So, this isnt new by any means (its over a year old, in fact) but I love this sort of thing, and I just saw this for the first time. Maybe you havent seen it either, seeing as how its from an issue of British Vogue, which typically costs about fifteen dollars at Barnes and Noble, and sometimes they dont even have it! Whatever!
Anyway, heres a pretty cool editorial by Tim Gutt in which the signs of the zodiac are interpreted through Modern Fashion. I especially like Leo, Taurus, and Aries, while some are too literal for my tastes (Capricorn, for example). But what I really take issue with (and its not just this editorial) is that so often Aquarius is portrayed as a water sign, when really its an air sign. I would argue that the element of any given sign is a pretty important component of its character, but it would seem that the presence of the word aqua is enough to blind people to its true elemental affiliation. For example, here, Aquarius is entirely under water! Plus, whats up with Pisces? I dont get it!
Here they all are, in order. What do you think?
images via here
No comments:
Post a Comment