Cheryl can go to Hellyl.

by Katie on September 6, 2010

So perhaps it’s because it’s a rainy Monday. Or, because I’ve had meetings cancelled at the last minute. Or, because delivery companies can’t get their act together to actually, you know, deliver, and I’m on a deadline, but *this* little beauty has more than got my shackles up: CHERYL COLE on a VOGUE front cover for the 2nd time, no less. And a good October issue, not one of the hidden mid Summer ‘thin on the advertising’ versions. Trust me. It was the demise of civilisation the first time this happened. I predict a fashbacklash.

Now, I realise she’s the nation’s sweetheart and she can do that ‘brown doe eyed’ thing to a tee and coo over the cute black guys or girl bands that appear on ‘X Factor’ and burst into spontaneous tears at exactly the right time (boy, I never trust someone that can do that…so fake) but do I really want her on my Vogue UK cover? Sacrilege. Hello, OK and Heat I can accept and even the odd Grazia, but Vogue? Nah!

Please listen up, Ms Shulman, I am a Vogue aficionado, fanatic and one of the brand’s biggest supporters but *this* has me in shreds of outrage. I am practically apoplectic that the byline ‘Pure Style’ appears on the cover on top of Ms Cole.  I wonder if this would ever happen with Italian Vogue?  Pshaw.  Of course not.

Just think of the international outcry? Iffy girl band member who got lucky, mimes own P.A’s and gets over malaria while simultaneously smothering the tabloids and rags in ‘woe is me’ stories of her marriage demise, gets front cover of esteemed fashion title. What *are* you thinking? There’s populist and there’s down right tacky. I’ve done a straw poll amongst fashion types and I’m not alone it appears.

Now, if Roisin Murphy or Duffy or Alison Goldfrapp had been your choix de jour, there wouldn’t have been a peep out of me. But most of the time, you know that Cheryl’s been poured into her clothes by a metrosexual stylist desperate to make a statement and she looks so uncomfortable the majority of the time and it reeks of ‘ bad fashion night out’ not style and elegance, which Vogue and all it encapsulates, is meant to exude. (Please see Lee Clatworthy’s excellent piece here:

I could say I’m not being a snob, but hells teeth, I admit I am.  I just don’t think she’s inherently stylish for all the David Koma and Brian Atwood shoes she can muster.  Perhaps I’m alone in that opinion.  I’m bound to find out.

What do you think of the Vogue UK Cheryl Cole cover for October 2010.  Please let me know by leaving a comment in the box below.  Thank you.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

{ 17 comments… read them below or add one }

Cherie City September 6, 2010 at 3:07 pm

It’s a very pretty, girly shoot and she suits the 60s look very well, but doesn’t really say Vogue.

I like it that British Vogue usually reflects the English Eccentric look acknowledges that British style is full of quirks rather than classic or BCBG. It’s daring to put Cheryl on the front, but it’s not really necessary. We have enough of her in Grazia and Look already.

I too would love to see Daphne Guinness, Goldfrapp, Roisin and Chloe Sevigny on the cover, but they won’t sell magazines. I don’t personally find Cheryl’s story particularly inspiring, but I guess she has mass appeal.


The Very Simon G September 6, 2010 at 3:07 pm

I think we should bring Ms Wintour over to give Ms Shulman a lesson or two on cover stars… OR even Lucy Yeomans, she always gets it right! x


meredith September 6, 2010 at 3:20 pm

that cover is ‘essence of simper’ YUK


RedlegsinSoho September 6, 2010 at 3:44 pm

I would find walking around with a magazine featuring her on the cover embarassing. Tarty slacky tacky loo attendant beating nothing type.
She’s a role model to the kind of person who admires Raoul Moat. Boo to Vogue.


To ELLE and Back September 6, 2010 at 3:44 pm

Cheryl is just not Vogue cover girl material and as you have so rightly said OCTOBER?! Hello?! One of the biggest fashion issues of the year and they choose this unoriginal as their cover star….me no likey!


Charlie September 6, 2010 at 3:46 pm

Once a brawling chav in a tracksuit, always a brawling chav in a tracksuit, regardless of your stylist. Not a Vogue reader but even I can see she’s a million miles from Vogue material.


Olivia September 6, 2010 at 4:14 pm

I agree. I’ve had enough of Cheryl. She’s everywhere and it’s sickening. Why is she the nation’s sweetheart? What has she done, sorry?!
I’m sure part of my annoyance with her is marred with a bit of jealousy of her constantly ‘perfect’image. But really, as you say, it’s all the work of a stylist (plus layers of makeup, fake teeth, fake hair, fake tan, non existent food intake… etc).
She certainly doesn’t have natural style or taste. You only need to look at her chavtastic tracksuit/crop top days to see that.


esther September 6, 2010 at 6:15 pm

I too am outraged. She does not belong here as she is styled within an inch of her life but does not have her own style. Her chavvy cheap polyester days where she used to smash people’s faces in if they so much as looked at her have all been forgotten it seems. What short memories the media have.
What a travesty!
She should not be there, she does not suit the brand. Its like having Linda Evangelista on the cover of Heat.
I seriously feel like cancelling my subscription which I have had for 22 years.


Louise Rodd September 6, 2010 at 6:49 pm

It is appalling. Full stop.


RUTH CRILLY September 6, 2010 at 7:29 pm

Good point Esther – she doesn’t suit the brand! I’m generally sick of ‘high-end’ mags putting ill-fitting celebs on their covers, (the word ‘celeb’ sums up exactly WHY they don’t fit!) trying to claw in a different readership. I actually think Cheryl is very pretty – but is she a ‘style icon’, or a ‘classic beauty-with-an-edge’ that they used to be so good at finding? I don’t think so….


ReallyRee September 6, 2010 at 8:10 pm

Yes Katie. It’s a joke. I’m sick to death of her and she belongs on the cover of Now or Hello or some other trashy, boring rubbish. I haven’t forgotten the fashion choices she made without the help of a stylist, and the people she beat up when she thought no-one was looking.

It’s a poor fit and very disappointing from Vogue.


ps. good to see you earlier!


Ondo Lady September 6, 2010 at 8:22 pm

I am not a Cheryl Cole fan so not at all pleased to see her on the cover the UK’s so-called fashion bible. But then UK Vogue is a tad desperate to boost their sales figures and are going a bit low brow in order to appeal to the masses. Remember when they featured Coleen Rooney nee McCloughlin?


Cherie City September 6, 2010 at 10:28 pm

I actually really enjoyed a feature a while ago in Vogue where Christa D’Souza took Alex Curran to the east end and had her dressed by Jeanette and Richard Nicholl.
It was fun and questioned fashion elitism, but then again it wasn’t there on the cover.


Anonymous September 7, 2010 at 8:31 am

1. That’s an April cover. For Good Housekeeping.

2. I wasn’t struck by the September cover either, and thought it was a tad lazy compared with the international September issues.


Anonymous September 7, 2010 at 9:27 am

So judgemental, Katie. Cheryl is charismatic.
Best Wishes, Pete Stapleton


Anastasia and Duck September 7, 2010 at 12:50 pm

It’s awful. I like Cheryl on the XFactor but here I want to smack the simpering expression right off her airbrushed face just as she would punch you in a nightclub when the paps aren’t looking. You should start a campaign to get Roisin Murphy on the front cover – now that’s a lady who deserves to be up there!



fashionbratt September 16, 2010 at 12:15 pm

This has got to be one of the best rants I have ever read! Very funny. And you’re absolutely right – anyone with the name Cheryl who has beaten up a toilet attendant shouldn’t be on a Vogue cover.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: