It Is Not Art. Yet.

by gimmegoodstyle

is it art or fashion? stylebubble.co.uk

According to a clever article in i-D magazine, it seems that we are beginning to collide art and fashion in bad ways. And lately, I agree with the thought. Art and fashion should not be in the same track, not now. Just like what Miuccia Prada once said in MET Gala: Impossible Conversation a year ago, fashion has never been a part of art for her. It’s too technical, it’s too distracting and above all; it reduces the real value of art to nothing but commercial advantages to big fashion houses that need to sell their clothes.

Just face it designers, sometimes what you design is just too bizarre for normal people to wear. Take a look at Maison’s staple face mask or crazy pointy structural… studs Mugler used to really proud of. They’re beautiful indeed, but are they worth the real bucks? Probably no. And the answer to escape all the troubles in finding the real way between versatility and vision is to promote the clothes as ‘arts’. People love arts even when it comes in such peculiar ways, people love to have one, and, even though we are ending up in the same way, people love to have a different, unique thing.

That’s art in fashion industry for you.

There is also no need to deny that ‘art’ word gives a significant boost of money to the company. After all, no one really knows what is the real value of art in currencies.

I am not saying that fashion should be all bare and dry like a desert. It’s also impossible to really separate art from fashion and vice versa. Designers are slowly recognizing their selves not as dress makers, but as visionaries. They are indeed probably telling the fact. Without their visions, there wouldn’t be the world of high fashion or, even worse, there wouldn’t be any fashion at all, we will all end up wearing same t-shirts-jeans combination. Or potato sack could be the new classic item.

And I admit some of the ‘visionaries’ designers are doing their artsy-fashion jobs well. Remember Karl Lagerfeld’s massive art-inspired collection, complete with mini gallery like venue? And I always consider Schiaparelli’s Haute Couture revival collection as a work of art in the hand of Christian Lacroix, a French couturier who has nothing to do with arts educationally. Those are arts and those are fashions. A perfect balance between the two over-demanding worlds in the hand of pure fashion designers.

What we have to do is figuring out what is the absolute silver lining to connect the two worlds. Maybe it’s how we want to dress in general, maybe it’s the price, maybe it’s the visions. It is so hard actually to take side in this matter, but in my opinion: we are not ready to taste art-fashion yet.

Fashion houses are still obsessed with money (oh, well, who doesn’t?!?) and instantly worried about designers’ over-wild visions, which is not entirely their fault because we have to remember that we are standing in the brick of new Great Depression era (hah, economics…), money is easily out of everyone’s question right now. Putting fashion and art together at the time like this is like making a big bait to commercial lovers. Or probably more like a big burden.

Nah, we don’t want art-fashion to be that cheap, believe me!

P.S: Don’t mind Lady Gaga, she is taking the ‘art’ side a bit too far.

Image taken from Style Bubble. Edited by Gimme Good Style.

Advertisements