Does the Truth Matter?

When I was talking to Australian podcaster, Gabriella Kelly-Davies, recently, she asked me whether I thought truth mattered. ‘Yes, of course truth matters,’ I replied, ‘but …’ and this is where I think we have to define what truth actually means in the context of non-fiction. The truth matters when it is a question of facts that can be checked. You cannot get the date of the start of the First World War wrong nor can you make up the height of the Empire State Building. Those are facts that are checkable. So is the price of an ounce of gold in June 1973 or the date the Thames froze over: January 1940 (for the first time in six decades).

Then Gabriella and I started talking about truth versus fact and here the water gets muddier. One person’s truth can differ from someone else’s to a considerable extent. For example, childhood memories. My sister and I are eighteen months apart, but we very often have different recollections of certain events that happened within our family. I remember being in a road accident when my mother was run into by a man whose car got out of control on the ice on a lane near Burton on the Wirral. It was in the bitterly cold winter of 1963. My sister remembers it too: ‘Afterwards Mum drove us to the Shone’s house and we were given warm milk to help to calm us down. It was either 1964 or 1965.’  Who is right and does it really matter? Truth in this case differs from fact. I know I’m right and she is equally certain her memory is better than mine. And in retrospect I’m sure she is right because in the winter of 1963 she was only 6 months old and would not have had such a clear memory. Does it really matter? It is just part of the muddle of personal memories and were I to write an autobiography, which incidentally I never will, I could serve up my version of personal family events. It’s my memory, after all. Dame Marina Warner, a writer I admire enormously, wrote a book entitled Inventory of a Life Mislaid with the subtitle an unreliable memoir. In using this wording, she signals to the reader that this is her take on the family story, not that of her sister or her parents. It’s a brilliant, enchanting, and at times devastating book and I cannot recommend it highly enough.

As a biographer I do not have the luxury that Marina Warner enjoyed of relying on her own recollections of family life. Facts are what matter to a biographer and if I cannot be certain of something I either have to leave it out or signal to my reader that I am making a best guess as to the missing link between two facts. Lee Gutkind wrote a brilliant book called You Can’t Make This Stuff Up. In it he differentiates clearly between truth and fact. Truth is a personal thing; facts can be checked. When I interview people, especially about their childhoods, I have to be clear when I am quoting them in my writing that this is ‘their truth’. If it differs dramatically from facts that I have checked I make that obvious to the reader while trying not to undermine the interviewees memory. This was particularly tricky when I wrote about the evacuees of the Second World War in When the Children Came Home.

When I came to write my biography of British Vogue, I had to do be diligent about checking facts against people’s memories of their experiences of working for the magazine. Occasionally that got me into hot water. One example involved the model, Kate Moss. She is a woman I admire more than any other Vogue model: a consummate professional and infinitely adaptable. She looks as wonderful in grunge as she does in David Bowie’s outfits for Ziggy Stardust or in a long black cape photographed by Jamie Hawkesworth in 2019. Facts about Kate Moss and Vogue: she first appeared on the front cover of Vogue in March 1993. She was photographed by Corinne Day wearing a pale pink and ice-blue bustier from Chanel Boutique. She has appeared on more front covers of British Vogue than any other model in the magazine’s history: 46 times to date and counting. The only model who comes close is Jean Shrimpton who featured on 23 covers between 1962 and 1974. Where I came unstuck was over her height. In an interview for Vogue by Lesley White in 1994, Kate Moss ‘girl of the year in person’, explained that when her agent initially saw her in Boots campaigns, she concluded her height would rule her out for fashion. How tall is Kate Moss? In the Vogue article Lesley White says 5’5”. Look at her profile today and it says 5’7”. I wrote what I’d read in Vogue but was encouraged to change it upwards by two inches to the widely accepted height of 5’7”. The only way I could possibly have fact checked that was to appear at Ms Moss’s door and ask her politely if I could measure her. Which of course I did not.

