Comme des Garçons S/S 2022 Paris

[MulletProof]

^ you're right, but one has to wonder just to what extent you truly oppose repetitiveness when, for the past 10 years and with the exception of two collections, she has presented about 18 shows consistent with the collection above and in each of them, it's the same people stating 'ew no it's repetitive' 'ew no it's repetitive' lol. Yes, you loved her more simple work and somehow have managed to reignite your disappointment twice a year for ten years but.. time to make some peace with this stage maybe? or move on/stop caring? (saying you don't care while taking the time and effort to say you don't care doesn't sound very logical). I mean, what kind of fix are you hoping to get from this when, after 18 collections (more than the entire careers of many designers), it's highly unlikely there will be a change of direction especially when you consider her age?

Do I think you should sit down and applaud? or that the artistic trajectory of every creator is fascinating at all times "if you really love him"? no, I mean no one really cares about Picasso's plates and it's not a crime, right? , but the difference between her freedom to create and yours to demand for her to satisfy your consumerist needs is only close in words and an abyss in reality, it says a lot about how we perceive the great contributors of a field while simultaneously pushing to demerit this craft.. may a fashion designer never forget she/he is here to meet functionality ('wearability') and our expectations, when in reality, the complete pointlessness and heart of fashion (which is what we communicate through clothes, not clothes, ever) inhabits a collection like this more than any other. It's only seemingly 'insulting' because yeah, she's intentionally or unintentionally weeding out not connecting with the kind of patrons who 'demand' full service.

 

[jeanclaude]

I mean, what kind of fix are you hoping to get from this when, after 18 collections (more than the entire careers of many designers), it's highly unlikely there will be a change of direction especially when you consider her age?

but the difference between her freedom to create and yours to demand for her to satisfy your consumerist needs is only close in words and an abyss in reality, it says a lot about how we perceive the great contributors of a field while simultaneously pushing to demerit this craft.. .

I don´t think she is done because she is old. She is a person who has always manifested her hunger for newness in fashion; so a change of direction could be possible...even if so far she seems stucked in this phase.

I don´t demand for her to satisfy my consumerist need. I demand for her to keep making interesting and subversive clothes, just because I enjoy looking at his work. I also have a neverending hunger for newness.
The first collection of this phase was interesting and subversive, it was something radical...but after so many collections in the same line, I can´t find those feelings anymore.

 

[MulletProof]

^ but that subversiveness is subjective and the way I see it, it's as intact as ever here, she's turning participants into spectators and clearly against their will. Yes she's not inciting any sartorial riot and instead seems to be simply locking up the doors, so you can stare through the window.. from outside lol, but there's nothing conformist about this last act either.. at all, not when everyone is allowed in now.. and when her company is hugely responsible for that 'all you can eat' type of access.

In regards to the newness, I'm not sure if she's actively tried to get past the confinements of the reputation that came with the degree of success and cult-like following she acquired in her career, or if it's just rather difficult to provide it when you respond to your socioeconomic context differently when you are older.. it's just not very possible for her to be the person that's going to inject that into her field anymore. It's a type of sensibility that you have more present with the lack of certainty earlier in life.

 

[jeanclaude]

^ but that subversiveness is subjective and the way I see it, it's as intact as ever here, she's turning participants into spectators and clearly against their will. Yes she's not inciting any sartorial riot and instead seems to be simply locking up the doors, so you can stare through the window.. from outside lol, but there's nothing conformist about this last act either.. at all, not when everyone is allowed in now.. and when her company is hugely responsible for that 'all you can eat' type of access.

In regards to the newness, I'm not sure if she's actively tried to get past the confinements of the reputation that came with the degree of success and cult-like following she acquired in her career, or if it's just rather difficult to provide it when you respond to your socioeconomic context differently when you are older.. it's just not very possible for her to be the person that's going to inject that into her field anymore. It's a type of sensibility that you have more present with the lack of certainty earlier in life.

For me something subversive must have a short lifespan, because the moment it lasts for a very long period of time it just becomes conformist. I need movement and dynamism to keep my interest alive.

I don´t know if she has become too "bourgeoise" now that she is an icon in this industry. But for a person as interested in creation like her, I still see possible she can evolve her style into another phase.
We always have a lack of certainty in life, as life is dynamic and unpredictable. Even at her age something could happen to her, that makes her change her points of view about life...and that can push her into a new creative phase! As long as she is alive, there is still a chance for it to happen.

