2013 Costume Institute Exhibit : "PUNK: Chaos To Couture"

[mistress_f]

where's the thread where we post all the pics and comment as they come in?!

http://forums.thefashionspot.com/f50/costume-institute-gala-2013-punk-chaos-couture-235647.html

 

[Zazie]

Urgh, urgh, urgh....the clothes....I have lost all respect for Tisci!

Is vomit punk?

 

[softgrey]

i watched the feed afterwards, not live...
and i literally had to stop it at certain intervals because it was just awful at certain points...

they cut off debbie harry and vivienne westwood but they spoke to the teenaged Fanny oops, i mean Fanning sisters for ages...
...

it was sort of a debacle...lol

 

[softgrey]

^That's one of the things that I found rather random for Riccardo to chair this years gala, the fact he is known for his gothic-romantisism - than his execution of a punk aesthetic, I would have been more compelled to have had Vivienne Westwood to chair this years or someone of her genre.

agree...
guess we shouldn't be too surprised though...
people have been confusing the two for years...
even while it was happening people who weren't part of it all tended to just lump everything together...


i like that marc jacobs wore comme des garcons...

 

[Scott]

phuel,but you see that's the point....it wasn't even anywhere close to sioux's hair style....they literally look like afros......

i just find it hilarious that beyonce is co-chair.....

no wonder this whole thing stinks. if the V&A had done this i think it probably would have been done properly and certainly without the crutch of shallow celebrity,which anna and co. seem to be pandering to more and more with each passing year. i'm bored with it. frankly,seeing more images from the exhibit it really looks kind of pathetic,actually.

 

[Chanelcouture09]

i watched the feed afterwards, not live...
and i literally had to stop it at certain intervals because it was just awful at certain points...

they cut off debbie harry and vivienne westwood but they spoke to the teenaged Fanny oops, i mean Fanning sisters for ages...
...

it was sort of a debacle...lol

I felt that although Vivienne came across as overtly outspoken she still had the punk spirit there when she was being interviewed, standing up for her beliefs and for him to cut her short, it caused an uproar at his approach of interviewing skills - well the lack of, I should say.

They spoke to the most dull and dis-interesting people for what seemed like eternity and the interesting, compelling and fascinating for what felt like a split second and the approach was beyond impolite.

Next year - Scrap 'Billy', a longer live stream, scrap the banal questions and have interviewers who have a clue what they're talking about 'favourite punk song?' - we all knew it would cause a moment of and at one point Hilary actually asked the people behind the camera who she was interviewing (so I'd say sharpen up the act next year).

Who is 'Billy' anyway? whilst watching the live stream I was constantly like...

*Thisismygeneration.tumblr.com

 

[laika]

This is pretty wicked...from the Daily Beast:

Punk: Chaos to Couture at the Costume Institute Shows How Derivative the Style Has Become

 

[Mathewthew]

They should have westwood host the Gala...not Tiscci. He is good I love his work, but westwood would be the best choice out of all designers attended.

 

[Mockingbird]

The real punk thing would've been to stay home from this celebration of mainstream, pretentious over-excess.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

God Save McQueen
5.7.2013
By Greg Garry
Is it punk or plagiarism? A critical look at the Costume Institute's 'Punk: Chaos to Couture' exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

The very ethos of punk was meant to be anti-fashion, anti EVERY-thing, so a fancy museum show about its relationship to high fashion seems like an oxymoron, and blasphemous to all the Blitzkrieg Boppers out there. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s PUNK; Chaos to Couture opens May 9, and hopes to duplicate the two-hour long lines their Alexander McQueen retrospective had a few years back.

The rumor mill has it that all the original punk players—like Johnny Rotten and Patti Smith—refused to cooperate or loan any clothes. And the annual Gala had Beyoncé as honorary chairwoman and Korean sensation PSY and Kanye West as the main performers. How the **** are they punk? Sid Vicious must be pogoing in his grave! Watch out: This could all end in tears, and lots of spitting.

The exhibit itself starts off promisingly, with a replica of Vivienne Westwood’s legendary London store SEX (pictured), ground zero for punk style circa 1976. The entire show should have solely been a retrospective of this maverick’s career. She’s the real deal, and you see her influence on all the other designers on display. Her quote during the Gala’s red carpet was telling: “I like my part of the show, and I’ll just leave it at that.”

To rep the New York City scene, there's a funny grade-school diorama of the legendary CBGB men’s bathroom, but it wasn’t half as foul and filthy as the original. There’s no blood, vomit, or **** on the walls for one, and these toilets (unlike the originals) all have seats.

Things get a little schizophrenic once it leaves 1977 behind and goes fancy, with mannequin after mannequin in the same fluffy fright wigs, all wearing high-priced rip-offs of the original punks’ party clothes. So you get Joe Strummer’s hand-stenciled shirt done by Helmut Lang (pictured below), Richard Hell’s ripped t-shirt by Hussein Chalayan, and Johnny Rotten’s safety pinned jacket by Versace (pictured at top). The overly cited and revered safety pin dress worn by Liz Hurley in the '90s is there, alongside a rather tacky gold-buckled Versace number that’s more ****** hooker than punk.

The whole point of punk style was that you were broke and made your own looks from actual garbage, the stuff the rich clothes horses threw away. Your own unique persona emerged from that DIY moment. To merely show that aesthetic alongside the expensive designer versions that sell for 10-grand is a little offensive, and too simple a curation job.

We live in a cut-and-paste world, and what we need is the new punk to come along. Some very beautiful clothes—by McQueen, Margiela, Rodarte, and the adorable Zandra Rhodes—are on display. But wait until you exit through the gift shop and see they are selling bedazzled CBGB tees and Manic Panic hair dye!

The rooms at the Met start to feel like a slightly subversive and very expensive mall store, where they sell a ****ed up and slashed Chanel suit even your granny can love. Let's call it Hot Topic haute couture. Suzy Menkes destroyed the show in the New York Times, deeming it “bloodless,” which is very apt. Like the parttime punks on St. Marks Place in NYC (who really live in Connecticut with their parents), it might have some of the right clothes but not a drop of the proper attitude. Fashionistas and the ladies who lunch will eat this **** up, but real punks might want to stick to the gutter. It’s about as punk rock as Avril Lavigne.

via OUT magazine



@Scott I couldn't agree with you more about the V&A. They don't care about how many celebrities show up. They like to expose true fashion history. This isn't the same as a retrospective. Save the theatrics and histrionics for those and strip this down to the true details of Punk.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

Look what they're selling in the gift shop...
via Out Magazine
http://www.out.com/entertainment/art-books/2013/05/07/punk-my-as's#slide-1 <take out the apostrophe.

(they're selling the manic panic for $20. you can get it online for 10.)

 

[Littleathquakes]

Wish more celebrities felt this so that 1) less celebrities, and 2) it really needs to be smaller/more intimate. That guest list this year was really random.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2013/05/08/paltrow-met-ball-not-fun/2144353/

 

[softgrey]

you know...
when i was a kid growing up in nyc...
you used to see the pics of all the socialites who attended this event every season and who were basically responsible for all the fundraising for the museum's costume institute...
they wore their own designer gowns...(not borrowed stuff)...
and they each had their own personal style...

i used to dream of some day going to the event myself...

but now...
...
not so much...
i am not interested in very many of these people, many of whom have no relationship to fashion other than the fact that they are not naked...


ah well---
maybe the Nick Knight videos will be good?
no one has really mentioned them...
kinda weird...

 

[mistress_f]

ah well---
maybe the Nick Knight videos will be good?
no one has really mentioned them...
kinda weird...

ooh what videos? i know nothing about this. I have conflicting feelings about this exhibition so i have been avoiding news etc. Nick understands the punk subculture (better than most, that's for sure). I'm really looking forward to them

 

[Phuel]

you know...
when i was a kid growing up in nyc...
you used to see the pics of all the socialites who attended this event every season and who were basically responsible for all the fundraising for the museum's costume institute...
they wore their own designer gowns...(not borrowed stuff)...
and they each had their own personal style...

i used to dream of some day going to the event myself...

but now...
...
not so much...
i am not interested in very many of these people, many of whom have no relationship to fashion other than the fact that they are not naked...

You sound like Cinderella when you were little! Little softgrey looking out her gloomy window at the shiny, sparkly castle like in the Disney version of Cinderella..

This obsession with any and all celebrities being forcefully shoehorned into every damn event to appeal to everyone is stripping every event of its uniqueness and identity. The majority of these people don't even belong there.

