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

[Chanelcouture09]

Oddly, though, I don't even see "mainstream" elements of punk in either of these two.

Oh no I didn't mean to link them both, I was just stating Punk has become mainstream and with Kanye and Beyonce there they're as mainstream as you're going to get... if that makes any sense

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ I think I get your drift!

 

[LucaNatashaFan]

Still anything about the livestream? If i'm not wrong at this point last year many sites already reported the news about it so i guess we won't have it this year

 

[Chanelcouture09]

^Here.

 

[LucaNatashaFan]

^Thank you Richard, i can't give you karma anymore

 

[Phuel]

Thanks for that pic of Adam, softgrey! My god, he was perfection then: Total style over substance, but who cares, just look at him.

I remember Johnny Rotten wore CdG back in the 90s. Johnny was alway too clever to be a punk-- and he knew that when you're pushing 40, you'll look like a fool still clinging on to punk's youth. CdG was so appropriate for an aging punk, and Johnny wore it well without ever looking like a relic. That's how you bring punk to a whole other level. I think I cherish Rei a little more each day.

 

[wild roses]

Didn't Anna kill the grunge trend in the early 1990s? By saying if designers kept doing it, she wouldn't show them in Vogue or go to their shows?

If that's so, then I can only imagine what sort of cleaned up, spiritless version of punk we'll get in this exhibition. (I know grunge and punk aren't the same, but both have the same sort of carelessness, messiness, and freedom to them that Anna doesn't like.)

 

[laika]

laika...
who on earth is Oliver Saillard?

he directs the Musée Galliera in Paris and is easily the most innovative and interesting curator working with fashion presently.
i think his most recent show was the one featuring tilda swinton, called "the impossible wardrobe."

he is a true fashion geek, super insightful and generally just awesome.
how have we not discussed this before?

is there a thread for fashion curators or fashion and museums?
I don't want to get off topic here, but I would happily start one or contribute, if you can point me in the right direction...

 

[Phuel]

Didn't Anna kill the grunge trend in the early 1990s? By saying if designers kept doing it, she wouldn't show them in Vogue or go to their shows?)

I distinctively remember looking at my sister's American Vogue back in '93, and that damn designer grunge thing was everywhere. So, if Anna hated it, she definitely didn't do anything about it since it was her BFF Marc Jacobs that was doing it for Perry Ellis.

 

[Phuel]

he directs the Musée Galliera in Paris and is easily the most innovative and interesting curator working with fashion presently.
i think his most recent show was the one featuring tilda swinton, called "the impossible wardrobe."

he is a true fashion geek, super insightful and generally just awesome.
how have we not discussed this before?

is there a thread for fashion curators or fashion and museums?
I don't want to get off topic here, but I would happily start one or contribute, if you can point me in the right direction...

The industry would be richer, more interesting, more inspiring if this man-- and the likes of him, were in a more prominent position.

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

Didn't Anna kill the grunge trend in the early 1990s? By saying if designers kept doing it, she wouldn't show them in Vogue or go to their shows?

)

no when Marc Jacobs did the collection for Perry Ellis. Anna was the one who I believe featured his look on the cover. His grunge collection was editorially praised but Perry Ellis didnt sell it

 

[luckyme]

Discovering Westwood and McLaren's Seditionaries was "soul-shaking" for Undercover designer Jun Takahashi....

http://www.style.com/trendsshopping/stylenotes/043013_Punk_Jun_Takahashi/

 

[lepetitcouturier]

Okay. I have to say this, and I feel really terrible for saying it. But in my eyes, Punk is dead. I don't understand what Anna Wintour, Beyonce, and Kanye West has to do with it. I find it to be silly that they're taking a raw moment in history and turning it into some kind of luxury thing. If there's anybody who should've been co-chair of this it should have been Viv or Gaultier. Not Beyonce. And if there's somebody who should be performing it should be someone from that era. Not Kanye West. It just honestly makes no sense to me. This is something that died out years ago. It got a little revival for 15 minutes in the Grunge years. But it is dead. There are so many designers out there who deserve their own retrospective. So many people and eras. This is certainly something that has it's place in history, but it's also something that died out a long time ago. This just seems to be a fake thing to me. Like a bunch of people who, rather than actually putting a safety pin through their cheeks, they tape one to their face.

 

[Spike413]

Okay. I have to say this, and I feel really terrible for saying it. But in my eyes, Punk is dead. I don't understand what Anna Wintour, Beyonce, and Kanye West has to do with it. I find it to be silly that they're taking a raw moment in history and turning it into some kind of luxury thing. If there's anybody who should've been co-chair of this it should have been Viv or Gaultier. Not Beyonce. And if there's somebody who should be performing it should be someone from that era. Not Kanye West. It just honestly makes no sense to me. This is something that died out years ago. It got a little revival for 15 minutes in the Grunge years. But it is dead. There are so many designers out there who deserve their own retrospective. So many people and eras. This is certainly something that has it's place in history, but it's also something that died out a long time ago. This just seems to be a fake thing to me. Like a bunch of people who, rather than actually putting a safety pin through their cheeks, they tape one to their face.

But that's the whole point, this exhibit -- as with all of the Costume Institute exhibits -- is about that place in history and how it's been integrated into contemporary fashion and style. The Goddess exhibit was about the history of classical dress and how it's informed the present, the Anglomania exhibit was about British sartorial history and how it's informed the present, the Poiret exhibit was about Poiret's history and how it's informed the present, the Model As Muse exhibit was about the history of changing beauty ideals and how it's informed the present. How is this exhibit any different?? It's an examination of how punk, an underground and decidedly anti-fashion movement, has informed the present in large part through it's being blended into high fashion.