 

[Uemarasan]

The fact that you can admire the work of a fashion designer does not mean you have to admire every single period of his/her career.

And this does not mean we are trying to belittle Kawakubo´s work and importance in fashion history at all.
This means that just because this collection was created by Rei Kawakubo does not mean we have to like it, just because it was made by Rei Kawakubo.

Of course she has all the freedom to create what she feels like. But we also have the freedom to say we find this collection repetitive and boring (compared to his previous work).

I never said otherwise. I simply prefer MulletProof’s perspective when it comes to Rei’s and other long artistic careers. Feel free to react negatively. I’m more interested in a more thoughtful consideration and contextualization of her collections.

However, reading the same repetitive criticisms, with a bit of paraphrase and egregious use of pop culture references, over the years gets a bit dull. What else has to be said that hasn’t been said years ago? Say your piece, then move on, instead of sounding like that cranky old man shaking his fist at tiktok videos. I’d rather read negative criticism that has something new and interesting to add to the conservation, commenting about how Rei’s vision may be compromised by responding to market demands, her shift from the margins to the forefront of the industry, the esteem she enjoys among her peers that might have calcified her work, instead of the umpteenth reiteration of “costumes for a grade school production of Rainbow Brite.” I mean, get a new gig. It’s been nearly a decade. You’ve just become the embodiment and caricature of the repetitiveness you’ve been criticizing in the first place.

 

[jeanclaude]

I never said otherwise. I simply prefer MulletProof’s perspective when it comes to Rei’s and other long artistic careers. Feel free to react negatively. I’m more interested in a more thoughtful consideration and contextualization of her collections.

However, reading the same repetitive criticisms, with a bit of paraphrase and egregious use of pop culture references, over the years gets a bit dull. What else has to be said that hasn’t been said years ago? Say your piece, then move on, instead of sounding like that cranky old man shaking his fist at tiktok videos. I’d rather read negative criticism that has something new and interesting to add to the conservation, commenting about how Rei’s vision may be compromised by responding to market demands, her shift from the margins to the forefront of the industry, the esteem she enjoys among her peers that might have calcified her work, instead of the umpteenth reiteration of “costumes for a grade school production of Rainbow Brite.” I mean, get a new gig. It’s been nearly a decade. You’ve just become the embodiment and caricature of the repetitiveness you’ve been criticizing in the first place.

WelI, I am tired of people who try to intellectualize everything using bombastic words in their ramblings, when at the end all that we are talking about are clothes.

 

[MulletProof]

^ just to recap, we were talking about the stages of Rei as a creator, you're the one that brought strictly fashion concepts that are imaginary and intellectual and that can’t be applied to just clothes without sounding delusional, like shock factor, innovation and newness. That is all industry-made, norms and context, how you think you’ll be perceived. I don't blame you for getting tired though.. these are some bombastic expectations if what you want is really just clothes.

 

[Uemarasan]

WelI, I am tired of people who try to intellectualize everything using bombastic words in their ramblings, when at the end all that we are talking about are clothes.

In the same way, I’m also tired of the dumbing down of culture. Nothing is just “clothes” in the same manner that nothing is just “food” or just “paper with words printed on them”. If the utmost value you place on clothes is their function as something to put on the body, why not just wrap yourself with some fabric from Home Depot?

^ just to recap, we were talking about the stages of Rei as a creator, you're the one that brought strictly fashion concepts that are imaginary and intellectual and that can’t be applied to just clothes without sounding delusional, like shock factor, innovation and newness. That is all industry-made, norms and context, how you think you’ll be perceived. I don't blame you for getting tired though.. these are some bombastic expectations if what you want is really just clothes.

It’s also disappointing to see how much anti-intellectualism has pervaded the culture. Why not appreciate and entertain both practicality AND more cerebral propositions? Surely there’s room for both. No reason to starve the mind, unless people just want to mindlessly consume products.

 

[Phuel]

Yawn. Lather, rinse, repeat.

LOL Exactly how Comme's been these last few years.

(Glad you see you posting again. Even if it's just to be dismissive of my opinion.)

 

[jeanclaude]

^ you're the one that brought strictly fashion concepts that are imaginary and intellectual and that can’t be applied to just clothes without sounding delusional, like shock factor, innovation and newness. That is all industry-made, norms and context, how you think you’ll be perceived. I don't blame you for getting tired though.. these are some bombastic expectations if what you want is really just clothes.

