by insted » Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:30 am
very well put - i've often been considering the crosshatch of form and function. are there instances when one trumps another, based on contextual value? for example the artistic merit of a designer - a runway piece is beautiful and tells a story, but does not "function" as a utilitarian object - is it important to own said object? is it subjective? how subjective?
the conversation tends to start deviating here between clothing as necessity and clothing as art. true these lines can blend, an example I would reference being acronym. their explicitly functional approach to design is indeed an artform, not to mention the actual aesthetic quality the work possesses.
however it really is difficult to lay down a specific paradigm when talking about clothing, a lot is being left out when it's referred to strictly as consumerism. i think within reason it is fair to develop a personal relationship with the allure of a designer, or a style. what can be ultimately defeating about this though is the ravenous nature of the market.
i also believe that the instant transmission of informational media as apparent in a post-modern society has a lot to do with the consumeristic tendencies many tend to adopt. there is just so much calling for stimulation that you want something to be new and current in all aspects of your life, so why not clothing as well.