How many editors has Vogue had in the past 109 years? Was Edward Enninful the first male, gay, black editor? This became a fascinating game of hunt the facts. To answer the second question: no, no and yes. Edward Enninful was definitely the first black editor of British Vogue. The first gay editor was Dorothy Todd and the first male editor, albeit only for six months, was Harry Yoxall. But it is true that Enninful was the first with all three attributes combined. The answer to the first question is even more intriguing to my mind, but then I am variously described as a pedant, a nerd or a ferret. In the time period of my book: 1916 to 2024 there were 12 editors who held the office for between 18 months and 25 years. They include Audrey Withers, Beatrix Miller and Alexandra Shulman, who between them accounted for 67 years. If you want to know who they are I have listed them at the bottom of this blog.

Please note that Elspeth Champcommunal, a name very familiar to the fashion industry, does not appear in the list of Vogue editors. That is because she never was the editor. She was the fashion editor. The editor herself at that time was a woman called Ruth Anderson. How can I be so sure? Because in 1937 the writer Lesley Blanche was commissioned to write a survey of the first 21 years of British Vogue and she mentioned Miss Anderson as the editor between Dorothy Todd’s two periods at the magazine. If I’m losing you, please bear with me, as it has an impact on another very famous woman in Vogue’s history: Anna Wintour. When it came to writing the story of the magazine for the golden jubilee edition in 1976, it was simply more glamorous to have the exciting fashion designer, Elspeth Champcommunal, as the second editor of Vogue than the less well-known Ruth Anderson. How did this rewriting of Vogue’s history occur? Miss Anderson had no advocate and Miss Champcommunal’s daughter claimed her mother had held the role. It became the accepted story.

Anna Wintour’s first issue of British Vogue, July 1986

And now to Dame Anna Wintour. A name so respected and feared by many in the fashion and publishing industry that I will surely be warned against publishing this blog. But here goes. In June 2025 the BBC reported, amongst many other news outlets, that Anna Wintour was stepping back as editor-in-chief of American Vogue after 37 years. So far so good. ‘a role she has held longer than any other editor.’ Oops. No. That palm goes to Edna Woolman Chase, the editor appointed by Condé Nast himself, who held the role for 38 years from 1914 to 1952. OK, I’m nitpicking here but it’s my job to pick nits. Incidentally, Mrs Chase worked for Vogue for 60 years which I believe is another record in its own right. The Guardian claimed Wintour had begun as editor of British Vogue in 1985. Not so. She started at Vogue House in April 1986 and her first issue was July. Another source claimed she edited the British edition for three years. Again, no. Her editions run until November 1987 and number seventeen. Her successor, Elizabeth Tilberis, took over the reins in the late summer and published her first issue in December 1987 with Naomi Campbell on the front cover.

Does any of this really matter? After all, Anna Wintour is the most famous name in Vogue’s history and surely her reputation is more important than my research. As a biographer I think it does. I have an obligation towards my reader to be as accurate as possible. It is a contract between me and that individual and one I will do my utmost not to break. They have been kind enough to buy my book in the first place and give up hours of their lives to read it. If I break that contract by making guesses and assumptions, I will lose their faith. So while I won’t be knocking on Kate Moss’s door with my tape measure, I will continue as I research my next book, to dig as deep as I possibly can to uncover accurate facts and bring them to light even if they sometimes conflict with received wisdom. I believe that truth matters.

Link to the podcast https://www.biographersinconversation.com/s03e19-julie-summers-british-vogue/

Vogue Editors 1916-2024

Dorothy Todd 1916-1919

Ruth Anderson 1919 to 1923

Dorothy Todd February 1923 to September 1926

Michel de Brunhoff/Harry Yoxall September 1926 to March 1927

Edna Woolman Chase March & April 1927

Mrs Meynell May to July 1927

Alison Settle July 1927 to October 1935

Elizabeth Penrose 1935 to September 1940

Audrey Withers September 1940 to December 1959

Ailsa Garland January 1960 to April 1964

Beatrix Miller June 1964 to June 1986

Anna Wintour July 1986 to November 1987

Elizabeth Tilberis December 1987 to March 1992

Alexandra Shulman April 1992 to June 2017

Emily Sheffield (acting Editor-in-Chief) October 2017 issue

Sarah Harris (acting Editor-in-Chief) November 2017 issue

Edward Enninful September 2017 to January 2024 (final issue March 2024)

