suggests that poor sleep - measured by the total amount of sleep, the degree of awakening during the night, and most importantly, how long it takes to get to sleep - may have more serious health consequences for women than for men," says Dr Edward Suarez, associate professor in the Duke department of psychiatry and behavioural sciences. "We found that for women, poor sleep is strongly associated with high levels of psychological distress, and greater feelings of hostility, depression and anger. In contrast, these feelings were not associated with the same degree of sleep disruption in men."

So now, in addition to making you super-sized, sleep deprivation can give you depression and heart attacks! All the more reason to cosy up with a good book and catch some guilt-free zs.

Meanwhile, The Sydney Morning Herald asks, is celebrity cook Nigella Lawson a curvy goddess or dumpy frump? Gabriella Coslovich writes, "The near-hysteria with which some worship Lawson's carnality is a sign of just how starved contemporary culture is of rotund, sensual role models — of women, in short, who embody the pleasures of the flesh... [yet] as anyone addicted to her cooking shows would have noted, [her body weight] has been creeping towards the less glamorous side of the scale, becoming more corpulent than carnal." Lawson, who uses liberal doses of full-fat cream and lard in her cooking, has reportedly started to see a personal trainer.

Weight gain can be an unhealthy thing, for sure, but strict diet/exercise regimes drain your brain (who has time to think about politics when there are calories to account for? A robust figure = a robust mind.), make you moody and boring (would you rather party with a celery stick or a cupcake?) and stifle your creativity (been there, done that; it's no fun). As The Sunday Times reported last year, not only do men find curvy women more attractive, women with hourglass figures, like Nigella's, are brighter, too. Which makes me think: exactly who do we diet for? Besides, as Professor Dick Telford recently wrote in the Herald (Skinny folk can't rest easy), as long as we are physically active (and, therefore, can climb a flight of stairs without passing out), it is not technically unhealthy to be overweight (fat and fit people are less prone to chronic disease than thin, unfit people).

My favourite food doctor, Dr. Rick Kausman, tells the Herald Lawson is a good role model, whose philosophy about enjoying food is important at a time when people have developed warped relationships with food, with fad or restrictive diets leading to anxiety and guilt.

I personally love Nigella's fleshy, womanly look – she makes eating pleasurable, curves sexy and lives life with the gusto one can't manage when calorie-deprived (bet she has no gnawing night-time hunger pangs depriving her of sleep, either). Her figure certainly outweighs the skin and bones little-girl shapes we're accustomed to seeing in the media.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

Mags: state of the (mag)nation

I'm quite tardy with this exploration of the latest mag circulation figures (soz) but a piece in The Sunday Telegraph by Carmel Melouney and Melissa Hoyer (see right) prompted me to post.

In the six months to December 2007, Australians spent $105 million – that's $17.5 million a month – on magazines. Not bad for a country whose population is 21 million. It's no secret that we love our mags. And while publishing companies will wax lyrical about readership figures (by nature higher than circ. figures – i.e. for every one mag bought, at least three or four people will read it), the real indicator of where the mag market is at is the ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulation) circulation audit.

Unlike America, where most mags are bought through cut-price subscriptions, Aussies prefer to make their weekly and monthly mag purchases in newsagents, at inner-city stands or at the supermarket, selecting titles based on loyalty (I always buy this magazine), interest (hobby/specialist titles), cover (I love this celeb/this story is a must-read), flick-through (appealing content), cover-mount (ooh, free gift!), promotional exposure (saw it on Sunrise), addiction (GWAS), boredom (on holidays, nothing better to do) or life events (getting married; travelling; having a baby; renovating). And we're happy to pay the full cover price for the privilege.

Australian mag sales are, therefore, a great indicator of consumer sentiment – mags are seen as luxury items (for GWAS, they're obvi a necessity), which, along with DVDs, clothes, perfume and such, are the first to be scratched from the shopping list when the purse strings tighten. Given current economic conditions, it'll probably be more interesting to look at results for the six months to June 2008, rather than the July-Dec '07 results, but it's a start. The ABC's auditing standards have also tightened, so publishers can't be sneaky and inflate sales data by giving away copies, etc., so it's probably not productive to compare with previous results, though it's fair to say the market has witnessed an overall downward trend (or experienced 'rationalisation', which is easier for publishers to swallow).

I should note, social commentator/journo David Dale is the supremo when it comes to assessing the market, and I've used his piece on the circ. figures as a jumping-off point, then mined the mags' websites for updated results (if someone wants to send me the official ABC report, go ahead!). I've used Australian circulation figures only (i.e. no international sales figures).

I'm going to give you stats for the women's/fashion market. Some magazines, such as Russh, Yen, Frankie and Oyster, don't audit, which is a bummer, but the majors are included...

