Another Vogue Cover, Another Irrelevant Feature

Emma Watson gives her take on sustainability again.

(Charlotte Wales/Vogue)

Yes, I am going to judge a book by its cover. Emma Watson's cover with British Vogue, in January 2024, is confusing. Watson has been on an acting break since 2019. Despite the break, she has done

many interviews. Though, with no happening career projects, her opinions on sustainability is all she can talk about. We as readers have too much content on Watsons sustainability opinions. If this article has already been written by other publications, no reader is going to pick it up. But ok, fine, we give her another article to talk about sustainability, but why get the cover? 

Judging by the cover, you would never know the article is on sustainability. The solo image of Watson is a headshot. With this style, it would be assumed this article is a profile piece. The cover photo of Watson should have given us more insights on the article. They missed the opportunity to show off sustainability in clothing. The lack of relevance to the article gives the cover no excitement. The image isn't striking and the text headlines are small. They don't capture readers attention/capture a buyer. The biggest text written is, “Sustainability TRAILBLAZERS”. While it is the only readable text, it by no means makes me want to read this edition. The photography done by Charlotte Wales is nothing to write home about either. The lighting and style is the same as any other photo I’ve seen by Vogue. 

(Charlotte Wales/Vogue)

The styling of the shoot makes me think of this year's trend, “subtle sexy”. The makeup, done by artist Kanako Takase, is a smokey eye, with prominent contour, and a plain base. It fits the trend but by no means the vibe of the article. The butter yellow, with the light brown, compliment the mood, as well as bring out the warmness of her hair. The way the hair stylist, Eugene Souleiman, styled her hair, is messy and wispy, furthering the subtle, sexy energy. Subtle sexy and sustainability do not exactly align. What she is giving on the cover is not what we are getting for content. 

It is worth noting that the public also had an uproar over Emma's prestigious role. On Reddit, a social networking site, a subreddit (collaborative message board) got created solely to bash this month's cover. One user, @Headfullofflame, had to say, “They've been featuring her in sustainability profiles for like eight years or more as some kind of leader in the field. It's wild.”. Another user, @burnafterreading90, says, “Emma doesn’t deserve the praise she gets, she cannot act, she doesn’t live a sustainable lifestyle even remotely as proven by her flouncing lockdown rules and I won’t even get into the Panama papers…BUT because she’s got a nice face she gets away with it.”. Needless to say the public does not understand Emma's relevance either. 

The only reason I’ll remember anything about this cover is because of the way it confuses me. It’s not a consistent message, the cover's mood is wrong, and the article is over done.