Are The Glossies Losing Theier Luster ?

If you want only things you can afford, it's boring. It's great to see things you may not buy—because you don't have the money—but it is very ugly to think they shouldn't exist because you can not buy them."

Despite glossy magazines' awkward attempts at channeling the "recession-chic" zeitgeist—or, maybe, because of them—it's glaringly obvious that their experiments with mixing high and low fashion finds are still heavily weighted towards the high. Those who understand the advertiser-editor relationship understand why big ticket items still claim the majority of page space in the glossies during a massive economic crisis—not to mention that the wealthiest of readers probably haven't yet started to feel the crunch. But, what about everyone else? By continuing to focus on the highest of fashion, are magazines alienating a readership for which luxury is an aspiration more out of reach than ever?

To find out, we took a (very unscientific) poll of our friends and acquaintances, in hopes of discovering whether the glossies are losing luster among their workaday readers—the answer to which was a resounding no.

Most of those surveyed claimed not to take offense at the continuing barrage of unattainable luxury paraded in the pages of their favorite magazines. "To be honest, I read the articles and admire the clothes, but that's where it ends," agrees an LA-based actress. "If I see something I really love, I tend to find a more inexpensive version somewhere else. I mean, even if the economy wasn't bad, I would still want designer bags that I can't afford!"

In fact, the only thing readers do seem to take issue with are the glossies' attempts at unearthing bargains. "I wish fashion magazines had more of a variety, regardless of the economy," says an Arizona marketing executive. "Some have 'recessionista' pages, but I find a lot of the less expensive items are still somewhat pricey for someone on a budget."

An LA writer agrees, saying: "I think condescending articles on 'bargain shopping'—wherein a writer or editor discovers a place called Target or sacrifices their bi-weekly blowout and lives to tell the tale—are what's offensive right now. And those seem to be everywhere. It is so archaic and so out of touch with the readership, who most likely are already aware that a pair of shoes can be had for less than $400, or that drugstore beauty products actually work."

The one thing that all those surveyed agree upon is that, in times like these, fashion magazines' escapist offerings are more important to them than ever. "I, for one, want to see the most expensive and insanely creative pieces of fashion even if I cannot afford them, not just what is available at the Gap," says a New York jewelry designer—a view with which the industry as a whole seems to agree. Take it from Karl Lagerfeld, who told BBC News: "If you want only things you can afford, it's boring. It's great to see things you may not buy—because you don't have the money—but it is very ugly to think they shouldn't exist because you can not buy them."