Apocalypse now?

Posted by: Georgina Combes

I don’t usually buy girlie glamour mags, although I’ll happily flick through them in the dentist waiting room, but this month’s Marie Claire caught my eye. Contained in a brown paper wrapper boasting a recyclable “this is not a plastic bag” tag, I was intrigued to see how green an issue it actually was. I bought it and buried my nose in its ‘eco chic goes glam’ pages.

My hackles quickly rose. As usual, the page upon page of products being touted as the latest must-haves, albeit most of them eco-fabulous or ethically produced, is enough to send the sanest of girls into a state of fashion anxiety. Buy this, buy that, and feel good about it. “Fashion with heart”. I’m not saying I’m not into fashion. I am, and I try to shop as responsibly as possible and LOVE charity shop bargains, but I just don’t feel comfortable with Marie Claire’s promotion of eco-chic.

What interests me most is how the non-sustainability specialist will interpret the green messaging in this magazine. From the apocalyptic Plant in peril, band-wagon jumping Feel-good fashion, buy-me Gorgeous and guilt-free, trend-setting Hollywood heroes to easy ways to Save the planet sections, I worry readers will be left very confused.

The Planet in peril pages especially do a spectacular job of breaking Futerra’s climate change communication rules. They picture designer-clad celebrities, wearing despairing expressions, superimposed onto iconic UK landscapes that have been digitally altered to reflect how these places may look with a temperature rise of between 3 and 6 degrees. My favourite is the image of Elle Macpherson, all tousled locks and floaty dress, on a dapple-grey stead struggling through the tropical wilderness that will apparently be Trafalgar Square at +6 degrees. Nelson’s head is nestled in the fern-like foliage. These apocalyptic visions couldn’t be more extreme, misguided or ineffective at actually encouraging people to care about climate change. They may actually have the opposite effect, making people think it’s futile to bother changing their behaviours.

Compare these predictions of “worst nightmare scenario” to the section, later on in the magazine, on easy ways to make a difference. The 12 actions are valid, carbon footprint reducing activities but they aren’t made to sound very heroic or equal to the scale of the climate doom predicted in the celebrity fashion spread. And if we keep buying more and more, even if our shopping basket only contains the greenest of green products, are we really addressing the problem?

Anyone for next month's free gift, cotton-canvas flip-flops? One hint of water and they’ll be in tatters, which won’t be any good when London’s underwater.

More blog entries