Audrey and Lee

July 1941, the defiant image that characterised Audrey Withers’ wartime Vogue

In September 1944 Vogue’s editor, Audrey Withers, published a four-page spread with two turns at the back of the magazine on a field hospital in France. It was not the first time that she had brought her readers face to face with the horrors of war, but it was the most powerful reminder to date of the scale of the operations of D-Day. On 6 June that year almost 7,000 ships and landing craft had transported 156,000 infantrymen to the beaches of Normandy. Over the next weeks a further 2,500,000 would land on the coast of France to continue the push towards Berlin and the elimination of the Nazi threat. It was natural that newspaper and magazine editors would be following the story closely.  But was it plausible that a glossy fashion magazine would want to take its readers into the heart of the war? After all, Vogue’s main fare was couture and culture, was it not?

Fashion is Indestructible by Cecil Beaton, 1941

British Vogue was called into being in the middle of the previous war. It was first published in London in September 1916, during the Battle of the Somme. Its pages were filled not only with fashion and features but also with articles on the war, including reports from Belgium on the plight of pregnant women giving birth close to the front line and the work of the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry in France. By 1939 Vogue was 23 years older and had gathered experience and influence. It was not surprising that in this new war the editor would want to help readers make sense of what was happening at home and abroad. During the Blitz, Audrey Withers, included a photograph of Vogue’s bomb-damaged offices and proudly told readers that the magazine, like its fellow Londoners, was being put to bed in a cellar. This was a reference to the cellar below No 1 New Bond Street where the Vogue staff retreated during the nightly air raids and where they carried on working as if it were entirely normal.

Audrey Withers once described herself as an unlikely editor of Vogue and this comment stuck to her reputation for the next sixty years. In fact, she was an outstanding editor. She was brave, single-minded and always alive to the most important matters of the day for her readership. At 5’ 10” in her stocking feet she was tall for a woman of the time. She had been brought up in an eccentric household where from a very young age she had been invited to engage with her father’s literary and artistic friends. One of these was the artist, Paul Nash, with whom she conducted a 16-year correspondence in which she tried out all her ideas about the world on him, often eliciting affectionate and amusing responses. It was Nash who advised her on attending Somerville College, Oxford and who applauded her decision to switch from English to PPE in her second term. And it was Nash who comforted her when she was awarded a 2.1 and not a First as she had hoped. When she decided to leave her first job in a bookshop and apply to Vogue, it was Nash who congratulated her on the appointment.

Audrey Withers by Clifford Coffin, 1947

Audrey started as a subeditor, the lowliest job in the magazine, in 1931, and gradually rose through managing editor to Editor in September 1940. Her greatest champion when she made the step up to the top job was Condé Nast himself. He wrote to Harry Yoxall, the managing director of Condé Nast Publications in London, to say he would rather ‘have an editor who can edit than an editor who can mix with society.’ She may not have had the right social connections, but she had the intelligence and courage to stand up to the most difficult of Vogue contributors. She once took on Edward Molyneux who threatened to pull his advertisements if he did not have control over which photographs she used in the magazine She refused. Vogue’s independence was more important to her than Molyneux’s contribution to the magazine. Her wartime Vogue is a remarkable body of work that deals with all aspects of war, from clothes rationing and austerity, through the roles women took on both in civilian life and in the armed forces to the great battles being fought abroad. Her main photographer, Cecil Beaton, was removed to India and China in 1942 and she wrote ruefully of how much his absence would mean to her readers. However, another photographer was waiting in the wings, and this was Lee Miller.

Self-portrait by Lee Miller ©www.Leemiller.co.uk

Lee had begun her career in the 1920s as a model, appearing on the front cover of American Vogue in 1927. She was described as one of the most beautiful women in the world. Her life changed when she went to live in Paris in the early 1930s where she worked as Man Ray’s assistant. By the outbreak of the Second World War she had become a photographer with an exceptional eye and a singular ability to pick out the essence in a scene. This was to develop over the course of the Second World War. She arrived in London soon after the outbreak of war and applied to work for Vogue photographic studios in 1940. She worked as a fashion photographer for the magazine but also worked alongside features editor, Lesley Blanch, taking photographs of work done by the female armed services personnel.

