The consequences of affordable collections

[BaroqueRockstar]

belletrist- "art is totally about emotions"
i think you really have to take into account what you consider art
but art all about emotions?! Maybe this is my english-nerd mode turning on, but in british and american universities, there is a heavy ephasis on new criticism, which is separating text (which they consider art) from any context and reader bias
i think in more media-ized and pop-culture there is a heavy emphasis on emotion, but is rap music really comparable, to lets say, camille saint sans? (this isn't an elitest view, i promise, it's a view i actually stole from a marxist literary critic, and last time i checked marxists aren't elitest )
that said, are these two arts equal?
but then again, saying their not equal leads to such things as elitism!!! ARGGG... such a vicious neverending cycle !

 

[Lena]

i dont even see this 'trend' as 'democratic' design..
its just the same old trend recycling wheel, same old crappy low quality mass market garment with a 'designer name tag' stuck there in order to milk more $$ from the wannabe 'trendies' and i do find this pathetic, the illusion of 'design'

on the long run, i find this as just another marketing trick making rich industrialists even richer
it does help the designers making a quick $ but on the long run i believe it may be bringing down the 'image' and the creative standards for the shake of mass exposure.

simply put, i'd like to see an end to this 'populist' fiasco marketing

 

[belletrist]

belletrist- "art is totally about emotions"
i think you really have to take into account what you consider art
but art all about emotions?! Maybe this is my english-nerd mode turning on, but in british and american universities, there is a heavy ephasis on new criticism, which is separating text (which they consider art) from any context and reader bias
i think in more media-ized and pop-culture there is a heavy emphasis on emotion, but is rap music really comparable, to lets say, camille saint sans? (this isn't an elitest view, i promise, it's a view i actually stole from a marxist literary critic, and last time i checked marxists aren't elitest )
that said, are these two arts equal?
but then again, saying their not equal leads to such things as elitism!!! ARGGG... such a vicious neverending cycle !

+no, I don't think rap can be compared to C St Saens. It's not a difference of intensity, it's a difference of nature. One is music (the second), the other is something else (let's say noises). At the very beginning of my 16 yo, I used to believe that the only music that was really worthy was opera. Since then i've understood that some "pop" (as opposed to classical, not Kylie Minogue and Madonna) artists are really worthy too and just have a different way to share emotions, although the lenght of the "pop" songs (4 mn) is too short. It's unfair to compare a 10-songs album, even a really beautiful one, to a 4 hours Wagner's opera.)
Then, about fashion, I think that in some cases, the conceptualism is sometimes more interesting than the clothes (Martin Margiela being in the top of my list). And even if the clothes are really interesting (Rick Owens), it's very hard to put the "runway" look in your everyday life so... Not sure about the "art" of the clothes outside the runway.
+ I'm not for elitism, nor I pretend being elitist (which would be stupid). I wish everyone could love/understand/try to listen to Saint Saens. The world would certainly be much better if everybody had listened to The War Requiem: probably a more peaceful planet . Sad news: that's not the case.

[edit: to BaroqueRockstar, I didn't say that art was/wasn't about emotions, sorry if you misunderstood me, but my english is a bit awkward, I was just trying to explain what Tarkovski said about music, Tarkovski who was the elitist of the elitists so that was all about: the elite can understand, the masses just shouldn't even try]

 

[BaroqueRockstar]

^ i just reread your post... i must admit i did misread it a bit!
i must say, we have much in common. i used to be an opera-obsessee too

 

[zamb]

i dont even see this 'trend' as 'democratic' design..
its just the same old trend recycling wheel, same old crappy low quality mass market garment with a 'designer name tag' stuck there in order to milk more $$ from the wannabe 'trendies' and i do find this pathetic, the illusion of 'design'

on the long run, i find this as just another marketing trick making rich industrialists even richer
it does help the designers making a quick $ but on the long run i believe it may be bringing down the 'image' and the creative standards for the shake of mass exposure.

simply put, i'd like to see an end to this 'populist' fiasco marketing

well.......... I call it democratic design in the sense that today, Higher end designers work is more accessible to the masses. There are a lot more people being able to partake of higher end designers work than there used to be, and at cheaper prices.
After all democracy is (or pretends to be) about the masses

I also understand what you mean about "the illusion of design" but.......... whether we want to call it bad design, no design, poor quality design, cheap design or whatever. we have to agree that it is some kind of design.
this is so (at least to me) because they are appropriating a product to an intended customer in a specific market, which is what most designers, at least the ones who bear the needs of the customer in mind,aspires to do.
I personally dont like the state of the industry today, and i am hoping for a serious shift in the next 5 years. I would like to see a return to real design with designers who have integrity and talent, (i honestly doubt this though, my desire may be just wishful thinking as i think that the major developed countries that influence fashion have developed to the point where the culture that breeds designers with fundamental skills has become almost nonexistent).

