care-tags.org

I enjoy reading longform journalism pieces but I feel like a lot of clothes related journalism is either super utilitarian or kinda wishy washy and boring. I was wondering if we could share particularly well written pieces that were enjoyable to read.

I bring this up because I just pulled this

Not exactly "highbrow" but I also really liked this profile of

Edit: They don't necessarily have to be long. Just something that you would have enjoyed reading even if you didn't give a shit about the designer/about fashion.

And while we're at it, that I just found.

This is awesome, I have a half hour break or so between a few of my classes and usually enjoy sending articles to my kindle.

someone tell me if this vice bit on ervell is any good

http://www.vice.com/read/the-evolution-of-patrik-ervell

aldaily.com

the air mocs in that first photograph are so lovely

i bring this up because of how i perceive a difference between the representational aspects of clothing, which is to say, the pieces themselves, and the dialogue that clothes have and how that dialogue often becomes confused with the consumption of the product. people talk about copfreezes, being bored or excited by their wardrobes but that all feels kind of...superficial, like the internet conversation has wiped out or overstimulated that strictly aesthetic relationship with clothing. has conversation on the internet created [the need for] a post-aesthetic relationship with clothes in order for participation in the fashion world in a non-designer capacity to be worthwhile or interesting?

this isn't to suggest that relationship no longer exists, it's just that it has an endpoint, a cul-de-sac you can ride your trike around and still have a good time but never go anywhere. people become happy or content or discontent with their wardrobes and i argue that it's because we've done what we can in that domain and to be involved with clothing in a satisfying way, a different, additional relationship to your wardrobe is necessary.

how would you talk about clothes without talking about clothes?

Is it because we're all modern individualists and therefore the clothes themselves aren't as interesting to us as our relationship to the clothes, which clothes we curate, etc?

A personal relationship to clothes is definitely easier to talk about, needs less historical knowledge and specialist language. As a result it's more immediate and relevant to more people, so more people talk about it. It's also a more circular and annoying discussion sometimes.

It reminds me of ben's designer friend. ben said she is "Not interested in the hobbyist aspect of fashion." and who can blame her when some hobbyist discussions are so banal. (Obviously consider myself guilty of this)

Then again there are few shows/lookbooks/pieces that aren't presented as "something you could buy" so is it so weird that the majority of the discussion is about whether people want it or not? It would be lame to go to an art museum and only talk about which paintings you'd buy to put in your living room, but then again paintings aren't mass produced, placed for sale, and then discounted if they don't move (generally)

Also reminds me of the common wish to "quit the game" and not actually care about what clothes one is wearing, just follow "fashion" and appreciate it for what it is and wear all Margaret Howell 1998 every day for the rest of your life.

nice reading. It's not really saying anything novel but it did nicely condense the last 600 years of western pictorial to non-pictorial art rather succinctly. I'm not sure how I feel about his criterion that art must be about something/have internal meaning. Because that traps it within the problems of interpretation and what various artists and critics have to say about it.


transferring that to clothes, meaning/interaction in a non-aesthetic (you could say philosophical or perhaps emotional vis a vis personal experiences) mode is pretty hard to parse. Seems to me that it can only really be accomplished through contemplation. Alternatively, we could approach clothes 1) functionally (which is the mode of the vast majority of americans) either in full function or non-function or disrupted/modified function, 2) culturally, which is to say examine the cultural expectations and uses of a various object and then interact with it either according to or against these uses, or 3) philosophically.

all three of these modes are not new ways to approach clothing at least in their positive modes. As people 'who like clothes' however, we could learn from these modes to approach clothing from a non hobby non aesthetic perspective.

is it possible to have a non-representational relationship with clothing? the act or wearing conforms a garment to a representation or operates through its denial. even a square bit of cotton takes on representational qualities when worn. to not wear an item is to deny it of a fundamental property though.

Architecture, i think, can provide some solutions. I was reading stuff by peter eisenman last semester (he's a hack though) and early in his career he expressed the desire to form an autonomous architecture, that is to say, an architecture that is generated from within itself and is not dependent upon any outside meaning or mode. Borrowing from his friend Derrida he wanted to disconnect (deconstruct) the sign from the signified. The classic example is of the column. In architeture the sign of the column is the same as what is signified, the function and appearance of the column are one and the same. A column is a vertical element that supports the crossbeams and operates as a unit. column is defined by function. Eisenman wanted to separate these so he created a wall with a surplus of supporting elements: a wall and a column in such number that it is impossible to tell which bit is doing the actual supporting. function is obscured and the sign flattens out. ANYWAY. is it possible to create such a disconnect in clothing? What would that look like (not simply aesthetically). Don't think too hard though because eisenman is a hack. But these kind of exercises could be a different approach to clothing.

Telegraph published an interesting insight into the world of Yoox:

I've had so many dreams where I enter the yoox factory

The Secret World of Fast Fashion



Interesting to see how Korean-Americans were able to dominate the fast fashion market in the US in just two generations. It also shows how different the production process of these Korean-owned fast fashion manufacturers from say, Inditex in Europe.

Digging through the threads on Stylezeitgeist's "designers and their work" section is worth a look. I've read a number of "news" articles linked on there. Unfortunately, I haven't bookmarked them...so happy hunting

http://www.stylezeitgeist.com/forums/fo ... y.php?f=56

Not any one article, but here's an issue of The New Inquiry that's focused on fashion - http://thenewinquiry.com/wp-content/upl ... d-iPad.pdf

What is the most significant fashion innovation in history?

Ran across .

If anyone has knows of any long form journalism articles about ACRONYM I'd love to read them

, but still pretty cool.

Great piece on controversy in clothing advertisement.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/tmagazi ... blogs&_r=1

Pretty depressing article about the modern world's obsession with branding and boringness. Focusing on SLP

, thanks for sharing.

"Today, as high fashion moves closer to mass media — with brand-hosted YouTube channels, films, huge spectacles — there is pressure to simplify." Sums it up well.

"Holland Cotter, an art critic for The Times, wrote, “We’re in an age of remake culture, an epidemic of re-enactment fever.” " Everyone loves the music metaphor of sampling. But I'd say creatives were always bricoleurs, just not so obviously, since now we have quick access to see where their flintstone came from; might have been less transparent pre-Internet.

I have a book recommendation for you and anyone else: http://www.amazon.com/Brand-New-Jane-Pa ... 1411223744

I'm reading this right now, about half-way through, and some of the brands it references are old at this point but it's still an interesting and relevant read.