Women of the Auxiliary Territorial Army operate a searchlight battery at South Mimms by Lee Miller ©www.Leemiller.co.uk

The opportunity to get into France – occupied France – was only possible because of her US citizenship and the press accreditation Audrey had helped to secure at the end of 1942. Lee’s visit to the field hospital in Normandy in August 1944 left her deeply moved. Her photographs are fresh, absorbing and searingly honest, as is her writing: ‘Another ambulance arrived from the right and litters were swiftly transferred to the parlour floor. The wounded were not “knights in shining armour” but dirty, dishevelled, stricken figures … uncomprehending. They arrived from the front-line Battalion Aid Station in lightly laid on field dressings, tourniquets, blood-soaked slings … some exhausted and lifeless.’ Audrey was delighted with Lee’s work. She wrote later:  

‘I made myself solely responsible for editing Lee’s precious articles. I used to begin by cutting whole paragraphs, then whole sentences, finally individual words. One by one to get it down. Always I tried to cut them in such a way that there would be the least possible loss of their impact. It was a painful business because it was all so good.’

What was new here, in Vogue, was the quality not only of the photographs but also of the writing. Combined it made some of the most powerful photojournalism of Vogue’s war. Today Lee Miller is well-known. When Audrey Withers agreed to sponsor her application for press accreditation there was little to suppose this would turn out to be an extraordinary relationship. Audrey later described it as the greatest journalistic experience of her war.

In October Lee had two features in Vogue, one on the battle for St Malo, where she had witnessed the use of Napalm, and the other from liberated Paris. She went on to produce articles on Operation Nordwind, a German offensive in Alsace, and then on the liberation of countries such as Liechtenstein. Her work became ever more intense as the war reached its conclusion. In April she entered the gates of Buchenwald and, just 12 hours after it was liberated, the concentration camp at Dachau. The photographs she sent back to London were so powerful and shocking that she sent an accompanying telegram ‘I IMPLORE YOU TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS TRUE’. Audrey wrote that she had no difficulty in believing it was true: ‘The difficulty was, and still is, in trying to understand how it was possible for such horrors to be perpetrated not just in a fit of rage but systematically and carefully organised over years. To me, it was far more frightening than the existence of a Hitler or a Stalin and the fact that their crimes could not have been carried out without the willing cooperation of thousands who applied to work for the gulags and concentration camps just as if it was a job like any other.’

Audrey’s courage failed her. She could not bring herself to publish the photographs from Buchenwald and Dachau in her Victory issue of the magazine in June 1945. History, and she herself, has judged her harshly for that but both overlook the fact that she included Lee’s article in full. And the article is so packed with rage it almost burns the pages it was published on:

‘My fine Baedeker tour of Germany includes many such places as Buchenwald which were not mentioned in my 1913 edition, and if there is a later one, I doubt if they were mentioned there, either, because no one in Germany has ever heard of a concentration camp, and I guess they didn’t want any tourist business either. Visitors took one- way tickets only, in any case, and if they lived long enough they had plenty of time to learn the places of interest, both historic and modern, by personal and practical experimentation. . . Much had already been cleared up by that time, that is, there were no warm bodies lying around, and all those likely to drop dead were in hospital. Everyone had had a meal or two and were being sick in consequence – because of shrunk stomachs and emotion. There is a diet arranged for them now, very similar to what they have been receiving in texture, although the soup now contains vegetables and meat extracts. I had seen what they had, that emergency day; and you’d hesitate to put it in your pig bucket.

The 600 bodies stacked in the courtyard of the crematorium because they had run out of coal the last five days had been carted away until only a hundred were left; and the splotches of death from a wooden potato masher had been washed, because the place had to be disinfected; and the bodies on the whipping stalls were dummies instead of almost dead men who could feel but not react.’

As Audrey was a wordsmith, she knew the power of Lee’s words and I think it is telling that she chose not to tone down the fury that they conveyed.

Kate Winslet in LEE (Sky Cinema)

The current film LEE, which is enjoying success worldwide, with Kate Winslet as Lee and Andrea Riseborough at Audrey, naturally focuses on Lee and her war photography. I just want to remind readers that without Audrey Withers, Lee’s work might never have gained the prominence in Vogue that it did. Lee was extraordinarily brave and brilliant but so too was her editor.

With thanks to the Lee Miller Archives for the use of two images www.leemiller.co.uk

Rosa Nostalgia – one of my favourites.
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami