The start of the fall season marks the arrival of fall fashion — along with the “September Issues,” our go-to source for deciding whether Philip Lim or Marc Jacobs will be hanging in our closets for the next six months.

I remember anticipating the day when the weighty 300-plus-page editions showed up in my mailbox; I was eager to delve into the fantasy world of fashion I knew Vogue, Elle and Lucky promised each month. Flipping open to a photo spread by Mario Testino offered a quixotic getaway into the land of high fashion, rife with haute couture gowns and jewel encrusted baubles one could only dream of possessing.

Yet, there is something decidedly different about our favorite glossies this year. With retail sales looking grim, the fall issues of many fashion magazines seem less lustrous than years prior. It isn’t so much the fact that I can actually lift the fall issue of Harper’s Bazaar, which was once the source of my back pain as I toted it around campus. Bazaar’s headlines suggested the contents inside were less than happy-go-lucky, despite Leighton Meester’s beaming face on the cover. “Affordable Luxuries!” and “Stylish Steals!” hinted at the state of the economy, as the articles inside pitched classic pieces that would last for seasons to come. I questioned what this meant for future collections, in a time where designers are cutting back on runway shows, pricey ad campaigns and celebrity endorsements. Could it be that the fashion industry is at risk of forever losing its sartorial sheen?

Admittedly, the change in my favorite magazines was, at first, somewhat of a disappointment. I enjoyed lusting over pieces I knew I could never afford in this lifetime, appreciating them instead as works of art rather than something I could actually wear. I miss the lavish Dolce & Gabbana ads; now replaced with mall staples like Gap and Express. In a year marked with layoffs and “staycations,” couldn’t I still have this one fantastical escape into fashion, where price tags and credit card bills seemed not to exist?

But after some consideration, I realized this shift could only be a step in the right direction. I mean, how long could readers pretend that a $150 hair elastic from Louis Vuitton wasn’t completely ludicrous? And really, who is buying a Galliano skirt that cost more than this semester’s tuition? Instead, I embraced the fact that there were brands I could actually afford, shot in everyday locales: a diner and a hot dog stand in Bazaar, a crowded city street in Vogue. The ordinariness of the shots made me think, “I could wear that, I could afford that!” Even Vogue — notorious for featuring clothing credited as “Price available upon request (and if you have to ask, you can’t afford it)” — now features a section of designer deals within reasonable price points (though, one might question Anna Wintour’s definition of what’s “reasonable”).

I may not experience that feeling of escapism the next time I pick up Elle, but that’s okay. I’ve come to realize it’s not the dollar amount that makes the featured clothing special. It’s the painstaking construction and design of each garment, the editorial photography and the artistry put in to every set that should inspire how we incorporate fashion into our everyday liv­es. The new crop of fashion magazines might weigh a little less, and the photo shoots are probably a touch less glamorous, but the tradeoff — more affordable fashion for the masses — is worth the price.