Nicely, hiya there, Linda, Christy, Naomi and Cindy, the O.G. supermodels; ladies for whom the time period was created; creatures who grew to become so well-known that they didn’t even want final names, like Aretha or Marilyn. Again, as soon as once more, on the duvet of the September difficulty 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 hearth emojis?

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

But beneath the refrain of affection is one other, rising pressure of commentary that’s barely much less enthralled. One centered 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 folks.

In line 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 meaning is a relative difficulty.

It casts an uneasy mild 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 duvet, who broke by way of again within the day as a result of they’d character and have been prepared to indicate it; as a result of they didn’t need 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 form 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 constructive that Vogue, a model that also positions itself because the bible of vogue, at the same time as its maintain on that place appears more and more tenuous, is placing ladies 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 superstar, the broader cultural fascination with the supermodel heyday of the Nineteen Nineties, and the truth that the 4 ladies have an Apple TV+ documentary about their careers coming subsequent month.

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 So outdated!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

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

Definitely, photos of fashions at all ages are retouched (generally ridiculously so). It is usually true that, having seen Naomi Campbell in particular person, I can let you know 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 just isn’t the identical factor as unbelievably good. When pictures of youngsters and 20-somethings, it’s doable to delude your self into accepting the impossibly flawless nature of what you see. Thirty years later, it’s more durable to fake.

Which suggests it’s laborious to not assume that right here was a misplaced alternative to embrace all the 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 look like just a little factor. However it’s a part of what chips away at our shared sense of fact.

Within the movies which might be embedded within the article, there’s a slight frown line shadowing Christy Turlington’s brow. That’s not stunning, on condition that she not too long ago 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 snicker strains; 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 any case, if anybody ought to perceive the complexities of feminine ageing in a society obsessive about youth, it’s the ladies 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 duvet 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 dying 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 in all 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 form of magnificence. Right here’s hoping they are going to be once more.