It's not about how punk as a legitimate movement is or isn't still genuine or even relevant, it's about how punk -- like classical draping, like revolutions in menswear, like modern undergarments, like liberated shapes, like McQueen's infamous bumster pants -- has shaped how we dress today.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

But that's the whole point, this exhibit -- as with all of the Costume Institute exhibits -- is about that place in history and how it's been integrated into contemporary fashion and style. The Goddess exhibit was about the history of classical dress and how it's informed the present, the Anglomania exhibit was about British sartorial history and how it's informed the present, the Poiret exhibit was about Poiret's history and how it's informed the present, the Model As Muse exhibit was about the history of changing beauty ideals and how it's informed the present. How is this exhibit any different?? It's an examination of how punk, an underground and decidedly anti-fashion movement, has informed the present in large part through it's being blended into high fashion.

It's not about how punk as a legitimate movement is or isn't still genuine or even relevant, it's about how punk -- like classical draping, like revolutions in menswear, like modern undergarments, like liberated shapes, like McQueen's infamous bumster pants -- has shaped how we dress today.

I guess the thing that pisses me off about this is that it's involving a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the movement. Granted, Anna Wintour lived through it. But Beyonce? Kanye? Vivienne Westwood is getting a ton of attention for this. And she has nothing to do with this exhibit (it seem slike Anna doesn't even like her. I can't remember the last time I opened an issue of Vogue and saw something from Vivienne in the eds.) It just confuses me that they're taking something that involved street kids in the 60s (and nowadays in the gritty parts of NYC), and they're having a bunch of multi-millionaires act like they know a thing or two about it. I mean, I can't stress how stupid it is to me that Beyonce is co-chairing this.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

Hmmm, 60s?

I always date the high punk movement later, like mid-late 70s, into early 80s (although the transition into the New Romantics, Post-Punks and Goths happens here). But I guess if you factor in Velvet Underground, Warhol's factory, moving into early Iggy Pop/Stooges and early Bowie you could pin some roots down to the mid-late 60s.

Still, classic punk - Clash, Pistols, Ramones - is later.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

Hmmm, 60s?

I always date the high punk movement later, like mid-late 70s, into early 80s (although the transition into the New Romantics, Post-Punks and Goths happens here). But I guess if you factor in Velvet Underground, Warhol's factory, moving into early Iggy Pop/Stooges and early Bowie you could pin some roots down to the mid-late 60s.

Still, classic punk - Clash, Pistols, Ramones - is later.

I always get confused between Punk being in the 60s and the 70s. I always thought it started brewing in the late 60s.

 

[laika]

I guess the thing that pisses me off about this is that it's involving a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the movement. Granted, Anna Wintour lived through it. But Beyonce? Kanye? Vivienne Westwood is getting a ton of attention for this. And she has nothing to do with this exhibit (it seem slike Anna doesn't even like her. I can't remember the last time I opened an issue of Vogue and saw something from Vivienne in the eds.) It just confuses me that they're taking something that involved street kids in the 60s (and nowadays in the gritty parts of NYC), and they're having a bunch of multi-millionaires act like they know a thing or two about it. I mean, I can't stress how stupid it is to me that Beyonce is co-chairing this.

But that's what happens when fashion gets involved.
the spirit of punk is completely incompatible with fashion...so you could never
have an fashion exhibit that captures it "authentically," no matter who was involved. Even Viv.

I think spike's point is absolutely right on, although I understand why that kind of approach is hard to digest in this context...there isn't an ethos or politics of classical dress or Poiret, so it's pretty straightforward to present them in a deocontextualized/art-historical way. Punk, not so much...

 

[Spike413]

I guess the thing that pisses me off about this is that it's involving a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the movement. Granted, Anna Wintour lived through it. But Beyonce? Kanye? Vivienne Westwood is getting a ton of attention for this. And she has nothing to do with this exhibit (it seem slike Anna doesn't even like her. I can't remember the last time I opened an issue of Vogue and saw something from Vivienne in the eds.) It just confuses me that they're taking something that involved street kids in the 60s (and nowadays in the gritty parts of NYC), and they're having a bunch of multi-millionaires act like they know a thing or two about it. I mean, I can't stress how stupid it is to me that Beyonce is co-chairing this.

But ultimately I think you need to look at the Gala and the exhibit as two completely separate things, which they very much are in the end. The gala isn't trying to be informative, nor is it aiming for realism or anything of the sort. It's a charity event -- and by extension of that, a publicity event -- first and foremost. The people involved aren't involved because they have anything to do with the punk movement, they're involved to bring publicity to the event and to raise money for it. As someone else pointed out earlier in the thread, the performances, guests and co-chairs selected for the party rarely have anything at all to do with the theme of the exhibit. I mean what did Cate Blanchett have to do with Poiret, or Giorgio Armani with Superheroes? One recent gala had a performance from the Boradway revival of "Hair" if I'm not mistaken.

I'm sure that people will show up this year in high-fashion that's been infused with a bit of what we identify as punk, and I'm sure the party will have been outfitted accordingly to complement the exhibit but expecting more than that is setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[LolaSvelt]

^I'm glad somebody said this. I think people are taking it way too seriously. It's just a a bit of fun and for charity. And people seem to be forgetting that Rooney Mara is also co-chairing. Hello, she played Lisabeth Salander.

It doesn't matter if punk was initially anti-fashion. The point is that it has a place in fashion history.