- Joined
- Apr 10, 2011
- Messages
- 27,320
- Reaction score
- 69,987
This ad, photo, whatever, rubbed me wrong. I must be pretty simple. I see that model, and I think... would I look like that wearing that jacket?
But isn't that the point of models wearing the advertised garment? To be inspirational, if not aspirational? On the opposite end of the spectrum, go look at Vanson's catalog. Un-models, with dad bodies.
No, I don't think so. You can look at clothes without wondering what you'd look like in them. Just like I can go into a museum and look at Goya's "Saturn Devouring His Son" without wondering whether I want that hanging in my bedroom. You can appreciate fashion just for its visual aesthetic without injecting yourself into the clothes or personalizing the objects.
And no, models and lookbooks don't have to be aspirational. Fashion-forward lines can use product photos, models, lookbooks, marketing campaigns, and all sorts of images to convey other things -- an idea, a mood, a visual reference, or really whatever they want. Look up Alexander McQueen's Savage Beauty exhibit. There's very little "aspiration" there. His shows were just about a mood.
Here's something that I think is easier to grasp. This a Rick Owens showroom from the early 2000s. What you think is "shapeless" actually has a lot of shape when worn in real life. This design aesthetic is in the same vein as Zamb's stuff.