Weeklies
Woman's Day: 465,565 copies per week (ACP)
New Idea: 388,257 (Pacific)
NW: 170,046 (ACP)
WHO Weekly: 141,682 (Pacific)
OK!: 140,826 (Northern & Shell/ACP)
Famous: 73,058 (Pacific)

Monthlies
The Australian Women's Weekly: 570,228 per month (ACP)
Cosmopolitan: 175,455 (ACP)
Cleo: 160,137 (ACP)
Marie Claire: 115,500+ (Pacific)
Madison: 97,632 (ACP)
Shop Til You Drop: 75,017 (ACP)
Women's Health: 75,000+ (Pacific)
InStyle: 64,874 (Pacific)
New Woman: 60,229
Harper's Bazaar: 53,531 (ACP)
Vogue Australia: 51,827 (News Magazines)

Teen girls
Dolly: 121,578
Girlfriend: 121,080

Not a lot of surprises – Harper's continues to out-sell Vogue (the only country in the world, I believe, where it does so), and the gap between teen titles Girlfriend and Dolly is practically non-existent, which is a huge coup for Pacific and departing Girlfriend editor (and friend of GWAS) Sarah Oakes, and should make things nice for the ad sales girls.

It will certainly be interesting to see the figures for the year to June '08, as well as the affect that Grazia and Glamour's entry will have on local market. The end-of-year results for Harper's, InStyle, Shop Til You Drop and Girlfriend will be eagerly anticipated by their respective new editors, I'm sure.

Read my post about Jan-June 2007 circulation figures here.

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

P.S. The women's lifestyle division of Australia's biggest magazine publisher, ACP Magazines, has launched an interactive online consumer insights site, All Woman Talk (it's pink, of course!), where women can sign up to give their opinion on the company's women's titles, as well as other products and services.

"I have always believed in the power of research to identify a gap in the Australian market," says Pat Ingram, group publisher women's lifestyle titles. "Our focus is on launching magazine titles that consumers want, not what publishers want to sell - research is key to getting it right and our success over the years proves that."

The site will allow consumers (aka valued readers) to give instant feedback on editorial content, ad campaigns, products and services.

"Consumers who participate can hold virtual highlighters and circle elements they like of a magazine cover or advertisement," says women's lifestyle research director Justin Stone. "They can flip through virtual magazines while we track where they look. They can even participate in virtual shopping exercises, where browsing as well as purchasing, is possible. The respondents are given 'in context' situations providing a far greater degree of insight from the research."

Every time a site member completes a survey, she'll go into the quarterly prize draw (sign up before April 14 and go into a draw for $1000 cash).

Girl In Media – Rebecca Wallwork

Before Carrie Bradshaw came to our TV screens in 1998, glamourising the freelance writer's life and inspiring many a young lady to disembark for NYC in pursuit of Manolo Blahnik shoes, a newspaper column and their own Mr Big, Aussie writer Rebecca Wallwork was busy filing copy for Interview magazine in the city that doesn't sleep. Meet GWAS's new NYC correspondent and her border terrier, Winnie...

When did you head to NYC and what prompted the move?
I first came to NY in 1996. It was one of those post-uni temporary-work trips that got extended once I fell in love with the city. In '97 I did an internship that led to a job at Interview magazine. I worked there until 1999, when I returned to Sydney for three years. (I worked as deputy editor on Australian Style, and then worked at New Woman and Empire.) I came back to New York in 2002 to be the music editor at Interview. The following year, I left to freelance. I've also worked at ACP's NY bureau. I still freelance, although I now work for a dog organisation as well.

What's been your experience of freelancing from NYC?
Breaking into the US market can take time, and it's something I didn't always chase because I was busy taking paying jobs for Australian magazines. (Paid assignments trump unpaid time spent working up pitches.) Of course, with magazines dropping left and right, the freelance market here has gotten even more competitive. So many people I know who lost their staff jobs have gone into entirely different positions, in TV or in digital media. All that said, in my experience, the US editors are very thorough and highly professional when you work with them. They are very clear about what they want.

Freelancing for Australian mags from New York is great. I like the independence, and the chance to experience different aspects of this strange, wonderful place called America. But blogs, the tabloids and easy access to content has made that need for freelancers on the ground in the US less urgent. I have to look a bit deeper to find original ideas that editors aren't already seeing every day.

Is there a community of Aussie writers over there?
There are small ones that seem to ebb and flow as people arrive and then go back home, and then new people arrive. Apart from my time at ACP NY, I haven't really been part of any big Aussie expat crews, though.

Who are you currently writing for?
In Australia, Madison and Sunday magazine mostly, but I've also written for Men's Style, The Bulletin before its sad demise, Escape in The Sunday Tele, and Shop Til You Drop. In the US, I've written for The New York Daily News, FHM, and I still write for Interview occasionally. I've been writing a lot about dogs lately, though. It's a nice change from the celebrity circuit. Dogs are always on time.

What's been your favourite celebrity interview to date and why?
Hmm, a tough one. I'm going to go with Bette Midler, because she was tired and a little cranky, but still such an undeniable force of nature. She couldn't not be Bette. She warmed up as she started talking, and broke into song at one point. She wasn't quite what I expected, which rarely happens with celebrity interviews. Getting tipsy on champagne with a kooky Toni Collette years ago was also a lot of fun (again, rare with celebrity interviews!).

And best music interview?
I should have a cooler answer than this, but I'll own up. I was a huge New Kids on the Block fan as a teenager. And I interviewed a few of them in person for a "Where Are They Now?" piece in Rolling Stone in 1999. My inner 15-year-old was beside herself!

What is the publicity machine like in the US?
You said it – machine. The big personal publicists can be tough. (Ben Affleck's rep would never return my calls... until I asked him if it was true Ben had fallen off the wagon. He called me back pronto to deny it.) Most of the time you start with a point person from the film or record company, which might then lead to dealing with the personal publicist (the guard dogs who protect more than promote). For Australian stories, I almost always deal with the Aussie film company publicist first, then they put me in touch with the US publicist who handles international media, and then there's often yet another publicist at the actual interview with the celeb. Layer upon layer upon layer! Rarely does it work to approach personal publicists directly to request an interview; although it can work with the stars who aren't so high-maintenance, like Ethan Hawke.

Any interesting experiences with PRs or celebs?
PRs, not so much; it's mostly been about negotiating nitty gritty details. Most interesting experiences with celebs include: attending Donald Trump's wedding and being more preoccupied with not slipping on the very shiny marble floor in my sky-high heels than with all the stars; Dominic Purcell teasing me in front of Wentworth Miller on the set of Prison Break; and being inside the New York Jets locker room. American footballers may not be celebs to some people, but I love the NFL. Interesting experience given the players' different attitudes to towels in front of female journos.

Which magazines are you currently reading and/or loving?
I love [US] Elle – it's the only fashion magazine I subscribe to, because the features are as strong as the fashion. They run a lot of essays by great writers like Dani Shapiro, Cathi Hanauer, and Meghan Daum. And the fashion seems more laidback and fun than the shoots in Vogue, Bazaar and W.

My other standbys are:
- Travel + Leisure (for ogling the photos and wishing I was planning trips to places like Cinque Terre)
- The New Yorker (great profiles, and often on unexpected topics, like... Bonobos! Fascinating.)
- Lucky, because I can 'read' it in half an hour (all sugar rush, no sustenance)
- Madison (and not just when I've written something for them!) There's always a few great reads, and it keeps me in touch with what's happening in Australia. I often experience a 'grass is always greener' hankering for Aussie brands I can't get here in NY.

A few of my favorites have bitten the dust in the past couple of years, like Jane and ElleGirl.

Which blogs/websites are you checking in with daily?
Jezebel – love the mix, the tone, everything. It fills the space left by Jane, and then some.
Elle.com – just to look at pics and read my horoscope.
Jack Marx Live – you never know what you're going to get with each post, but you know it's going to be one of the best things you've read all month. Or year. (I may be biased, I worked with Jack at Australian Style.) His commentators also give me an idea of what's getting up Australians' noses.
Facebook – to play a move on Scrabulous, check in on friends in Sydney and to annoy my boyfriend, who hates Facebook and all it stands for.
iGoogle – I've been playing around with this, customizing a page with everything in one place--my email, news feeds, Google Docs, and Google Notebook, which I'm hoping will help keep me more organized than my numerous hard-copy notebooks.

Your favourite NYC... restaurant, clothes shop, book store?
Restaurant – my local Puerto Rican diner lovingly known as "The Chicken Shack".
Clothes shops – two local Brooklyn stores: Hooti Couture for vintage (the owner, Alison, really is a hoot. She brightens my mood instantly, even if I don't buy anything), and Red Beri, a great little boutique with cute tees, shoes and accessories that make you feel like you've treated yourself even if you can't splurge on the clothes.
Book store – Actual physical stores for browsing: Strand Bookstore for used; McNally Robinson in Soho for new stuff. (Truth be told, I live near the huge Brooklyn Public Library, and often work near the New York Public Library, and utilize both heavily. When I buy, it's usually on Amazon and Half.com)

Yours truly,
Girl With a Satchel

P.S. You can expect to see some posts by Rebecca in the near future. What a treat!