Random fashion thoughts

[A Fellow Linguist]

^ While I don't agree about the 'point' of clothes, that article is definitely great. One of my favorite articles about fashion, generally speaking.

 

[brad-t]



who says art should be pleasing?

Universally, it doesn't -- people are free to have their own preferences on that. I'm just personally not interested in something that isn't pleasing on some level. I actually feel the same way about a lot of CCP and older Margiela (not to say newer Margiela is better). Conceptual clothing is impressive but ultimately doesn't sustain my interest. The best for me is clothing that combines art and practicality, such as The SoloIst.

 

[Lane]

the soloist is hardly wearable

 

[KingJulien]

I feel like clothes should always make you look better. You're the first priority, not the clothes. Otherwise you're just a hanger with someone else's personality imposed on you. That still leaves a lot of leeway for designers to play around with shapes and proportions, and even to subvert norms and expectations and whatever. Speaking of which, I know this has been posted before, but I think this piece about CdG is really smart, for anyone who hasn't already read it. http://www.themorningnews.org/article/come-as-you-are
Just saw this
I think art, when it's successful, pleases the viewer or consumer in some way, sensually and intellectually. Bad art, whether it's visual, literary, culinary, or whatever, is considered bad because it's displeasing. That doesn't mean art has to please in a simplistic way, of course.

Isn't the whole point of CDG that it throws away the notion that clothes should always make you look better?

 

[indesertum]



the soloist is hardly wearable

whaaa?

 

[snake]

that is, unless you are stephen mann

 

[sipang]

I think I must be at odds with most here because I find that viewing fashion through the prism of wearability alone gets absolutely mindnumbing really fast. There are only a few designers whose stuff is worth talking about based on the sole intrinsnc merit of construction or cut or whatever, if you remove anything that relates to arts, visual culture, inspirations, references, subcultures etc... from the discussion you're left with nothing but noise and threads about shopping and discount codes and ugly sneakers.

I don't want to go all conceptual or intellectually masturbatory btw, and to be honest I don't think the High fashion thread is really about designers waxing poetics (but maybe I'm desensitized about that). I guess I'm just a bit surprised that a lot of people here seem interested in design, films, music... you name but somehow that sensibility doesn't carry over to fashion.


:foo:

 

[the shah]



I think I must be at odds with most here because I find that viewing fashion through the prism of wearability alone gets absolutely mindnumbing really fast. There are only a few designers whose stuff is worth talking about based on the sole intrinsnc merit of construction or cut or whatever, if you remove anything that relates to arts, visual culture, inspirations, references, subcultures etc... from the discussion you're left with nothing but noise and threads about shopping and discount codes and ugly sneakers.

I don't want to go all conceptual or intellectually masturbatory btw, and to be honest I don't think the High fashion thread is really about designers waxing poetics (but maybe I'm desensitized about that). I guess I'm just a bit surprised that a lot of people here seem interested in design, films, music... you name but somehow that sensibility doesn't carry over to fashion.


:foo:

While I agree (shocking , I know) the bold is not a surprise to me but expectation. After all, we're dealing with senseless people here who enjoy the act of consumption rather than the taste of what they consume.or maybe enjoy the taste but aim to stay in some pragmatic realm of discussion pertaining to that taste and its utility...

That and the SF101 new feature are killing the value of this place. A formulaic, consumerist approach to style and fashion should be left to malls.

 

[Lane]

having handled it, it just has too much going on. Each individual piece is quite detailed and stands out quite a bit. If you have too much of it on, and it can venture into costume territory rather quickly. I'm certainly not the type to remove the conceptual from the object, I feel like some items "speak" to me over others; but I have started to become more timid with my choices.


I think in the end with every individual there's going to be a formation in their mind of what's acceptable and what is ridiculous, so no one is ever going to agree on what is wearable, but I find it harder to enjoy things if they look too out of place and loud.

 

[cyc wid it]

It's clothing, not some spiritual exploration of self or whatever deeper meaning people want to attach to it. People rambling about recreating and channeling the designer's vision into their outfits are no different than people who copy looks from ads or GQ.

 

[Lane]

I agree with shah though, its why people buy and sell **** so frequently. No one understands why they like something and therefore don't form an attachment or understanding to anything but instead flock to what is known as "quality" or worth the "price." That's why people can't understand why I bought those ann boots over guidi, im buying them because they fit what im going for in my look. The other shoe labels loved here aren't offering what I want in that department.


i think responses like yours cyc wid it are just a byproduct of people attacking things they don't understand. There is nothing wrong with identifying with labels, otherwise why the **** are we not just buying jcrew and gap.

 

[dmash]

Attachments to clothing........? I'd rather form attachments to people than clothing.

I seriously wonder if some guys on here have any friends, much less relationships.

 

[Lane]

here I was thinking we all had oniomania

 

[dmash]

I wear clothes because I see it, think it looks f'ng cool and if it fits, we're good. I've read some posts on here and SZ analyzing the f*** out of a label/garment and it makes me seriously question their mental state.

 

[Synthese]



While I agree (shocking , I know) the bold is not a surprise to me but expectation. After all, we're dealing with senseless people here who enjoy the act of consumption rather than the taste of what they consume.or maybe enjoy the taste but aim to stay in some pragmatic realm of discussion pertaining to that taste and its utility...
That and the SF101 new feature are killing the value of this place. A formulaic, consumerist approach to style and fashion should be left to malls.

I feel like there's this little niche of SWD that's the indomitable village of gauls surrounded by roman legions of timeless and classic menswear. I don't really get what Putthison is, or anything about its affiliation with SFbut I do know I don't really like being told how a man should dress, which seems to be the obsession of 80% of the blogosphere. I agree about the 101 features. If they have to exist, and I accept that they can, and that they can be helpful, it seems better to make it a part of the "Men's clothing" subforum (a title that I hate; apparently I'm not a man?). I don't want that to represent me, and I don't want MC to be the driving force of the forum. Maybe we can have some conceptual 101 features to offset that, with obtuse directions like "1. Embrace the void 2. Accept that choice is the ultimate determinate force 3. Populate the forest" and so on.

I agree with shah though, its why people buy and sell **** so frequently. No one understands why they like something and therefore don't form an attachment or understanding to anything but instead flock to what is known as "quality" or worth the "price." That's why people can't understand why I bought those ann boots over guidi, im buying them because they fit what im going for in my look. The other shoe labels loved here aren't offering what I want in that department.
i think responses like yours cyc wid it are just a byproduct of people attacking things they don't understand. There is nothing wrong with identifying with labels, otherwise why the **** are we not just buying jcrew and gap.

I guess I never really think of dressing as embracing a designer's vision; I prefer to tell myself I'm incorporating elements of their design into my own misguided artistic visions Sometimes that includes JCrew.


My girlfriend basically considers food to be sustenance and nothing more. I, on the other hand, enjoy exploring the ins and outs of ingredients and techniques and presentations and all that twiddly elitist ****.