I’m 100% enamored with this video, featuring a milliner at Stephen Jones’ workroom. The idea of craftsmanship at this level is typically so elusive; it’s fascinating to watch art being made, step by step:
{ 0 comments }
Since graduation season is upon us, the inevitable “state of jobs for recent grads” articles are publishing fast & furious. Per WWD and this article on The Cut, the outlook isn’t exactly rosy for those in fashion. While I’d argue, that the jobs outlook isn’t great for any grads, this piece by afingo intern (and recent LIM grad) Carmen Castillo offers a great perspective:
“Right now, my goal to stay in the fashion industry remains just that, a goal… But I’m not down. Neither are many of my peers. We got into this because we love fashion, because this is what we wanted to do with our lives. Yes, the pickings are slim right now, but maybe that means only the strong will survive. Only those who really belong in the industry will tough out these lean times to enjoy success on the other side of the down market and find new ways to work and flourish.”
Words of wisdom for seasoned vets and newbies alike.
{ 0 comments }
This article in Bazaar (5/2010) by Christopher Brooks offers some pretty great insight into the male perception of style:
“My question is always ‘Is that doing anything for you?’ Does what you are wearing make me think of you as more feminine or more elegant or more provocative or more intellectual or more street than I thought before?”
I’m loving the theatrical implications of this quote (which he elaborates on, later), as I’ve always believed that fashion is glorified dress-up. It conveys your inner-most self to the outside world. And if you take that cue and spin it with a slight bit of camp, it sounds like the dudes will appreciate.
[Image via Garance Dore]
{ 0 comments }
It’s so interesting to me that very, very subtle cues in these two images mark the difference between tawdry and seductive. From the best I can tell, it boils down to a few points:
1. The Tom Ford glasses are more “fashion” in that they have a touch of the outlandish. The bow plays to this point, as well.
2. Hair, even when it’s teased to bejeezus, should look touchable.
3. Boob size. Smaller is more fashionable, always.
4. Background. Simple = better.
5. Directive. I feel like the Guess stylist said “be sexy,” while the Tom Ford one said “be playful.” The styling is already sexy, so the Guess image results in overkill.
Anything I missed? Can you spot any other differences?
{ 0 comments }
In WWD’s recent article “Youth Among Keys to Luxury Rebound,” they wrap up with an interesting assertion:
“‘But what also fueled luxury’s comeback was the fact that, among traditional shoppers, the number of transactions during the recession never fell,’ [Ed Jay, senior vice president of Business Insights] said. Perhaps it was a fear of committing a faux pas, but many of these shoppers opted to make their purchases online. ‘They just didn’t want to be seen coming out of stores with shopping bags,’ he said, noting this shopper traded down less than originally believed.”
Is online shopping really the best way to assuage shopping guilt? I’ve always thought of it as the more “practical” (ie: less activity-based) means of shopping, but really; do people shop only for the value those myriad of bags reflect in others‘ eyes? Call me crazy, but new outfit after new outfit is just as ostentatious as carrying an armful down Madison.
{ 0 comments }
Have you ever seen a more perfect balance between delicate femininity and badass punkery? Fashion as art in its awesomest incarnation…
{ 0 comments }
Remember Now by Karl Lagerfeld. Entire video available at Chanel News.
{ 0 comments }
This video (click-through, no embed available) series by SHOWstudio encapsulates everything I love about fashion. In describing Prada’s FW2010 legwear:
“Miuccia Prada has an eye for the perverse; her work is about inversion… At first glance there could be nothing sexy about the items themselves: cable-knit woolen socks, square-toed loafers with a sensible block heel and a color palette more pensioner than Prada. But if we take the 50s cartoon theme of Prada’s collection as our jumping off point, it’s easy to view these stockings as Prada’s take on the sexy seamed stocking twisting that erogenous line to the front and rendering it in inch-thick cable-knit.”
So deconstructionist, it’s musical. Shall we do a feminist reading on the collection next?
{ 0 comments }
This just makes me want to bouffant my hair and eBay crinolines. Talk about evoking an aspirational lifestyle…
[via Fashion Gone Rogue]
{ 0 comments }
Crowdsourcing is a hot topic in the digital space these days.
WWD defines the practice as “the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call.” Threadless stands as the gold-standard in the field (apparel or otherwise), but crowdsourcing is beginning to become more and more prevalent in the fashion space.
Unfortunately, I think the sentiment that crowdsourcing offers a democratization of the design process is a cover for the nitty-gritty fact of the process: individuals are tapped to create work (often for free or minor “prizes”), which in turn creates revenue for a large company. While the notion of the “little guy” getting a chance to have their designs seen and promoted is great in theory, in practice, this little guy is simply used as cheap labor. A $50 gift certificate is pretty crappy compensation for an item that sells thousands of units for $20 a pop.
That said, I’m all for companies who play with a “crowd-voting” model, wherein a community chooses the exact pieces they’d most like to see in production (Modcloth has been experimenting with this in their Be the Buyer program). Could you imagine a world in which designers present their runway collections, put each look up for a “vote,” and then produce the most popular? Pretty awesome for all parties involved.
What do you think? Is crowdsourcing a viable business model in the fashion world or is it exploitative?
{ 0 comments }
“I’ll be honest: fashion is neither feminist or not — it is the woman wearing it who makes it whichever it might be. So when I wear my thigh-high boots with four-inch heels, I’m every foot and inch in charge, but some other woman wearing the same would be completely enslaved. Clothes don’t make the woman; the woman makes the clothes.”
- Elizabeth Wurtzel, in Elle Collections ss10 (UK), on the title question.
{ 0 comments }