Effectively, hiya there, Linda, Christy, Naomi and Cindy, the O.G. supermodels; girls for whom the time period was created; creatures who turned so well-known that they didn’t even want final names, like Aretha or Marilyn. Again, as soon as once more, on the quilt of the September concern of Vogue, that vestigial megalith from the journal period, many years after you emerged. We’ve clearly missed you.

How else to interpret the fervid enthusiasm generated by the looks of their new cowl, a collaboration between American and British Vogue styled by Edward Enninful, photographed by Rafael Pavarotti and dropped on Instagram final week? The hundreds of social media responses, the feedback and clapping palms and fireplace emojis?

“More of this always and forever, please,” wrote Karen Elson, the mannequin, underneath Vogue’s put up, in a abstract of the overall response.

But beneath the refrain of affection is one other, rising pressure of commentary that’s barely much less enthralled. One targeted on calling out what many viewers see as egregious age erasing: the promotion of girls age 58 (Linda Evangelista), 57 (Cindy Crawford), 54 (Christy Turlington) and 53 (Naomi Campbell) as paragons of mature magnificence whose years have seemingly been smoothed from their faces. Who look so retouched that they appear extra like A.I.-generated bots than precise individuals.

In keeping with a Vogue spokeswoman, there was solely “minimal retouching and minimal lighting” on the images. However in a world the place we’re more and more involved in regards to the blurred line between digital actuality and precise actuality, the place disinformation is rife, the definition of “minimal” and what precisely which means is a relative concern.

It casts an uneasy gentle over the entire shoot — how a lot of it’s actual, how a lot Photoshop — that doesn’t serve anybody concerned.

It doesn’t serve the ladies on the quilt, who broke via again within the day as a result of they’d character and have been keen to point out it; as a result of they didn’t wish to be clean mannequins, as fashions had typically been earlier than them, however people with personalities and attitudes and opinions of their very own. The sort of personalities that contain expressions, which over time etch years and experiences — pleasure, sorrow, laughter, fury — onto the topography of a face.

And it doesn’t serve the ladies who look to them as position fashions.

It’s unquestionably optimistic that Vogue, a model that also positions itself because the bible of style, at the same time as its maintain on that place appears more and more tenuous, is placing girls within the fullness of their life on its greatest cowl of the yr. Even when it’s not precisely a shock, given the swing to movie star, the broader cultural fascination with the supermodel heyday of the Nineteen Nineties, and the truth that the 4 girls have an Apple TV+ documentary about their careers coming subsequent month.

Certainly, there was a transfer to exalting age in a wide range of Vogues during the last yr, with the mannequin Carmen Dell’Orefice on the quilt of Vogue Czechoslovakia at 91 and the tattoo artist Apo Whang-Od on the quilt of Vogue Philippines at 106. However it appears extra like a stunt — OMG! Look, how she defies age! Or OMG! So outdated! — fairly than an actual embrace of a extra mature demographic. There are, in any case, no nonfamous older fashions who seem commonly within the journal.

And it’s attainable that the journal is solely depicting the ladies as they wish to be proven. Through which case, honest sufficient. In keeping with a Vogue spokeswoman, although, “Vogue retains final editorial control of the creative, fashion and video shoots that appear on any of its platforms.”

Actually, pictures of fashions at all ages are retouched (typically ridiculously so). It is usually true that, having seen Naomi Campbell in particular person, I can inform you that she doesn’t have a line on her face. And there’s no query that the previous supes look extraordinary for his or her age.

However extraordinary will not be the identical factor as unbelievably excellent. When images of youngsters and 20-somethings, it’s attainable to delude your self into accepting the impossibly flawless nature of what you see. Thirty years later, it’s more durable to faux.

Which implies it’s exhausting to not suppose that right here was a misplaced alternative to embrace the entire hallmarks of our humanity, to not point out transparency about what we’re faking (or not). Fixing a wrinkle right here, some crow’s-feet there, might appear to be a bit factor. However it’s a part of what chips away at our shared sense of reality.

Within the movies which can be embedded within the article, there’s a slight frown line shadowing Christy Turlington’s brow. That’s not shocking, provided that she just lately advised Marie Claire: “Women who have stayed away from augmentation of themselves — those are the women I really admire. I love seeing a real face.”

As Cindy Crawford takes a selfie together with her outdated associates, she has small however seen snigger traces; her brow strikes and eyes crinkle. These are a part of being alive. Blanding out these expressive marks from the images, when they’re nonetheless obvious elsewhere, makes the entire shoot appear extra faked than it in all probability was.

In spite of everything, if anybody ought to perceive the complexities of feminine getting old in a society obsessive about youth, it’s the girls who represented the top of that youthful magnificence.

Linda Evangelista has been public about her trauma with CoolSculpting, which she stated left her disfigured. When she was on the quilt of British Vogue in September 2022, she was open about how the make-up artist Pat McGrath used tape and her instruments to “create fantasies” and erase actuality.

Within the present Vogue wide-ranging interview, Ms. Evangelista type of tiptoes across the topic. “I want wrinkles,” she stated, “but I Botox my forehead, so I am a hypocrite. But I want to grow old.” But it isn’t addressed any additional.

It’s notably ironic, coming simply after the loss of life of Jane Birkin, and the celebrations of her life and magnificence, which have been marked by an exhilarating disregard for the strain to play by any guidelines and a willingness to embrace her personal wrinkles and the tales they advised. (Ms. Turlington has name-checked Ms. Birkin as one among her personal paragons of magnificence.) That ought to have been an indication, if anybody cared to see it, of how keen we’re for such unfiltered examples.

“The world puts a lot of pressure obviously on women as they age,” Ms. Crawford says in a Vogue video. However, she continues, “we still can have fun, we can still be beautiful, we can still be visible.”

So allow them to be seen, marks and all. They as soon as have been pioneers of a brand new sort of magnificence. Right here’s hoping they are going to be once more.