Today’s
fashion industry plays by the same rules, but the validity of the finished
product is considerably more problematic. It’s easy to proclaim that a Lucian
Freud painting is art – it’s not quite so self-evident to claim the same of a
dress designed by Karl Lagerfeld, even though they are contemporaries, both
working in studios, surrounded by assistants and heckled by press. Both are
forces to be reckoned with within their respective realms of creativity and
both have been lauded by critics.
The
democratization of fashion runs parallel with the democratization of art – and
raises similar objections. In the case of fashion designers, however, in order
to be taken seriously, it is more necessary to distinguish themselves as
creating either ‘high’ or ‘low’ fashion. The question whether a painting of a
Campbell’s soup can amounts to art or not resounds with the question of whether
or not a conceptual piece by Hussein Chalayan can be considered an article of
clothing. The more unpractical or aesthetic-defying, it seems, the more
artistic. The examples of comparable instances in art and fashion are a legion.
London Fashion Week fixture Pandemonia’s recognizably unrecognizable effort to
disguise her (or him) self can be seen as inspired by the artist Cindy
Sherman’s identity explorations through self-transformation. Performance and
installation art are effectively used by designers to convey their fantasy
worlds in fashion shows, as for example during the now-legendary Alexander
McQueen Spring/Summer 1999 show, when model Shalom Sharlow dramatically let her
dress be spray-painted by robots.
What shocks
the audience most in these artistic high-fashion instances is that the medium
of clothing is used to express a concept that is not necessarily
fashion-related. The elevated emotion it gives rise to is also unexpected in
the context of a fashion show. In the sense that art can bring about a feeling
of awe because of its beauty, a fashion show can bring tears to the eyes of
editors because of its powerful aesthetic impact. It is precisely the tension
between functionality and aesthetics that lies at the heart of fashion’s
artistic potential. This potential is unleashed first by the designer’s
intention and ultimately fulfilled by the audience’s interpretation. In this
sense, modern fashion, like modern art is a catalyst for dialogue and an
exchange of ideas.
Exhibitions,
like the particular case of Martin Margiela, are evidence of this evolution in
the reception of fashion. By making a notoriously conceptual designer more
accessible it exposed the underlying message that any exhibition carries,
whether it is about art or fashion. It offers, as Kaat Debo poignantly states,
“an introduction to a type of aesthetic which people might not come across
every day. It broadens the horizons of the viewer, forces them to look at
fashion from a different angle.” In other words, if the art of fashion is
executed well, it has the power to renew our view of the word and lets us
experience it through visionary eyes.
No comments:
Post a Comment