Is Fashion Less Interesting?

[Creative]

^But that happens with every sort of industry, no? You can see the consecuences of globalization and digitalization everywhere. And the first one has been a reality for many years now, as well as the second one... In terms of their presence on Internet everything is quite stagnant: you have e-commerce and their webs, with a little bit of history and that's it.

And everything is a mirror of the society. When people say that about fashion trying to make it look 'relevant' (Wintour :cough: ) I'm like... Cars, houses, graphic design, interior design... Everything has its 'air du temps'.

 

[Lola701]

Yes, fashion is less interesting.
Even someone like me (who is trying hard to believe in high fashion) have to admit that fashion is less interesting.

You can't deny the influence of the crisis on it. I feel like the great big successes of fashion after the crisis (Valentino, Celine and Saint Laurent) killed a certain idea of fashion and diversity. When i'm talking about diversity, i'm talking about individualism and creativity.

Fashion is very product oriented now and you see it with the new generation of designers (Demna, Alessandro, Tait...etc.).
I hate to be nostalgic but i'm more and more because i don't find in today's fashion what struck me when i was a very young girl falling in love with a Karl Lagerfeld couture show for Chanel or a young woman being excited about buying her first Tom Ford for Gucci piece.
Fashion has become too pretentious for a moment because, it has been quite controversial to be frivolous.

The funny thing is that the industry tried so hard to push those new, young and not necessarly fresh designers but people seems to be more interested in what the "olders" designers are doing...maybe because their work has a soul.

As much as we can criticize it, we can't deny that the work of Karl, Tom, Hedi, Nicolas, Phoebe, Miuccia, Marc, John...etc has a soul. Even if most of the times in the discussions the words "irrelevant", "retirement", "dated", "done" are mentionned, they are still the voices we need.

I feel like this new generation of designers is not as talented as the previous one and everything they are doing is kinda mediocre and so, we have lowered our standards for them while having more expectations from the previous.

I feel like the whole culture is less interesting to be honest. Magazines are bad, interviews are boring...
Everybody pretends to be so into fashion and they are wearing branded stuff: designers jeans, t-shirts and leather jackets. It's depressing.

 

[softgrey]

http://forums.thefashionspot.com/f1...ting-better-we-rut-179831-2.html#post12892521

 

[softgrey]

Getting rid of old names like Anna Wintour, Alessandra Shulman or Emmanuelle Alt would be a great start.

that makes NO sense...
cause they are the ones who made all the good and exciting magazines in the first place...

it's the younger generation that generally has no clue...
or talent...
or taste...
they just copy and copy and copy...
and not even very well...
it's soooo boring...

plus- you will see that a LOT of the internet startups are being staffed by very UNstylish young'ns who have more of a business background than design background...
and very little or no experience with fashion or design...
MBA preferred...

so- yeah...
solid business plans...
with the glaring exception of anything worthwhile to sell...

...

frankly- the wrong sorts of people are getting involved in the industry, for the wrong reasons...
and the really talented people are getting out, rather than go down with the ship...
the newbies are overloading the boat (too many blogs, brands, apps, etc) and they are all gonna sink...
...

pop WILL eat itself...

if i had any advice to give anyone just starting it would be to get a job with the biggest company they could rather than any small or indie or start up firm...
and just ride it out safely until the feeding frenzy is over...

it's getting ready to blow...
even the hipsters are starting to get tired of their own sh*t...
that's the sign of the next wave on its way...

 

[Creative]

http://forums.thefashionspot.com/f1...ting-better-we-rut-179831-2.html#post12892521

Different questions. Fashion was in a period of stasis a few years back (when the girl opened the thread...); right now, it isn't. In fact, it interests less and less people. And that's the reason why I opened this thread.

that makes NO sense...
cause they are the ones who made all the good and exciting magazines in the first place...

it's the younger generation that generally has no clue...
or talent...
or taste...
they just copy and copy and copy...
and not even very well...
it's soooo boring...

And let me roll my eyes at this. They MADE (past) good magazines, but they don't anymore and they haven't for years now. So, yes, I do think we need fresh blood in magazines.

And the new generation didn't have their opportunity yet. Jamie H work is way better than what top photographer are doing now, yet he hasn't shot a single cover yet.

