by hharrissonn » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:58 pm
I'm not sure if this is the right thread for this but here goes.
I was watching this interview () with Jonathan Anderson, and around the 3:20 mark he starts talking about clothing communicating sexuality in a way that, while kind of off hand, really struck me because it's something I've thought a lot about before. I would be very interested to hear how other designers feel about dressing men as not only as some specific type of man in the world, but a man who is trying to have sex with other people in that world. Tom Ford is (fairly obviously) the master of this.Tom's Man (Gucci or TF) is put together in a way that highlights the beauty and elegance of the traditionally masculine. The cuts and the fabrics, and the way they are presented, make you want to be closer to them. It's luxurious, it's classic, it's safe, it's sexy. Tom Ford makes me think of men who are powerful but reserved, intelligent but not bookish, confident not boastful. He is charming, but not overbearing. I'd let Tom Ford's Man take me wherever he wants to go because I'm happy to be along for the ride.
Thom Browne does something similar, with his private-school-college-athlete-uniform-fantasy.While still playful and interesting, Thom makes products that do more to frame the man in them than to communicate an external message on the part of the designer. Thom's man is approachable and fun. He is put-together, but not stuffy. He's not afraid of his body, and he's not afraid that you know that. He's someone you would buy drinks for, were you a Tom Ford Man.
Helmut Lang did this well under Helmut, and I think under Shayne Oliver there is a huge potential for a resurgence of the Helmut brand of sexuality. Obvious bondage aesthetics aside, the worn in denim, fitted tees, the vintage style parkas give an air of nonchalance and effortlessness that I think a lot of other menswear designers aim for and ultimately miss the mark. There's an element of mystery and captivation that makes you curious about the man who can really pull off the Helmut look. His clothes don't wear him. That kind of unpretentious style, while elegant from a design standpoint, is ultimately a way to draw attention to the person who employs it. It's a way to exude sex that isn't peacocking. Helmut's man takes you to house shows and knows everyone there, but doesn't make a big deal about it. He is cool and collected, but not unaffectionate. He is comfortable, but never sloppy. He knows the DJ and wants to introduce you to them. Helmut's man will fuck on the first date, but he'll call in the morning.
On the opposite end of this spectrum I see things like Saint Laurent, basically from Hedi onward. There's this degree of affect and pretentiousness that doesn't, to me, read as sexual. Every Saint Laurent outfit I see, despite the sexy rockstar heroin chic image the brand has cultivated internally, looks incredibly put-on, and feels almost costume-y. The Saint Laurent man reads as someone living an escapist fantasy, who has come to a point in their life that they can now afford to look like they take risks. The uniform look of Saint Laurent doesn't achieve the sexual fantasy of Thom's uniform, and instead opts for Velvet Underground Cosplay.
vachement and Balenciaga under Demna are, to me, similarly unsexy. vachement makes leather pants for the man who would never go to The Eagle. The man wearing a "Sexual Fantasies" hoodie is probably thinking about missionary with someone who is wearing equally expensive garms. His weed grinder pendant was paid for with money from his internship at his Dad's investment firm, and the contrarian nature of that purchase is infinitely amusing to him. Everything is a statement, everything is a joke, everything requires so much thought and explanation that he has no time to think about how he's being read by a potential partner, only that his peers are paying attention and approving, ensuring that he's still in on the joke. There isn't much sexy about the grown-up version of suburban adolescent angst.
This is probably super reductive and I'm probably missing a lot here. There's probably a lot to say about gender stereotypes and the changing landscape of sexual politics and how sex shouldn't even enter the design process but this is how I read these things as a Gay Man and I don't think it's a coincidence that a lot of the designers I just riffed on are also Gay Men. Please pick this apart and tell me why it's not right for/to you because that's what I'm really interested in. How much of this is informed by my age/personal history of discovering fashion/personal tastes in both clothes and sexual partners. I think about these things when I dress myself, and I wonder how much of it is self delusion and how much has been culturally and socially imprinted on me and how much is really in the design of the clothes I buy and wear. This might not even register to a lot of people while they're thinking about how and why they wear the clothes they do and how they look and feel on/to them, but if we're wasting time thinking about how clothes look on why not give thought to how they look coming off.
ig: hharrissonn
tumblr: dyetransfer.tumblr.com