I hope this type of generic parade of the "stars" will get tiring to people soon. There was a time when certain stars would attend a fashion show because they were actually interested in being there-- or they were friends with the designers and wanted to show their support. Now stars like Beyonce are paid a billion dollars to attend because the designers' PR think that'll get all the trashy shows like TMZ to E! covering it... Just so cheapening. If I were a designer, I wouldn't pay 5 dollars to have Beyonce attend, but she would be welcomed if she wanted to come of her own accord. Although I doubt she would unless she were paid-- I get the feeling her entire career is all about making money and nothing else. No substance-- not even style, just instant flashiness: Gaudy and cheap. That's the perfect summation of her and how these events are handled.

 

[Daydreamer70]

Those cutesy headpieces really are a bummer... They could have used the headpieces from two or three of Junya Watanabe's more punk influenced collections, and it would have been amazing. Or Julien could have made punk hairstyles out of trash and found objects held together with packing tape and plastic wrap or something,But those soft fuzzy things look like something out of Doctor Seuss. - Still excited to see the show this weekend though.

 

[softgrey]

You sound like Cinderella when you were little! Little softgrey looking out her gloomy window at the shiny, sparkly castle like in the Disney version of Cinderella..

This obsession with any and all celebrities being forcefully shoehorned into every damn event to appeal to everyone is stripping every event of its uniqueness and identity. The majority of these people don't even belong there.

I hope this type of generic parade of the "stars" will get tiring to people soon. There was a time when certain stars would attend a fashion show because they were actually interested in being there-- or they were friends with the designers and wanted to show their support. Now stars like Beyonce are paid a billion dollars to attend because the designers' PR think that'll get all the trashy shows like TMZ to E! covering it... Just so cheapening. If I were a designer, I wouldn't pay 5 dollars to have Beyonce attend, but she would be welcomed if she wanted to come of her own accord. Although I doubt she would unless she were paid-- I get the feeling her entire career is all about making money and nothing else. No substance-- not even style, just instant flashiness: Gaudy and cheap. That's the perfect summation of her and how these events are handled.

...

listen---
it really was like that...
my mom took me to the met OFTEN...
have you been there?...
it really IS like a castle...
complete with grand marble staircase and real suits of armor, etc...

growing up in nyc is like growing up in a fairytale...
at least it is if you do it the way i did...
art galleries, opera, broadway, radio city, MOMA, the met, central park...
etc...
it was just normal...and really awesome...

mistress---
if you read the press stuff (even on here)---you see that Nick Knight and Ruth Hogden did some videos that are backdrops for the exhibit...
i don't know if there is just one or what, but they are both so talented that i cannot imagine it won't be good...
it's archive footage of sex pistols and stuff like that...
i guess they must have spliced it together and done some effects, etc...
i'm just really curious...
it seems to me that video would be a good way to bring the thing to life...

 

[Littleathquakes]

Ouch

 

[Zazie]

Punk had a great aesthetic, eg. cut and paste font, a lot of wit and provocative ideas...and "anarchy, i.e. being against a hegemonic command structure" isn't the same as "chaos". It is proposing a different, more just structure, but using strong and somewhat intimidating visual statements to increase the visibility of this belief. The roots of punk lie in the left-leaning Situationists, I believe...urgh...it seems they can't even get the basics right.

I might be wrong, but I see a bit of a mocking, ridicule and reduction to caricature here, all intentional, which I think is why this comes across as a fake "tribute".

Say, if there's a "tribute" to Martin Margiela and it shows up as painted over labels and fashion absurdities, like the H&M collection, instead of what lies at the heart of his influence, that will be as disrespectful.

This is le Petit Trianon, where the socialites (and their position in a highly polarized society), against whom and which the Punk Movement was rebelling against, can indulge in a little dress-up and make belief without sullying their minds with any thought of the deeper implications of what Punk truly represents.

It's a bit of a missed opportunity - while most of us posting here are probably not truly "punk", and don't quite "get" it, it is an important, creative, influential and relevant socio-cultural current that runs and moves our age.

 

[Zazie]

Wiki has a better, more correct definition of Anarchy according to the Punk Movement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

I believe that above all, Punk, like The Situationists, is about making society THINK.