One thing is talking about concepts like shock-factor, innovation and newness (you said are industry made; so they cannot be seen so much as intellectual when they are coming from business)... and another thing is introducing philosophy and different points of view on life just to justify a collection coming from an "untouchable" designer (because don´t you dare to say something against Rei Kawakubo!).

This is is fashion. Like it or not, we are talking about just clothes. And we aren´t posting in "The Quantum Physics Spot" either.

 

[jeanclaude]

In the same way, I’m also tired of the dumbing down of culture. Nothing is just “clothes” in the same manner that nothing is just “food” or just “paper with words printed on them”. If the utmost value you place on clothes is their function as something to put on the body, why not just wrap yourself with some fabric from Home Depot?
It’s also disappointing to see how much anti-intellectualism has pervaded the culture. Why not appreciate and entertain both practicality AND more cerebral propositions? Surely there’s room for both. No reason to starve the mind, unless people just want to mindlessly consume products.

You came here ranting about other people opinions, pretending to say to others what they should write or not about this collection. And you talk about negativity here? It´s not that you have a positive, and tolerant, point of view regarding other people´s opinions which differ from yours.

Ironically, you still haven´t said your opinion about this CDG collection (which is the purpose of this thread).
It seems too much thinking has cause you to forget that.

 

[MulletProof]

This is is fashion. Like it or not, we are talking about just clothes. And we aren´t posting in "The Quantum Physics Spot" either.

You can tell that to yourself, you made a clear distinction between fashion and clothes in a different thread, but if you have since changed your mind and truly believe a business wiring you into intellectual concepts that directly appeal to your standing and aspirations in society (newness, innovation and shock, things you would give up in a second if you were to live in isolation in the Kazakh steppes because it would hold no value) is 'just' clothes, well, they've done their job and you comply and more power to you..

It’s also disappointing to see how much anti-intellectualism has pervaded the culture. Why not appreciate and entertain both practicality AND more cerebral propositions? Surely there’s room for both. No reason to starve the mind, unless people just want to mindlessly consume products.

Yeah, social media culture has cemented this idea that only positive, short praise is healthy and constructive, while everything else is exhausting and combative.. yet, in the specific case of fashion, you see this constant longing for the complex worlds created by people who gave a lot of thought about, again, the pointlessness of fashion and the multitude of conclusions they came up with (Helmut Lang, Jil Sander, McQueen, Margiela, and to a much lesser extent, Galliano), but the moment anyone tries to understand or respond to these ideas in a way that is considerate of the creator behind them, you are trying to 'intellectualize' a can of pepsi that you should only ever feel entitlement for.

 

[jeanclaude]

You can tell that to yourself, you made a clear distinction between fashion and clothes in a different thread, but if you have since changed your mind and truly believe a business wiring you into intellectual concepts that directly appeal to your standing and aspirations in society (newness, innovation and shock, things you would gave up in a second if you were to live isolation in the Kazakh steppes because it would hold no value) is 'just' clothes, well, they've done their job and you comply and more power to you..

but the moment anyone tries to understand or respond to these ideas in a way that is considerate of the creator behind them, you are trying to 'intellectualize' a can of pepsi that you should only ever feel entitlement for.

What you are calling "intellectual concepts that directly appeal to your standing and aspirations in society" I just call it "marketing". Intellectualization of fashion is also a marketing strategy. And I am not interested in marketing.
I am interested in clothes: construction, patterns, fabrics...just clothes!

You can be as considerate to Rei (and any other designer) as you like. But not liking her last collection, and expressing it, does not mean being unconsiderate to her. It´s just giving an opinion about her last work.

 

[MulletProof]

What you are calling "intellectual concepts that directly appeal to your standing and aspirations in society" I just call it "marketing".

Of course you do, "marketing" gives you the belief that you have nothing to do with their strategies and that you "choose" not to be interested in marketing, when in reality, saying you want innovation and shock in fashion IS as unadulterated "marketing"/intellectualization as it gets: you value shock in regards to something, you want innovation and subversiveness from clothes as a result of some uniformity you appear to abhor. Yes, you want 'just clothes'.. but according to how you visualize yourself in your surroundings and most importantly, how others do... otherwise you'd be more than happy with a Subway apron. And that's okay... but a pinch of cynicism is more fun than playing it modest when it's clear you want it a lot more complicated (starting with your interest in fashion, a completely made-up concept clothes do not need).

