I'm not solid on this, but I
think there's an imprecise difference between what art and fashion can do. Or
maybe fashion is just a facet of art. I think that's a better way to think of
it. There's differences between what film and charcoal can do, but they're both
means of creating art. In art, there are different purposes and ways to
communicate. Fashion is one of those languages. Commercial art; preset computer
wallpapers and phone cases, mass-produced means of personalization, includes
commercial fashion. So at the moment, I don't think there's differences.
There's different "levels" or purposes of art, just as there are in
fashion. Some art pieces are "ready to wear" like fashion, and some
clothes are pretty out there and impractical, like art.
One of the pieces in Future Beauty, designed by Kosuke Tsumura,
was a jacket made for his "Final Home" project. The jacket is made of
translucent material. It's made with numerous zippered pockets, stuffed with
artificial flowers. Flowers surround the mannequin's feet, dripping from the
jacket. The puffed pockets resemble Ziploc bags, and Kosuke intended the jacket
to be a tool for the homeless. To me it looks like a piece about the future, a
modern liveable suit for the homeless. While it doesn't eliminate the problem,
it does make living on the streets easier. The fact that it's filled with
flowers instead of food or clothes is interesting. It could come across as a
criticism; how people hold beauty over practicality, or it could just be
aesthetically pleasing. It's an example
of fashion as social commentary, and I think it fits very well into art.
Art communicates ideas and can serve
as vehicle for people to come up with their own interpretations. Another piece
by Rei Kawakubo made me think of the past. The dress is made in extremely
thick, beige fabric. Draping and ruffles follow from the neck, to the shoulder,
and down the front of the dress. The comfortable look of these embellishments
is offset by the thick, layered fabric used. The dress looks at once both
extremely comfortable and painfully restrictive. Because of this, I thought it
could be referencing the past. I'm not sure about specific time periods, but in
the Rococo period at least, dresses were embellished and soft, but binding and
uncomfortable. It also reminds me of the tight-fitting traditional Chinese
dress, the qipao (also known as cheongsam).
In the exhibit, I also saw pieces that
looked more accessible, such as the sweet and goth lolita style dresses made
for Baby the Stars Shine Bright. I thought these were made with a different
purpose in mind than the other pieces. It's still a form of communication, but
I think it becomes more about the person wearing them than about the piece
itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment