# Can someone explain high fashion to me?



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

High fashion, that of big name designers and unwearable haute couture, is something that I don't really understand.

What is the point, does anyone actually buy the runway fashions? Or are they just to drum up press so you can sell your more realistic and wearable fashions?

What makes Armani, Dolce & Gabbana, Versace, JP Gautier, Lagerfeld, etc so important or relavent?


----------



## m kielty (Dec 22, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by crazyquik_
> 
> High fashion, that of big name designers and unwearable haute couture, is something that I don't really understand.
> 
> ...


Sounds like you already know the answer.
What makes Paris Hilton important or relevant?
What makes video gaming relevant? Etc.Etc..
Just the extent of peoples' interest.

I forgot to add ,the thing common to all that irrelevant stuff..it's fun.

mk


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

I'm not very fashion-forward myself. But the value I find in it is that it's sort of an extreme version of upcoming trends in menswear. For example, skinny runway suits predated/spurred the slim-fits that now benefit me greatly.

I'm a bit concerned, for example, about the big boxy jackets in the new Jil Sander collection. (I don't normally keep up with these things, but happened to read an article on it today.)

I personally don't buy fashion stuff, but I believe several of our SF refugees do.


----------



## Badrabbit (Nov 18, 2004)

I said this in another thread but it sums up my feelings about high fashion. 

"High fashion" is basically just abstract art with hot models as the canvas. The medium is a hodge-podge of egotism, charmeuse and lace.

I was talking about women's fashion at the time but you get the idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women thrive on novelty and are easy meat for the commerce of fashion. Men prefer old pipes and torn jackets. 
Anthony Burgess


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

There is no really no such thing as men's haute couture. The equivalent in terms of craftsmanship, not neccesarily in design, would be bespoke.

Originally women's haute couture was conceived as similar to what the men would order bespoke; however, the designer would offer seasonal collections of looks and then the women would choose certain looks and the designer fitted them.

However, since like all expensive commodities it has fallen to fickle economic times and now has been revamped as the sometimes outrageous shows we see today, resulting in a sort of very visual advertising. Of course, the clients still exist, albeit very few.

Note that Armani is not true haute couture; he only offers what is termed The Armani Privee Collection similar to what Yohji Yamamoto used to do. Almost riding on the coattails of the Paris Couture Week.

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I watch it hoping a model will take a tumble, much like a racing fan secretely hopes for a wreck. Really, those anorexic creatures from a Star Trek casting call doing that runway strut look like Mussolini posturing. When they fall it's like an old ship of the line demasted.


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by LabelKing_
> 
> *'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*
> 
> *Georges Bataille*


Do you know the works of Georges Bataille? Are they well known in the US?


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> 
> Do you know the works of Georges Bataille? Are they well known in the US?


I have never heard of him.

So I guess they're not very well known here.

---------------------

Beware of showroom sales-fever reasoning: i.e., "for $20 . . ." Once you're home, how little you paid is forgotten; how good you look in it is all that matters.


----------



## Joe Frances (Sep 1, 2004)

High fashion is to clothing what the Indie 500 is to highway driving. It is the place to test the limits of what is possible; it is where you put your "best" or wildest foot forward to the public; it is in essence, a trial by ordeal or fire. If you can make something of it, if you have thought of something different,you are entitled to the residual benefits- - more wearable stuff that bears a slight resemblance to the runway stuff; or better tires, spark plugs.

Joe


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

> quote:_Originally posted by Rich_
> Do you know the works of Georges Bataille? Are they well known in the US?


Yes, I'm familiar with his works. Most of them have to do with aesthetics and how sexual ecstasy is related to aestheticism.

Story of the Eye, perchance? I wouldn't say he is well-known generally speaking, however, probably well-known in academic circles.

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## 16128 (Feb 8, 2005)

I am not very interested in haute couture. It's interesting for art's sake, but is often unwearable and isn't flattering to the form.

I only care about things that make ME look better. I'm not interested in being a walking easel.

*"Buy the best, and you will only cry once." - Chinese proverb*


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

I dont quite understand this eletism against haute couture etc...yeah, so it's not as "sophisticated" or whatever (but sack suits [sarcasm] look "oh so suh-mart" [/sarcasm] [xx(])...but perhaps not everybody shares a certain view about clothing...perhaps a person might like to wear Gucci etc. more than Zegna...it doesnt make his taste worse...just different...

I think to a certain extent that dress is costume...now the guy dressed like a fashion mag ad is no worse than the guy dressed like an Italian CEO or a Saville Row old boy, or even a _*groan*_ Trad _*rolls eyes*_...he has just chosen a different style to costume himself with...heck if somebody wanted to go around wearing a pirate costume every day, he would be no more incorrect than a guy who decides that J Press rep ties are his bag...

To me...it really is a bit like abstract art...some people who want to call themselves "art lovers" recoil in disgust at abstract art because "it doesnt look like anything" or "my 12 year old could do that" (very sophisticated [xx(])...to me...it's important to keep an open mind...to me stuff like Brooks and Polo is Weyland and Kincade, while stuff like Comme des GarÃ§ons and YSL are Kandinsky and Rothco...now, while some people (myself not included) might find Weyland and Kincade more pleasant to look at than Kandinsky and Rothco...they cant deny that the Kandinsky and Rothco are amazing...and if they try to, they are only exposing the fact that they have alot to learn about the subject...

I personally am not super moved by haute couture, but I deffinately think it has its place...I'd prefer to wear Brioni than D&G, just because Brioni is a bit more timeless...but that doesnt mean that I'd never wear D&G...right alongside my Brioni, Zegna, Canali, Borrelli etc. I have Gucci, Valentino, Ferragamo, Hermes, Fendi, Armani etc...I dont see what the problem is with appreciating all different styles for what they are...

...surely if somebody told me that for the rest of my days I could only purchase Moschino or Brooks Brothers, I wouldnt even have to think about whom I'd choose (and it wouldnt be the ones with the dead sheep for a logo)...not to say that the guy who would choose the bretheren would be wrong...but he and I would just have different styles...I dont see what's so terrible about that...

...at least, that's the way I see it...

*****
[image]https://radio.weblogs.com/0119318/Screenshots/rose.jpg[/image]"See...What I'm gonna do is wear a shirt only once, and then give it right away to the laundry...eh?
A new shirt every day!!!"​


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

I agree with Gabba. I think that designer goods have their place. At least they do in my wardrobe. I don't have a ton, but tend to favor some CdG and Yojhi for some of my casual wear. I don't think being closed minded should ever be an ideal.


----------



## bosthist (Apr 4, 2004)

I'm with Gabba as well. And I think the Polo is Thomas Kinkade analogy is brilliant.


----------



## Long Way of Drums (Feb 15, 2006)

Gabba, you slander Rothco. I demand satisfaction.

Seriously, I agree with your overall sentiment, though I am rather less forgiving of haute couture. A lot of what's produced is a collective delusion, and it becomes great when everyone in the room is confused and uncomfortable enough to agree that it is brilliant. I'm reminded of the opening of Gia: "Fashion is not art. Fashion isn't even culture. Fashion is advertising."

Which is not to say good stuff doesn't happen in fashion shows or that there aren't fashion forward things I like (though this is a notable difference between fashion forward/progressive/original and the aggressive, unrelenting impracticality of haute couture), but I find much of it is ineptitude dessed up as originality and genius.

I suppose much of this, however, likewise comes from a fairly unusual view of style and fashion, and I don't imagine many people will agree.

"Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein."

"Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughtta fall down, tells you she's hurting 'fore she keels. Makes her home."

*We will not walk in fear, one of another.*


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

I love the haute coutur of Cristobal Balenciaga:










This Gres is very fine:










And Charles James was a master couturier. He would work on a single sleeve for two months:

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Vladimir Berkov (Apr 19, 2005)

I think there is a point to women's haute couture to some extent. Certainly many of the designers are completely out of touch with reality and with what clothes are for, but in theory the idea makes sense.

For men I think the very idea is pointless. The best analogy I can think of is a legal one. Women's clothing is like a new statute being passed. One day all the rules can change and some new style destroys the old and sweeps the world of fashion. Men's clothing is like the common-law. It builds gradually, based on precedent and no one designer or clothing manufacturer really has the ability to destroy the tradition that he has inherited.


----------



## LabelKing (Sep 3, 2002)

> quote:_Originally posted by Long Way of Drums_
> 
> Gabba, you slander Rothco. I demand satisfaction.
> 
> ...


At the time of Gia Carangi, true haute couture was almost presumed dead with many of the older houses closing or branching into RTW thus a true assessment of haute couture has to be done in the heyday, which was the 1920s to about 1950s.

It was the late '80s which somewhat introduced haute couture back with Gianni Versace's S&M influenced gowns and Christian Lacroix's neo-Baroque aesthetic, which correlated rather well with that age of excess. Then people decided that flamboyant haute couture shows were great for business advertising while still maintaining a tradition.

Look at John Galliano for Christian Dior. When it was under Marc Bohan, Dior was extremely stodgy.

And then there was Thierry Mugler, who revamped couture into an extremely sexual endeavour, which proved a great success for the Power Woman of the early '90s.

Helmut Newton and Thierry Mugler were a fantastic match for each other:

*'Naturally, love's the most distant possibility.'*

*Georges Bataille*


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Vladimir Berkov_
> 
> The best analogy I can think of is a legal one. Women's clothing is like a new statute being passed. One day all the rules can change and some new style destroys the old and sweeps the world of fashion. Men's clothing is like the common-law. It builds gradually, based on precedent and no one designer or clothing manufacturer really has the ability to destroy the tradition that he has inherited.


This is very thought-provoking - if only as a reminder of how very highly differentiated men and women are.


----------



## JohnnyVegas (Nov 17, 2005)

Men's fashion is a bunch of artsy people put silly-looking clothing on pretty people. Any fashion that looks good is very similar to what is considered timeless.


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

I agree with Gabba Goul.


----------



## williamkazak (May 24, 2005)

Were not the old kings like Peacocks;dressing up in colorful hand made attire and strutting the palace?
Now the men are very happy to watch the ladies doing the same!

William Kazak


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by williamkazak_
> 
> Were not the old kings like Peacocks;dressing up in colorful hand made attire and strutting the palace?


The old kings dressed up to show their rank. They wore colours and decoration (ermine and so on) that those below them in rank were not allowed to wear, even if they could afford to. In the days when men at the court seemed so flamboyant the dress codes were in fact complicated and very strict. I don't think men have never been as free as the ladies to dress fashionably. The uniform has always been a male thing.


----------



## Vettriano Man (Jun 30, 2005)

I see high fashion as being in the same league as high art. Nobody would ever want to buy Tracy Emin's soiled unmade bed and install it in their living room, would they? It's all about being extreme and catching the interest of the general public - indeed, what the tabloids crave for to sell their daily trash. Having said that, couture does throw out signals for other everyday designers who incorporate the slightest thing into their mall-store fashions.


----------

