Many New Jersey and New York residents* (more on that later) were at best temporarily displaced by Hurricane Sandy, and at worst still struggling months later after their homes or businesses were completely destroyed. Entire waterside and low lying neighborhoods remain torn apart, months after record high water levels have receded. So months later, a bit of awareness could be helpful in reminding people, like the congressmen who voted against giving federal aid money to hard hit states, that just because the storm’s fallen from the front page, the need hasn’t gone away.

Vogue‘s Fashion for Sandy Relief auction in partnership with the CFDA raised $1.7 million for the Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City, so their hearts (and wallets) are mostly in the right place, but the entire concept is not. Sticking a model in luxury clothes with people whose photoshoot hours could have been better utilized restoring utilities (ahem, ConEd) or otherwise helping people cope with the fallout from the storm comes off as not well thought through at best and completely tone deaf at worst.

Nana Gouvea’s post Sandy shoot

Brazilian reality personality Nana Gouvea was the butt of many a joke after her impromptu photo shoot with downed trees in the city. While the photography and models in this case are undoubtedly superior, the sheer ridiculousness of using a natural disaster that left people homeless, hungry and cold as the theme for a photoshoot under the guise of awareness is just as silly for an A-list magazine as it is for a D-list media chaser.

Vogue editor Anna Wintour has first hand experience in being inconvenienced by the storm, as she was forced to temporarily relocate to a luxury hotel on Manhattan’s Upper East Side {NY Post} while her Greenwich Village home was without power. Perhaps bumping into fellow refugees like Carine Roitfeld, Marc Jacobs and Emma Stone didn’t offer an uncomfortable enough or long enough relocation to consider those who don’t have homes to return to; whose favorite photos – not just of models, but of mom, dad, grandparents and family – are gone; those who probably hoped they could recover enough dry, heavy clothes to make it through the cold days that followed the storm, or bundle themselves in enough donated blankets to live without heat at the beginning of winter. While beautiful, it’s doubtful that any of the sleeveless gowns and delicate dresses featured would be up to that task. Maybe the water damaged clothes strewn about in particularly hard hit areas weren’t fashionable enough for Vogue, though surely a story with survivors discussing particularly meaningful pieces that were damaged or gone would have been relevant to a fashion magazine and relevant to the reality of the situation.

Which brings us to one final point: New Jersey.

*Loss is loss, damage is damage and suffering is suffering. That said, often overlooked in fundraisers, relief efforts and even shoots to glamorize those things is New Jersey. While Sandy seems to have succeeded in making more people aware that New York City isn’t just Manhattan (we’re betting the photograph of Chanel Iman and Karlie Kloss with Far Rockaway firefighters is the first time Vogue‘s shot in Queens in… ever), not a single photo op was dedicated to New Jersey. Governor Chris Christie estimates his state suffered $36.8 billion in damage, while New York Governor Andrew Cuomo puts his state’s cleanup bill at $32.8 billion {Huffington Post}. Given it’s less fashionable reputation (not entirely deserved), it might not be as much of a draw as New York City, but the cleanup bill is at least equal to, if not greater than that faced by the city and surrounding New York areas.

Perhaps New Jersey’s electric workers and recovery crews had something else to do when invited to participate in the shoot.

Fashion’s Night Out, the 3-year-old event that generates big buzz for one night prior to fashion week, but not so much in terms of big sales numbers, may be coming to an end. {the Cut/NY Magazine}

As we’ve mentioned numerous times, the bigger and more star-studded the events got, the less people actually seemed to shop. While we did see more retailers offering gifts or gifts with purchase to try to lure shoppers this year, apparently they’ve realized what we’ve been saying for a while: if it doesn’t make dollars, it doesn’t make sense.

Three years in, few people will speak on record about specific numbers to get an idea of just how good, bad or mediocre Fashion’s Night Out may be at a macro level. Retailers rarely miss an opportunity to talk about positive numbers though, so we have to imagine that the silence is more of an attempt not to fall into disfavor with FNO creator and Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour than a sudden shyness around discussing stellar sales results.

Enormous crowds of people are good for retailers if they’re buying things, but in the case of Fashion’s Night Out the result is more akin to a well dressed flash mob moving from free champagne spot to free champagne spot. While Ashley Turen, the owner of a small Lower East Side boutique, said that the night was good for business, unnamed publicists speaking to the Cut noted that the overall cost of events coupled with an extra event to work on right before Fashion Week make it more of a burden than benefit.

That’s to say nothing of the extra work for Vogue. For all of the faults we’ve found and written about concerning the event itself, the effort and amount of work that went into each of the events has been obvious and impressive. Maintaining growth of what’s essentially become a shopping holiday celebrated by thousands of retailers in 17 countries around the world and all 50 states could easily be a full time endeavor in and of itself. Considering that American Vogue pulled in more than $92 million from one issue alone this year (granted, it’s the year’s biggest issue), it’s not difficult to imagine that Fashion’s Night Out could have a low return on investment for Vogue as well.

While we wouldn’t be entirely sad to see the event go, we do hope that the things that did work survive and find their way into more sustainable promotions. Though the event seems to have gone on just a bit longer than needed, Anna Wintour certainly earns a solid E for effort; but now’s as good a time as any to realize that some things just aren’t meant to last all night.

The illustrations were commissioned for the magazine’s feature on the 10 Most Intriguing People In Fashion, and includes everyone from androgynous supermodel Andre Pejic to embattled American Apparel boss Dov Charney, with a few of the usual suspects (Anna Wintour, Mary Kate & Ashley Olsen) included for good measure.

Full sized versions of each illustration are available at Meets Obsession. All illustrations by Yiying Lu.

via My Modern Met

Pairings

the Kate Moss & Jamie Hince Wedding

We’ll start with some good news. Perennial supermodel Kate Moss married longtime rocker boyfriend Jamie Hince of The Kills in a 1920’s style unstructured John Galliano gown that’s drawn mixed reviews. The groom wore custom Yves Saint Laurent by Stefano Pilatti, as did his best woman Alison Mosshat. Vogue UK reports that Galliano did attend, though he was understandably camera shy. We all remember what happened the last time cameras caught surprise revelations from the former Dior designer, so hopefully there was some non-alcoholic sparkling cider available for him to toast the couple with.

After the wedding, the bride changed into a white 3-piece Stella McCartney pants suit as she and the groom hopped on a helicopter to embark on their honeymoon. McCartney was also in attendance.

The festivities cost a reported £1 million (approximately $1.6 million), and the guest list also included fellow supermodel bestie Naomi Campbell, a bevy of Vogue editors past and present (Anna Wintour, Emanuelle Alt, Carine Roitfeld), newlyweds Lara Stone and David Walliams, Daphne Guiness, Marc Jacobs, Kelly Osbourne and Jude Law.

Sounds like the ultimate bridal fashion show.

the Prince Albert II of Monaco and Charlene Wittstock Wedding

Then we get to the only wedding that could force Kate Moss to change her wedding date. A number of the fashionable guests for Moss’ wedding were also invited to the wedding of Prince Albert of Monaco and Charlene Wittstock (now, Princess Charlene).

The reported$65 million budget makes the Kate Moss affair seem positively low key, but considering the fact that the Prince and Wittstock actually had two weddings, and invited all 30,000+ of Monaco’s residents to take part in some part of the festivities, maybe it’s relatively reasonable. For the record, two weddings is actually common in France, where a civil ceremony is required before a religious ceremony is recognized.

In spite of rumors that Wittstock was considering becoming a runaway bride *three times* amid new paternity tests for Prince Albert (the groom already has two children out of wedlock, and is reported to have fathered two more while dating Wittstock), the couple made it through the official state marriage, and onto a balcony where they shared an awkward kiss.

They're definitely no William and Kate

For their civil ceremony, the bride wore a light blue Chanel suit, and for their church ceremony a custom made Armani Prive gown. The dress featured a 5-meter train, and was studded with crystals and pearls.

Guests included, um, all of Monaco (see previous note), Prince Albert’s ex-girlfriend Naomi Campbell (who had a wedding filled weekend), Karl Lagerfeld (who designed the blue Chanel suit), Giorgio Armani (who designed the wedding dress), French President Nicolas Sarkozy and wife Carla Bruni, as well as too many princes, princesses, kings and queens of various countries to mention individually. There’s no agreement on whether any of Prince Albert’s children or their mothers were in attendance. The palace says no, rumors say his daughter, Jazmin Grace, and Nicole Coste, mother of his son Alexandre, were somewhere amid the well-wishers.

Congratulations to all the happy couples, and good luck to any who aren’t so happy. No names.

