data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/32eda/32eda277fc1f65154f7effcf501b0ac2cfe0120e" alt=""
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd565/cd565c161ee7f2765608ab4665b8f867776d909f" alt=""
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