 

[Lena]

i understand your point zamb but still since this 'phenomenon' is nothing but 'democratic design' we may need a more precise title for this discussion 'cause the one we have now may be missleading

any ideas of how to rename this thread in order to get more on topic?

 

[BaroqueRockstar]

mass production of "high fashion"?

if you can even call it production...

 

[zamb]

i understand your point zamb but still since this 'phenomenon' is nothing but 'democratic design' we may need a more precise title for this discussion 'cause the one we have now may be missleading

any ideas of how to rename this thread in order to get more on topic?

I dont understand how is it misleading. maybe you can explain a bit more, However, if you think the topic needs to be changed to create a better understanding of the subject, I am all for it . as as now i have no suggestions though, i will think about it and get back to you on this one............

 

[Lena]

i've found it.. lets call it 'affordable collections' which is the term used in the Guardian article from which i repost the following

Famous designers creating aff ordable collections for the high street is a shopper's dream come true. So why are the results usually so disappointing?

Hadley Freeman reports

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Friday October 27, 2006
The Guardian[/FONT]
.......................
The French catalogue La Redoute popularised the concept in the early 90s and has since collaborated with Jean Paul Gaultier, Lagerfeld and, this season, Sophia Kokosalaki. But it was the hugely successful Designers at Debenhams, which launched in 1993, that really showed the British high street how mutually beneficial the relationship can be.

Contrary to what some stores may think, however, the public will no longer buy unflattering tat, no matter how famous the name inside. We've been spoiled and educated by the high street and now know how good cheap clothes can be and that we don't have to settle for poorly made blazers (Lagerfeld at H&M) or wonky skirts (Kokosalaki for La Redoute.) The problem is that while high street stores have learned how to do cheap clothes well and cleverly, high-fashion designers tend to try to do their usual expensive clothes on the cheap. Against this background, it will be interesting to compare what Mouret provides for Gap next week with the fantastic Mouret-esque dresses that Topshop did on its own last year.

The current Viktor & Rolf collection for H&M is a case in point. This slightly avant-garde label relies heavily on decent tailoring and fashion irony, both of which cost money to do with a modicum of credibility. The designers' signature trompe l'oeil ribbons and heart details may look (sort of) sweet and ladylike when done on a designer budget, but this kind of tongue-in-cheek girliness is never going to translate well on to the high street, simply because it is too similar to the saccharine tackiness that the mass market is starting to leave behind. The Jack the Ripper-esque double-breasted long coat with a pointless heart belt is just all out weird, but it is the black trousers with heart-shaped cutouts on the side filled with black lace that probably take the ugly biscuit, being reminiscent of the sort of thing Cindy Beale might have worn on EastEnders when going for a night out in that magical land, "Upwest". Similarly, Kokosalaki's collection for La Redoute has some nice pieces, but the fit of the skirts and trousers leaves something to be desired, not too surprisingly. Kokosalaki's USP has always been her clever pleating and pinching of fabrics, neither of which one associates with a budget catalogue......

for the whole article, check this link http://shopping.guardian.co.uk/clothes/story/0,,1932841,00.html

credited to Guardian.co.uk

 

[MUXU]

well...most people dont care much or even know much about high fashion or truly well contrusted garment. even if they do..it's mostly just the big name brands like chanel or dior or gucci..or whatever perfume they happen to like.
for most people...buying a brand named "high fashion" is just to buy a certain feeling...a feeling of "im wearing brand name". even if it's not the "proper" line but a second line...but they dont care, as long as part of the proper line's name is there, it's still a brand.
it's not like those people who buy these affordable collections appreciated the "real" garments before. so i dont see how these can ruin "high fashion".
i think the people who loses that "elite" feeling of wearing a proper branded garment are at a lost because it seems like everyone has the same designer brand but just at a different "level".

i dont know..just my two cents. =T
i forgot what i just said...

 

[justinleaddict]

I feel the need to defend these cheaper brands. Where I live, most people would definitely not call D&G "affordable." Middle class high school students, such as myself, cannot afford a lot of exclusive clothing, even if we would love to wear it. Therefore, what option do we have? Are you saying I should shop at target?

 

[zamb]

well...most people dont care much or even know much about high fashion or truly well contrusted garment. even if they do..it's mostly just the big name brands like chanel or dior or gucci..or whatever perfume they happen to like.
for most people...buying a brand named "high fashion" is just to buy a certain feeling...a feeling of "im wearing brand name". even if it's not the "proper" line but a second line...but they dont care, as long as part of the proper line's name is there, it's still a brand.
it's not like those people who buy these affordable collections appreciated the "real" garments before. so i dont see how these can ruin "high fashion".
i think the people who loses that "elite" feeling of wearing a proper branded garment are at a lost because it seems like everyone has the same designer brand but just at a different "level".

i dont know..just my two cents. =T
i forgot what i just said...

well a large part of what always drove designer fashion was the fact that they were status items, wearing certain kind of brands and certain quality clothing always gave the impression that one was from a respectable class with a certain kind of taste.
lower end stores and brands were avoided because wearing them would exclude one from a cetain category,
the thing now is, after the customer have become accustomised to know that it is OK to shop at a cetain budget store, because high end designers are endorsing such stores by making thier work accessable through this outlet. will it not mean less sales for the designers brand?
Also, if a designer who is or has been struggling to support his/ her company is given an opportunity to be able to design and produce (albeit cheaper) collections through budget stores do you think we will ever see a designer closing his/her high end business to focus solely on the more profitable budget collection?

