My parents and I talk about this every so often. I maintain that some collections (like Rodarte's Spring 2010 collection, the one that looked like the post-apocalyptic highlands meets Maori warriors) are art, but that the way that the fashion industry presents these works of art - you know, two weeks a year in far-off but beautiful and expensive places - is less than ideal. Because then they're making art into a capitalist venture, somehow.
Maybe what I'm trying to say is that if your inspiration comes from some unknown place - let's go back to Rodarte's collection and say the Scottish highlands and the haka - and the way that you express that inspiration is through making garments, that's a good thing. But art shouldn't really be an industry, I think. Maybe it makes it impersonal that way, or maybe I've just grown up in a culture where industry means dehumanization, but if fashion is art rather than a necessity or a way to make money, why are there fashion weeks and magazine advertisements?
Everything about the fashion industry confuses me. Everything. Except the Rodarte Spring 2010 collection, which was the first collection that I really fell in love with...
Have a picture:
Image from Rodarte's Spring 2010 Collection via projectrungay.blogspot.com
I hear you and I completely agree... I think the same goes for food too! Is food that doesn't expire for 5 years still 'food' or is it something to stave of your appetite? When does eating go from filling a hole in your stomach to actual nourishment? When does fashion go from preventing indecent exposure to art? hmmm you've certainly got me thinking! I guess there's a place for all of it... It's knowing where you lie personally within those realms!
ReplyDeletexox tash
Thanks - I never thought about food that way before, either!
ReplyDelete