Random fashion thoughts

[Nil]

Originally Posted by zissou

bagging high school chicks in their varsities...

Man... this is the only reason I bought a varsity. Now you're telling me it's not going to work? ****.

 

[Nil]

Originally Posted by Big Punisher

Still looking for stores in the Twin Cities besides Len Druskin

Check out Intoto in Uptown. I've only been there once earlier this summer when their stock was basically cleared out, but they had a few remnants of Margiela, Rag & Bone, Paul Smith, CP Company, etc. I'm not sure what their typical buys are like (I'm assuming rather boring due to the boring nature of the Minneapolis crowd), but it might be worth a shot.

 

[XenoX101]

Originally Posted by Sartorialist

The one body area a woman is most worried about is her hips, thighs and butt. Right? So why would a designer ever make a dress that specifically brings more attention, weight, and bulk to that area? This is a perfect example of the disconnect between fashion and real people. I mean, if you only have 30-something looks in a show to tell your story for that season why waste any of them on designs that would never sell (especially in this economy) or even push the "art" of fashion in a reasonable direction. That ruffle detailing is great (and, to be fair, Preen did offer other options with that detail), but there must be other ways to use it so that it doesn't strongly detract from a ************.
I particularly hate how unsubjective and superficial this is, as if there is only one way to look attractive and that means "don't put attention, weight or bulk to the hips, thighs or butt", plus the notion that people always want to look attractive all the time is laughable. The worst part however is how he asks why designers make clothes that won't sell and then tries to cover himself by saying these clothes don't 'push art' in a reasonable direction, what do you know about marketting Mr. Schuman and please tell me what is a 'reasonable direction' for art to be pushed in. I hate it when people who are clearly quite good at something (candid photography of fashionable individuals in this case) become very famous and decide that they can weigh in on anything and their opinion is automatically valid because of their status, this post couldn't have done his professional career any favours and would've surely made some respectable people in the industry shake their heads.

 

[thekunk07]

^yeah, he is douchey but he was right in that case.

 

[KitAkira]

Originally Posted by XenoX101

I particularly hate how unsubjective and superficial this is, as if there is only one way to look attractive and that means "don't put attention, weight or bulk to the hips, thighs or butt", plus the notion that people always want to look attractive all the time is laughable. The worst part however is how he asks why designers make clothes that won't sell and then tries to cover himself by saying these clothes don't 'push art' in a reasonable direction, what do you know about marketting Mr. Schuman and please tell me what is a 'reasonable direction' for art to be pushed in. I hate it when people who are clearly quite good at something (candid photography of fashionable individuals in this case) become very famous and decide that they can weigh in on anything and their opinion is automatically valid because of their status, this post couldn't have done his professional career any favours and would've surely made some respectable people in the industry shake their heads.
Well he's probably going to make a killing off of that stupid book of his

 

[XenoX101]

Originally Posted by thekunk07

^yeah, he is douchey but he was right in that case.

Right how?

 

[thekunk07]

drawing attention to a woman's most "difficult" parts shows a lack of understanding of what women want. i don't think it's sexist to say that women want clothes that make their ass and **** look good and their thighs small.

 

[jet]

Originally Posted by KitAkira

Well he's probably going to make a killing off of that stupid book of his

A couple morons on sufu already flossed them in rp.

Clothing as art is some of the stupidest **** I've heard.

 

[brad-t]

Originally Posted by XenoX101

I particularly hate how unsubjective and superficial this is, as if there is only one way to look attractive and that means "don't put attention, weight or bulk to the hips, thighs or butt", plus the notion that people always want to look attractive all the time is laughable.

The worst part however is how he asks why designers make clothes that won't sell and then tries to cover himself by saying these clothes don't 'push art' in a reasonable direction, what do you know about marketting Mr. Schuman and please tell me what is a 'reasonable direction' for art to be pushed in.

I hate it when people who are clearly quite good at something (candid photography of fashionable individuals in this case) become very famous and decide that they can weigh in on anything and their opinion is automatically valid because of their status, this post couldn't have done his professional career any favours and would've surely made some respectable people in the industry shake their heads.

unironically agreeing with everything in a xenox post

 

[XenoX101]

Originally Posted by thekunk07

drawing attention to a woman's most "difficult" parts shows a lack of understanding of what women want. i don't think it's sexist to say that women want clothes that make their ass and **** look good and their thighs small.
I don't think thats right though, I agree that many women want the conventional beauty of small waist slim curved thighs, but there are also many women, particularly those who buy designer clothing who aren't so self conscious about how their ass and thighs look and are skinny enough to know anything will look good on them, so they are happy to wear unconventional pieces like these (granted they genuinely like them). This is looking at clothes from a marketting perspective though, not an art perspective, some of these pieces won't go on sale and these pieces could have been made purely for the designer's interest or to compliment the rest of the collection. If it wasn't a designer brand but rather a high street or lesser brand, fair enough, I can understand making your clothes more 'friendly' to the public, but people who buy designer clothes know what to expect and for the most part it isn't conventional beauty.

Originally Posted by jet

Clothing as art is some of the stupidest **** I've heard.
Kidding right?

 

[Big Pun]

Originally Posted by Nil

Check out Intoto in Uptown. I've only been there once earlier this summer when their stock was basically cleared out, but they had a few remnants of Margiela, Rag & Bone, Paul Smith, CP Company, etc. I'm not sure what their typical buys are like (I'm assuming rather boring due to the boring nature of the Minneapolis crowd), but it might be worth a shot.
Thanks, I'll check it out.

 

[zissou]

Originally Posted by Rosenberg

dont get butt hurt man. i was only saying i thought it was ironic. much like a lot of the rest of fashion. i like clothes, doesnt mean i cant have a laugh at fashions expense

Oh, I wasn't. Your comments were probably the most subdued and sounded like they were actually thought out ahead of time.

 

[naaaaate]

Hey don't start a fashion is/isn't art discussion! Just laugh at the person in the comments section so blinded by sart-worship that they think the sartorialist just invented the idea that people enjoy clothing that compliments their body and makes them look good!

 

[jet]

Nate you want to see some real gems read the comments on pharrell.

PS. I really hate when forum idiots help noobs identify **** for their blogs or other type of gain.

 

[dfagdfsh]

xenox shut the **** up. you have no idea what you're talking about. schuman might be a douche but he is right - a big issue is designers producing unsalable clothing. look at gareth pugh. you can rave about his **** all day long but if nobody buys it he will not be in business.