Partings

Now for the partings. Because sometimes wedding diamonds aren’t always forever, for every spectacular celebrity wedding this weekend, we got two spectacular celebrity divorces.

the Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver Divorce

The Monaco Royal wedding may take the crown for scandalous and excessive weddings, but leave it to Hollywood royalty to show ’em how it’d done when it comes to scandalous and excessive divorce! Maria Shriver officially decided to terminate her marriage to the Governator, and filed for divorce citing irreconcilable differences. Which was kind, considering she could have cited messing around with the maid.

The couple will split an estimated $400 million, and custody of their minor children. In total, they have 4 children. If you’re trying to do the math, that’s enough for 1.5 royal weddings for each of them, should there be any eligible princes or princesses.

the Scarlett Johansson and Ryan Reynolds Divorce

After just 2 years of marriage, the ink is dry on the divorce papers for Scarlett Johansson and Ryan Reynolds. The split was reportedly amicable, with neither seeking spousal support. Probably not easy, but at least it was quick.

the Thomas Jane and Patricia Arquette Divorce

“Hung” star Thomas Jane and former “Medium” star Patricia Arquette also made it official, and sealed the deal on a divorce. There’s a joke about seeing this one coming somewhere in there. The couple will share custody of their 8-year-old daughter. Their marriage lasted approximately 3.5 years. In Hollywood marriage years (sort of like dog years), that’s almost 15 years.

the George Lopez and Ann Serrano Divorce

Then there’s late night comedian George Lopez and wife Ann Serrano, who are calling it quits after 17 years of marriage. They share one minor daughter, and thanks to a life saving donation from Serrano, they share the same kidneys as well (obviously, Serrano has one, Lopez has the other). Fortunately, the couple is trying to keep things amicable on both fronts.

Can you imagine how messy things would be if Serrano filed to get custody of her kidney back? Awwwkward.

Don't expect any Alaia/Lagerfeld collaborations any time soon

Azzedine Alaia‘s recent confirmation that he’d been offered (and rejected) the head job at Dior got people talking, but apparently the designer wasn’t done dishing. In an interview with Virginie magazine, the septuagenarian designer didn’t hold back on his opinions of fellow iconic designer Karl Lagerfeld or Anna Wintour, the reigning queen of fashion media.

On Karl Lagerfeld

“I donâ€t like his fashion, his spirit, his attitude. Itâ€s too much caricature. Karl Lagerfeld never touched a pair of scissors in his life. That doesnâ€t mean that heâ€s not great, but heâ€s part of another system. He has capacity. One day he does photography, the next he does advertisements for Coca-Cola. I would rather die than see my face in a car advertisement. We donâ€t do the same work. And I think that he is not doing a favor to young stylists who might think it works that way. Theyâ€re going to fall before they retire.”

On Anna Wintour

“I said it before. She runs the business (Vogue) very well, but not the fashion part. When I see how she is dressed, I donâ€t believe in her tastes one second. I can say it loudly! She hasnâ€t photographed my work in years even if I am a best seller in the U.S. and I have 140 square meters at Barneys. American women love me; I donâ€t need her support at all. Anna Wintour doesnâ€t deal with pictures; she is just doing PR and business, and she scares everybody. But when she sees me, she is the scared one. [Laughs.] Other people think like me, but donâ€t say it because they are afraid that Vogue wonâ€t photograph them. Anyway, who will remember Anna Wintour in the history of fashion? No one. Take Diana Vreeland, she is remembered because she was so chic. What she did with the magazine was great, with Avedon and all the great photographers. Vogue remains while its fashion editors come and go.”

Well then, tell us how you really feel Mr. Alaia.

It seems like he wasn’t the only designer who felt like opening up; Giorgio Armani made comments to the Italian press about the recent Prada and Dolce & Gabbana men’s collections, calling them ridiculous looking and saying no man would ever actually wear them. Armani said “fashion today is in the hands of the banks and of the stock market and not of their owners,” in scolding the press for not being more critical of collections. He also took a thinly veiled swipe at the recently public Prada by saying his company won’t be going public anytime soon because it “is independent and doesnâ€t have debts, and that his clothes make men look more handsome and elegant.” {the Cut/NY Mag}

It’s worth noting that this is the same person who uninvited the New York Times’ Cathy Horyn from his Fall/Winter 2008 show for the tone of a review that he found to be too critical. While it’s refreshing to hear unvarnished perspectives in an industry where journalists who do actually try to practice journalism through criticism or investigation are uninvited from shows, and publications have advertising budgets threatened, we can’t see the quips making a huge difference.

Lady in red

Really, there’s not much to say about the First Lady’s look besides wow. Vera Wang, in one of her own designs, was more understated but still elegant. We have to say the biggest surprise came from Wintour though. Perhaps it was out of deference for the First Lady, but the Vogue editor seemed a bit under dressed. Yes, Chanel suits are elegant and classic, but among the gowns of the evening – not just Michelle Obama’s either – it seemed like something better reserved for a cocktail gathering than a formal affair.

No one wants to be accused of trying to upstage the Michelle Obama or the first family (just ask Desiree Rogers), but did Wintour take that directive too far? We’ve seen the Met Gala photos so we know she has some gorgeous gowns in the closet, and we can’t imagine many designers refusing to lend a gown to the editor of the leading fashion magazine. Being low key is a good way to ensure an invitation to the next event, but we hope that Wintour doesn’t play it quite as safe the next time around.

Anna Wintour, Vera Wang and Christianne Amanpour (wearing an Armani suit that seems like a better choice for a formal dinner)

We think they’re dolls (or good candidates, at least), but drag versions of Vogue Italia editor Franca Sozzani sitting next to Anna Wintour, Grace Coddington and Tavi Gevinson are pretty fun too. Have to say that there’s one glittery blog star missing from the lineup though: how do you do a tranny tribute and not include one paying homage to Bryan Boy? That aside, there’s something about seeing a version of Anna Wintour with hairy arms that’s endearing.

View more photos from the editorial at Frockwriter.

Alexander McQueen Moves Forward

Goodbye Mr. McQueen, hello Ms. Burton. Long live McQueen.

Style.com covered the passing of Alexander McQueen and the showing of the final collection he designed, but something that was equally important this year was the success of Sarah Burtonâ€s first show as the new designer for the McQueen label. The passing of such a genius creative mind was indeed tragic, and the showing of McQueenâ€s last collection was a special moment, but Burtonâ€s signal that the brand can honor McQueenâ€s legacy while moving forward was absolutely stellar.

John Gallianoâ€s Dior Couture Wows

Dior haute couture was in full bloom this year when John Galliano showed his Spring 2011 collection of flower-inspired looks. The imagery and execution of the designs combined with the high, tulip-like hair of the models for a full package display of gorgeousness and perhaps our favorite moment in fashion of 2010.

While millions of kids will probably unwrap one of those famous pink boxes this Christmas, there are a few yet unrealized fashion dolls who would be fantastic to see in plastic.

Christian Dior Couture Barbie

Michael Kors thinks you'd appreciate this dress more if the collection in which it appeared had a different name.

“Everyone knows now that resort is important, but because the name ‘pre-fall’ is so ugly no one wants to acknowledge that these are the clothes you actually put in your closet,” he said at his recent pre-fall presentation.

Kors is certainly correct about that last part. Pre-fall collections typically consist of more commercially appealing looks than the fall/winter runway shows, but more interest is directed toward the latter likely just for this reason – because fall/winter runway collections are edgier and riskier, thus more intriguing.

As for his opinion that pre-fall gets the shaft because of its “ugly” name, Kors may be right that the name is a problem, but it is not simply because pre-fall is “ugly.” Our guess is that the average consumer thinks pre-fall is merely a preview of what is to come in the traditional fall/winter fashion week shows and thus does not realize they are missing anything.

It is also possible that the name pre-fall is not to blame. Resort shows likely get a decent amount of attention, not because the name resort is prettier than pre-fall, but because they belong to a more specific, obvious purpose (beach-going, cruising, etc.) and tend to be very distinctly summer-y compared to typical spring collections. In other words, resort shows give shoppers something that is more clearly missing from spring shows. Plus, U.S. Vogue Editor in Chief Anna Wintour reportedly wanted more resort shows this year {Fashionologie}, and her influence is large enough that she got her wish, which is likely another reason people pay more attention to resort than pre-fall.

So Kors is right that the pre-fall image needs some revamping. A name change may help, but educating consumers on the difference between pre-fall and fall/winter collections (and why they should pay attention to both) would likely be more of a game changer. The average person doesnâ€t always understand how fashion works simply because a lot of it is never explained.