 

[jeanclaude]

Of course you do, "marketing" gives you the belief that you have nothing to do with their strategies and that you "choose" not to be interested in marketing, when in reality, saying you want innovation and shock in fashion IS as unadulterated "marketing"/intellectualization as it gets: you value shock in regards to something, you want innovation and subversiveness from clothes as a result of some uniformity you appear to abhor. Yes, you want 'just clothes'.. but according to how you visualize yourself in your surroundings and most importantly, how others do... otherwise you'd be more than happy with a Subway apron. And that's okay... but a pinch of cynicism is more fun than playing it modest when it's clear you want it a lot more complicated (starting with your interest in fashion, a completely made-up concept clothes do not need).

It´s easier than that: i want innovation and subversiveness because for me it means joy and fun. It´s simply pleasure.
It´s not a question of "I hate uniformity because I want to be different to the rest; and feel more special than other people". It´s just that, as someone who likes creating clothes, I get easily bored with the same things over and over.

And whenever I see something different and/or interesting, I just can feel that joy. For me is more a question of feelings rather than intellectuality. It´s more a passion than a rational thing to dissect in a cold way.

 

[Uemarasan]

You came here ranting about other people opinions, pretending to say to others what they should write or not about this collection. And you talk about negativity here? It´s not that you have a positive, and tolerant, point of view regarding other people´s opinions which differ from yours.

Ironically, you still haven´t said your opinion about this CDG collection (which is the purpose of this thread).
It seems too much thinking has cause you to forget that.

Oh I never claimed to be the paragon of tolerance or positivity. It’s why I’m criticizing opinions on this thread.

I already co-signed MulletProof’s opinion of the collection. She’s already said it much more eloquently: the moment you recognize “fashion” you are already intellectualizing clothes. Construction, patterns, fabric? There is a reason why clothes are constructed a certain way, why patterns are manipulated, why fabrics are chosen and elevated above others. Hint: it has to do with intellectualizing the human activity of dressing. Otherwise, you’d be completely satisfied eating cheeseburgers in a cotton muumuu watching cat videos, instead of engaging other people on a fashion forum.

 

[jeanclaude]

Oh I never claimed to be the paragon of tolerance or positivity. It’s why I’m criticizing opinions on this thread.

I already co-signed MulletProof’s opinion of the collection. She’s already said it much more eloquently: the moment you recognize “fashion” you are already intellectualizing clothes. Construction, patterns, fabric? There is a reason why clothes are constructed a certain way, why patterns are manipulated, why fabrics are chosen and elevated above others. Hint: it has to do with intellectualizing the human activity of dressing. Otherwise, you’d be completely satisfied eating cheeseburgers in a cotton muumuu watching cat videos, instead of engaging other people on a fashion forum.

I am going to paste my last answer to MulletProof:

For me is more a question of feelings rather than intellectuality. It´s more a passion than a rational thing to dissect in a cold way.

PS. I love cat videos!!

 

[Uemarasan]

I am going to paste my last answer to MulletProof:

For me is more a question of feelings rather than intellectuality. It´s more a passion than a rational thing to dissect in a cold way.

PS. I love cat videos!!

This dichotomy between feelings and rationality seems overly simplistic. Pleasure can be an intellectual activity, especially within the parameters of enjoying fashion. Pleasure without “intellectualism” can be found in food, perhaps, if we’re talking about the pleasure of only satisfying hunger. Sex, maybe, if you only want to experience orgasms. But fashion? Fashion does not exist without intellectual engagement, or rationalizing.

 

[jeanclaude]

This dichotomy between feelings and rationality seems overly simplistic. Pleasure can be an intellectual activity, especially within the parameters of enjoying fashion. Pleasure without “intellectualism” can be found in food, perhaps, if we’re talking about the pleasure of only satisfying hunger. Sex, maybe, if you only want to experience orgasms. But fashion? Fashion does not exist without intellectual engagement, or rationalizing.

When you create you see things from a different point of view. Sometimes the more simplistic explanations are the more accurate ones: you just have to feel it to understand it!

 

[Uemarasan]

When you create you see things from a different point of view. Sometimes the more simplistic explanations are the more accurate ones: you just have to feel it to understand it!

I create. The process of creation certainly isn’t just feelings spilling out and then voila! Un chef-d’œuvre! Most individuals involved in the creative arts would probably say the same thing.