Also, the old generation was young once. And that's when most of them they did their best actually.

I feel like this new generation of designers is not as talented as the previous one and everything they are doing is kinda mediocre and so, we have lowered our standards for them while having more expectations from the previous.

In terms of designers I totally agree, though.

Wang, JW, Altuzarra, Vaccarello and many more have a name but aren't as talented as John, Tom, Karl, Ghesquière... They lack something and I don't get why. In every decade we've had 'geniuses', but now we don't.

 

[softgrey]

to make good mags- you need the materials to work with---
the clothes, the models...the money...

if the editors/photogs don't have that- they can't do great pics...
it's a catch 22...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not like you stop being briliant once you reach a certain age...
i don't know how old you are- but you are gonna be every age eventually too...
everyone is- and you aren't going to magically stop being yourself and turn into another person at some magical number...
that is just silly...


i'm not saying you have to be young or old...
just that the younger generation at this point doesn't have any ideas of their own...
whoever said that ideas stopped in the 90's is right...

since then- the best we have gotten progressively is grunge, hipster and normcore...
which is all basically anti-fashion...

maybe the whole world is sick of getting fashion shoved down their throat by obnoxious rich kids...
i know i am...

fashion also went through this period of using photographers who don't really like or care about fashion...
so you had these airy fairy pics of people where you couldn't see the clothes at all or very little...
that's not a fashion photo...

anyway- there are so many reasons...
but just firing everyone and hiring new people isn't the answer...
what happens with the new people is that they have less experience so they wind up trying to do stuff that the people before them already tried...
and found out doesn't work...
you wind up starting again from scratch and the circle just begins again...

you need a combination of experience and new ideas...
you must have both...

 

[softgrey]

Different questions. Fashion was in a period of stasis a few years back (when the girl opened the thread...); right now, it isn't. In fact, it interests less and less people. And that's the reason why I opened this thread.

it's not really different...
the fact that it may have been in a period of stasis is a contributing factor to it being less interesting...

but that's not really my point...
my point is that it has been going downhill for years...
getting progressively worse...
and we have been talking about it for years here as well...

so have a whole bunch of experts...
and they have regularly fired people over the years...
and closed mags and closed fashion houses and closed stores, etc...
or opened new ones and hired new people...
but the industry is just going round chasing it's own tail...

who is successful?
who is doing well?
let's talk about that and try to figure out why...
what are they doing differently?

 

[tangerine]

...
who is successful?
who is doing well?
let's talk about that and try to figure out why...
what are they doing differently?

Good questions! Follow the money... who is buying the clothes, who is making the successful houses successful? Are the designers and houses targeting specific demographics and are they the same demographics as in past eras that we are comparing them to?

Who has the wealth and what are the attached values? Is it even possible to generalize about this?

 

[Spike413]

Can't echo what softgrey said enough; as an editor or stylist or casting agent or any of that, you truly are only as good as the materials you have to work with. How the hell can anybody be expected to sell anything remotely fantastical, or edgy, or dreamy, or badass or anything other than the declawed, defanged, pre-packaged, committee-approved, PC crap we've all apparently been hating for a while now when in reality that's the only thing that sells at the moment?

I think the preoccupation with being cool has also sucked a lot of the life out of fashion. It's a fantastic quality to posses in small doses when it comes naturally, but coolness always seems to be defined by not caring whether or not one is cool, and in a way it's sort of a rejection of or disinterest in very extreme emotions. You can't appear cool if you're wearing your heart on your sleeve, right? That's all well and good, but when you have a generation of taste-makers all vying for who can seem like they're the least concerned with how cool they are while, ironically, working to be cool, it's all just a bit eye-rolling. Forget about the fact that when the joy, passion, histrionics, humor, anger, quirkiness etc. are concealed or rejected, it makes falling in love with something -- in this case fashion -- next to impossible. But hey, passion and obvious effort seem to be entirely démodé, so I'm clearly behind the times.

Edited to add, the above was basically stream of consciousness and I have no idea if it makes any sense.

 

[Creative]

There are mags that sometimes come up with wonderful things. Even in 2016. How can they do it? If the 'materials' don't exist.

