Is fashion discussion finite?

[Meg]

So are we saying then that fashion may be infinite but as humans we can only discuss it to a certain degree? I think even if fashion discussion was finite (which I don't think it is) we can't even begin to broach it's bounds.

 

[Lena]

there are so many issues to discuss, how can such an esthetic / economic/ sociological area of interest could ever be finite?
the thing is, has anyone anything to say?

*quite an abstract topic here

 

[SiennaInLondon]

I actually see Maverick's point in this -it wasn't random. Asking if fashion is finite is like asking if art is finite.

Fashion is to art what archaeology is to history. History is purer but archaeology covers a wider base of social and historical ideas... yes in a more superficial way but it is hard to combine profundity and scope. Plus -the two schools of thought don't have much respect for each other.

 

[Mr-Dale]

Fashion is to art what archaeology is to history. History is purer but archaeology covers a wider base of social and historical ideas... yes in a more superficial way but it is hard to combine profundity and scope. Plus -the two schools of thought don't have much respect for each other.

In the way you describe it, I think you can also easily say that fashion is to society what archeology is to history. A reflection of what is going on in the world. Most of the fashion we tend to discuss here mirrors a certain vibe or a certain need if you will, in the minds of the clients. And since a society like ours is constantly formed from peoples ideas, thoughts, needs, inspirations, loves and hates, fashion is completely coherent to it. Which, again, makes the discussion not finite. The fact alone that this discussion is already 3 pages long shows so as well

 

[softgrey]

I actually see Maverick's point in this -it wasn't random. Asking if fashion is finite is like asking if art is finite.

Fashion is to art what archaeology is to history. History is purer but archaeology covers a wider base of social and historical ideas... yes in a more superficial way but it is hard to combine profundity and scope. Plus -the two schools of thought don't have much respect for each other.

the question was and is not 'is fashion finite'....
the question is whether the discussion about it is finite...

two wholly different topics of discussion...

 

[helena]

 

[fashionista-ta]

I am believing more than ever in finite discussions

 

[fourboltmain]

Hmm... no. The discussion will never end. It's like PC's and Macs. Fords and Chevy's. Tastes great or less filling? Only because opinions will differ as long as people can think for themselves. I think once the discussion ends, so does the innovation and creativity.

 

[travolta]

^ well put. nice to see ya around, fourboltmain.

 

[fab_fifties_fille]

Hmm... no. The discussion will never end. It's like PC's and Macs. Fords and Chevy's. Tastes great or less filling? Only because opinions will differ as long as people can think for themselves. I think once the discussion ends, so does the innovation and creativity.

I've been trying to muster up what I've been thinking when I've read this thread...but I think fourboltmain put my muddle of thoughts into words there...

 

[faust]

Hmm... no. The discussion will never end. It's like PC's and Macs. Fords and Chevy's. Tastes great or less filling? Only because opinions will differ as long as people can think for themselves. I think once the discussion ends, so does the innovation and creativity.

Smooth

 

[fourboltmain]

Thanks guys, I originally wrote this whole historical thing about trends and history and materials and all kinds of nonsense. And then I read Softgrey's post:

"the question was and is not 'is fashion finite'...."

and promptly erased it all.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Hmm... no. The discussion will never end. It's like PC's and Macs. Fords and Chevy's. Tastes great or less filling? Only because opinions will differ as long as people can think for themselves. I think once the discussion ends, so does the innovation and creativity.

I took the question not to mean, will people ever stop discussing fashion (we never stop blabbing, esp those of us with no Y chromosome ), but, is there a limit to what can be said about fashion, or no?

 

[helena]

ta-ta I guess I meant, have we at tFS covered all the ground....and by that I mean all the socio-political type fashion chat.....religion, culture, aesthetics, capitalism etc.....sure we can babble about each new collection and each new skirt/jacket/shoe to our hearts content....but have we reached the point where that is all that we can say... nice shoes/great bag etc. I guess I am feeling slightly jaded and that there isn't much going on just now thats really exciting or makes people feel passionate about fashion....but maybe I am wrong.

 

[fourboltmain]

I'm sorry, Fashionista-ta. The "umm... no" was my answer to the question in the first thread, I didn't mean for it to be taken as me asking you to talk to the hand or whatnot.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Helena, I guess we read a bit more into your question than what you meant ... maybe because we know you majored in philosophy? I think I'm remembering that anyway But I reckon we can find a new angle here at tFS ... the Margiela show I thought stood out as def thought-provoking and exciting.

fourboltmain, thank you, I took your post as intended

 

[JATE]

I agree with you Arturo21. Fashion is like works in some many different dimensions that it is like an institution in its self! There are so many different functions for fashion especially modern fashion. Its ranges from porous mineral rings set in onyx to a paper thin, stemless bulb wine glass. Fashion isn't just on the runway and I think that is attributed to a new light on modernism. All things can be fashionable whether you are wearing it, watering it, dusting it, or listening to it. Its ever changing. Never finite.

Fashion can be taken as many things. However, I can hardly think of an argument against the fact that modern fashion, and the fashion that we discuss here, is based on vanity, on aesthetics. But there is so much to aesthetics - beauty is something everyone from Paris Hilton to a leading psychologist or scienist studies.

It can be a nice skirt, and we can buy it to look good - but why do we want to look good? I think that's a basic in this subject. It's for the wearer to feel good, to look good, to express - here I go corny - himself/herself in a way.

We can't forget lifestyle either or reasons. Military uniforms have inspired many designers for different reasons - because they look good or because they are historical and the designer is interested in such or because the designs of a military outfit emit power. Many designs came about for a certain purpose, and function meets design.

There is not one thing about fashion that you can say, that's it...that's fashion, that's what it's all about, it's just that - it's too many things at once to be able to say that. I guess what I'm trying to say that there is a different purpose for everyone, it 'interacts' with the wearer.

 

[SiennaInLondon]

the question was and is not 'is fashion finite'....
the question is whether the discussion about it is finite...

two wholly different topics of discussion...

No that is exactly what I was talking about. Let me insert the word 'discussion' to make it easier. The fact that my point stood without the word just shows that they aren't two different topics of discussion per se. How does it make sense that if fashion continues, discussion about it will stop?

"I actually see Maverick's point in this -it wasn't random. Asking if fashion [discussion] is finite is like asking if art [discussion] is finite.

Fashion is to art what archaeology is to history. History is purer but archaeology covers a wider base of social and historical ideas... yes in a more superficial way but it is hard to combine profundity and scope. Plus -the two schools of thought don't have much respect for each other."