 

[JJohnson]

Well I guess if something is mass produced it's going to be of lower quality perhaps than something 'high end.' The law of economics fully explains this. I have a liking to dubbed down designers in high street markets because it's bearing those designer's aesthetics. I think it's the name of those designing that collection that lures people in however- everyone wants a taste of status and high fashion . Personally, I say wear whatever the hell you feel like. Perhaps a bed sheet can be worked into an amazing frock. If you can do that and pull it off, wear it with pride!

 

[JJohnson]

Oh, someone just brought to my attention how much high fashion costs- thousands...Personally, my parents buy me things occasionally..etc, but for others perhaps all they can handle at the moment is something for high street shop. As long as they're fashionable what's the problem? I think those only affluent with high fashion really cares if someone else is wearing high quality and even then such a concern seems kinda silly because many people are unfashionable anyway so one would eventually go crazy from trying to spot the fashion disasters. I find fashion to be very interesting. I think it's more about what people think it's worth, than what it actually is. As an example, im sure it doesnt take a Vuitton worker that long to make a bag and look at how much it sells. Honestly, if you're working in a factory and you're skilled, I'm pretty you can whip out items in no time...the illusion of how much items cost really interests me. Anyone care to comment?

 

[justinleaddict]

But not everyone who doesn't wear all luxury is unfashionable. You should know that. My point was, if I cannot afford high end, I will do my best and at least wear high street, which is not always bad.

Like you said, most of the people here do not seem to understand how much these things cost... especially to young people. Those of us who cannot afford to dress completely in the most exclusive clothing should at least be given credit for appreciating exclusivity and luxury.

 

[JJohnson]

Ufff.....whatever!

 

[Diorling]

Well, since I am *probably* the biggest snob here I feel like I should comment.

I dont mind these affordable collections, I just dont want them to get out-of-hand. It's getting tiring. The new cool thing is for rich people to shop at cheap stores. I mean, American Apparel is the place to go if you're rich and want to show off how "with it" you are...I mean I see Birkins and Louboutins in there all the time!! H&M to a lesser extent...

...It's the new thing, wearing inexpensive, it's just a trend, it's a trend to be modest. Nobodies mindset has changed, the rich are just as pretentious as they've ever been, just now they want to be seen as "hip" and "modest" which now is dressing like a hobo.

NOW down to economics. Of course they make more money with the small collections, 1. Everyone buys it 2. The markup is enormous. Also, someone mentions, why dont they drop thier mainline and keep the cheap line...Uhm, because thier cheap line wouldnt be as desireable if there wasnt a more expensive mainline. Do you think Lagerfeld, McCartney and V&R wouldve sold out if it werent for thier high-priced mainlines? I doubt it.

It's just a trend right now. It will become played out and that will be the end of it. It's not the "new" fashion, fashion will become too common (which it already has become) then fashion will change drastically to scare-off the leeches and become elite once again.

 

[Scott]

honestly,most of the crap I've been seeing in these shops are truly the most bland things. i don't see design in much of it at all. just sellable things with a name on the tag,really. so in that,i do so agree with you,lena.

I mean,really,you can't compare Boudicca with TopShop or Dries Van Noten with H&M....just not in the same leagues. So no it doesn't affect anything in my mind. The design and the quality of these p-a-p designers is on a completely different level.

btw,off-topic:been listening to Saint-Saens' "Danse Macabre" and "The Swan".

 

[JJohnson]

honestly,most of the crap I've been seeing in these shops are truly the most bland things. i don't see design in much of it at all. just sellable things with a name on the tag,really. so in that,i do so agree with you,lena.

I mean,really,you can't compare Boudicca with TopShop or Dries Van Noten with H&M....just not in the same leagues. So no it doesn't affect anything in my mind. The design and the quality of these p-a-p designers is on a completely different level.

btw,off-topic:been listening to Saint-Saens' "Danse Macabre" and "The Swan".

Oh course you cant compare, but it is what it is. If someone cant afford Dries or Boudicca what can they wear? Is designer items out of reach? Unless, one is SUPER poor if he or she try really hard, they can get a designer item, but then.....what's the point?

 

[sammigirl25]

The fatal consequence of affordable collections...

your entire collection being common!

Nothing you created would be unique. Everyone would be wearing it.
The fashion industry, honestly, would be slowly reduced to an abyss of nothingness. Gawd no.