And they do have the models, they do have the budget and they do have the photographers. It's just a lack of vision and the will to do something good. They are stuck in a rut. And they are just enjoying the privileges of their bourgeois lifes. They couldn't care less about fashion. You just have to hear Anna Wintour talking in a TV show about the Kardashians. She loves fame. And I sort of understand that after doing the same for 50 years you end up being stagnant. That's why new people should take over.

 

[softgrey]

Good questions! Follow the money... who is buying the clothes, who is making the successful houses successful? Are the designers and houses targeting specific demographics and are they the same demographics as in past eras that we are comparing them to?

Who has the wealth and what are the attached values? Is it even possible to generalize about this?

well-
i've suspected that it's oil money in the middle east and corrupt business people in Asia who have been buying a lot of the most expensive stuff...
and the fact that Yoox Net-aPorter just sold a big stake in the company to some middle eastern interest would seem to confirm that...
and they seem to like things really shiny and stuff...
really decadent and glamourous...

*not just their clothes, but everything...even from an historical point of view...
so if that is who is buying and that is who you are catering to...
well- you're gonna get a lot of balmain customers...i guess...

and then in the west...
there is this normcore thing where it's cool to look really bad...
(which i will never get)...


frankly-
hardly anyone is making clothes that i actually want to wear these days...
what's in my closet is way better than what is on most runways...

and the stuff that actually interests me in some way is not usually a runway piece by a major design house...
it's usually some random thing i find in a little store by some designer/brand i never heard of...
cause at least it's special and a bit unique and it really feels like a 'find'...

 

[runner]

maybe it doesn't necessarily have to be interesting.
but there has to be beauty (or the eternal) extracted now (from the fugitive).


susan sontag :

one calls something interesting precisely so as not to have to commit to a judgment of beauty (or of goodness).
the interesting is now mainly a consumerist concept.

the promiscuous, empty affirmations of the interesting. it is a peculiarly inconclusive way of experiencing reality.

imagine saying, “that sunset is interesting.”

 

[Pricciao]

That's an amazing quote. Thanks runner!

 

[Creative]

Fashion doesn't have to be necessarily beautiful, it has to be interesting.

 

[Melisande]

I think the preoccupation with being cool has also sucked a lot of the life out of fashion. It's a fantastic quality to posses in small doses when it comes naturally, but coolness always seems to be defined by not caring whether or not one is cool, and in a way it's sort of a rejection of or disinterest in very extreme emotions. You can't appear cool if you're wearing your heart on your sleeve, right? That's all well and good, but when you have a generation of taste-makers all vying for who can seem like they're the least concerned with how cool they are while, ironically, working to be cool, it's all just a bit eye-rolling. Forget about the fact that when the joy, passion, histrionics, humor, anger, quirkiness etc. are concealed or rejected, it makes falling in love with something -- in this case fashion -- next to impossible. But hey, passion and obvious effort seem to be entirely démodé, so I'm clearly behind the times.

Edited to add, the above was basically stream of consciousness and I have no idea if it makes any sense.

Oh yes it does. I hear you, couldn't agree more. It's not just fashion either (look at the art world...music... ), these are times when crappy stuff is rampant because as you say, effort is démodé, and the more fame and fortune one can amass with the least effort, the more "awesome" it is. I'm sorry, I'm like you and believe in passion, perspiration and practice...dedication to creating beauty and the importance for others to honor and recognize that effort of craftsmanship and real artistry...because it can change the world. Say what you will, I will go to my grave believing in it.

 

[Melisande]

maybe it doesn't necessarily have to be interesting.
but there has to be beauty (or the eternal) extracted now (from the fugitive).

Thank you. And for the Sontag quote.

The "interesting" and the "new" in and of itself is meaningless and thus worthless: it's just a function of time, a mental assessment that has no value except within the context of comparison. Beauty is in the experience, and felt immediately by the soul, and has the power to change our lives. If it's truly beautiful it's interesting by default. I personally think it's a given that we should aspire to it in every single thing we do and create. It's not a popular idea though...

 

[Creative]

But design hasn't been (just) about beauty for decades. The same as art. It's just a part of it, and it's maybe the least "interesting".

And new isn't meaningless and worthless. In fact, newness is what makes fashion keep going. A true genius of his time is the one who can do something that hasn't been done before, or do something that has been done before in a new way.

And we don't have that. Thus fashion is not interesting. Cause there are no original new voices anymore. We have same old, same old. The new designers are just copying, there is nothing new and interesting about them. They might create beautiful things sometimes, but that's about it. And they aren't even too beautiful to not forget about them...

 

[Melisande]

And we don't have that. Thus fashion is not interesting. Cause there are no original new voices anymore. We have same old, same old. The new designers are just copying, there is nothing new and interesting about them. They might create beautiful things sometimes, but that's about it. And they aren't even too beautiful to not forget about them...

Yes I agree with you. Copying and rehashing is making fashion super-boring. However I don't think newness in itself is the solution or the opposite of boring, same old stuff Newness is fantastic when it's used as a carrier to bring something of worth to our consciousness in a fresh, awe-inspiring way. I love Iris van Herpen for example, she uses innovation and technology to bring us a new kind of beauty that is made newly possible in this day and age. I just think newness on its own is valued too much nowadays, there is too much pressure on creators to be "original" at the cost of other virtues, and this is very boring and shallow and uninteresting. But maybe here I'm no longer talking about fashion, more about art, and society in general.

I might be going on because I'm sick in bed with fever

 

[Creative]

^Yes, I get what you mean and I sort of agree too. Doing something 'new' for the sake of being new is sort of pointless. Although at the same time it can push boundaries and inspire other people to do something with more substance... So I don't really know.

What is really shocking is that, for example, in terms of magazines, we have the same old names all the time. We have the same top stylists, the same top photographers... Only models change. They don't really push new names, and as I always say I think that's because there is a lack of leaders.

Carine Roitfeld, from VP, discovered so many models, created supermodels, really pushed M&M giving them their very first Vogue cover and sticked to them, cause she really believed in them. The only new photographer Alt has given the cover to is Karim, and I'm sure it was because Vanessa required it. And it was a multicover issue. He has shot no more covers for the magazine... You see the difference.

And that happens in the rest of the fashion world: magazines, campaigns, collections... They are all so blasé.

And in terms of designers, I can't think of a new one who has really change how we see fashion. Maybe J.W. has had a little bit of impact, but not that much. The rest, Phoebe and Hedi, have been working in fashion for years... New names can't really make it big. Alexander Wang, for example, is well known, but he lacks the fashion factor. He doesn't have that aura John, Helmut, Tom or Alber had. It's like he lacks credibility in a high fashion way.

 

[Spike413]

Truth be told, I've come to loathe the word new when used in the context of fashion. The words new and newness set up nearly impossible standards for pretty much anybody involved in any sort of creative industry, especially if newness becomes your primary focus. Fashion, at it's best, isn't necessarily about what's new, but what's fresh. To me, fresh is sort of the feeling of newness, without the thing actually having to be something which has never been done before. And not for anything, the people who actually did create new things and do new things didn't set out specifically to do only that. It was a priority, but it wasn't ]the priority, you know?

I mean fashion -- and design, and art, and music -- have always looked back to look forward. The hippies of the 60s and 70s pulled ideas from Art Nouveau and the early 1900s while creating a style which still resonates today. YSL's le smoking looked at men's tailoring from the 30s and 40s to create something that wasn't truly new, but fresh. Halston's bias cut silk dresses looked at Madeleine Vionnet and the 30s in general to create the look which helped define the late 70s; again, not new, just fresh. You could go on and on about it because there are endless examples, but I truly do not think the fact that fashion is currently obsessed with looking backwards is what has made it so utterly boring these last number of years. It's deeper than that, because in the right designer's hands, with the right resources and permission to do what they're skilled at without answering to people who haven't an ounce of creativity to speak of, a reworking of any previous idea is still bound to be more enthralling than what we see now, and what we see now is a lot of designers desperately spinning their wheels trying to keep up with the demands of newness, profits, headlines, hashtags, worldwide marketability and ever tightening deadlines. They're stuck being told to please absolutely everybody in the entire world with their products and advertisements and licensing deals and an absolutely insane pace, and never before were fashion or the people working within the industry expected to please everybody. Same with art. Same with films. Same with music.