- Jun 29, 2016
- Reaction score
Good points. I guess that in light of historical context of social trends in dress, caricature-like emulation and imagery is not really extreme - and didn't say it was extreme, just twisted and artificial. I also don't think I implied that any of this exists in a vacuum - it certainly is all related in the broader context.A lot of what you consider to be extreme is just the most forward facing part of the market. And that part of the market's aesthetic then just gets toned down for mass consumption. Raf Simons and Hedi Slimane's boyish silhouettes are what kicked off the slim fit trend. And even Savile Row tailors right now are making slimmer suits than they did 30 years ago.
Similarly, Raf (again) and Demna's gigantic, oversized silhouettes are swinging things towards the other direction.
This stuff still affects classic tailoring. But once you leave tailoring, these trends are inescapable unless you only wear super basic things (e.g. Levi's 501s and a Hanes t-shirt). Even Brooks Brothers, the most vanilla of casualwear brands, has slimmer silhouettes now because of what happened on the runway. And in ten or twenty years time, mainstream stores will fill out again, silhouette wise, because of what's happening today with Balenciaga.
The whole Hawaiian shirt trend in classic tailoring right now goes back to Saint Laurent's runway shows a few years ago. I don't think any of this stuff exists in a vacuum. It's more like communities that are situated at different points in the fashion cycle.
The Hawaiian shirt thing is plain out silly and makes me laugh. What I do find extreme, are the directions that designers go to try and come up with something "new" for the sake of being different. Really, what if any, is the commentary or narrative underlying the Hawaiian shirt with tailoring look?