What is going on in the fashion industry right now!?

[brooksie]

It's funny that everyone on this thread seems to date it to 20 years ago.

Lapin we're in the same age range, so I know exactly what you're talkin' about. I recall when "second hand clothes" became "vintage" and blatant designer inspo which I thought was dumb back then! I often talk to people much younger than myself on LJ and I often ask then why they're so interested in the past rather than breaking free from it? The best I can glean from their answers is that the past is w/o risk to them. It's already there and waiting to be explored. Funny thing about this is that when many of us were their age, we thought very differently on the matter. We wanted our own stuff!

 

[chloehandbags]

^^^ Unfortunately, those massive changes in fashion were all driven by the music scene of the day and upheaval caused by the underground coming overground, if only momentarily. The music scene nowadays is pretty dead and we see that reflected in the clothes. Since hip-hop came on the scene, there's been nothing to come along to change the sound or look in any large scale or radical way. It's like we've been stuck in time since the 90s or worse forced to go back in time for inspo. It's all so strange to me given the amount of technology and info around to take advantage of. Of course, maybe that's the main problem.....after all none of the massive changes in culture or aesthetics happened in the days of the 'net. Maybe it was the lack of info that spurred action rather than mere observation?

Most of the 20th century was spent trying to find the next new thing and experimenting w/ aesthetics, but once we hit the 90s all that desire for new ways to express oneself seemed to limit itself to technology. Maybe it was that people had so much stuff by then that they lost their desire for novelty? Perhaps the young got lazy? Too often, they seem content to live in other people's pasts. The lack of a distinct musical revolution to shake people up seems play a major role here.

I don't know, it happened back then, too.

I remember when I was a child, in the early '80s, picking up clothes and bags in shops and my mum saying that the problem was that they reminded her of the '60s...

Also, there were songs in the charts like 'Just what I always wanted.' by Mari Wilson and 'Move Over Darling.' by Tracy Ullman; both of which had them done up in '60s gear and hairstyles and the latter was a cover of Doris Day, of course.

The whole of the '80s was a recycling of previous decades.

Most, if not all, decades are, in retrospect.

 

[Lapin de Lune]

brooksie - I have read that quite a number of teenagers are attracted to the fashions of previous decades due to them sensing a certain 'something' back there that they feel is missing now. Oddly, I went through a similar phase around that age, in which I was strongly attracted to the early 1970's, although for more than just stylistic reasons. I just felt that I belonged in this period, and can imagine that some of the ways in which I expressed this, via clothing and music, might have made older people smile and shake their heads at me at the time.

I know that this is veering away from the 'what is happening in the industry right now' question, but it says something, at least, about the view from ground level, so to speak. How stuff filters down. Mass media wasn't quite as invasive/dominant as it is now, so we tended to rely more upon local sub cultures and musical scenes than big magazines. I feel that the industry is extremely dominant right now, and has incredible influence upon much younger viewers than ever before.

Funnily enough, I am noticing a little less vintage right now and more of this growing surge of interest in pagan, wiccan imagery. Most often, this comes without the actual 'belief' package, and seems more concerned merely with the imagery, symbols and forms...pentagrams on pendants, horned gods on tshirts, etc. I wonder how actual wiccans/pagans are taking this...and of course, this is nothing new.

 

[educo]

IMO this is a symptom of our excessive dependence on technology to the point of abuse. We don't need to "look" or search for substance because we don't have to. And we don't have to because we know it's not information, just entertainment.

That's what I feel like the fashion industry has turned to, a form of entertainment. Whether it's reality shows that don't accurately portray the fashion business or shows like Sex and The City who sell false dreams, or celebrities having clothing lines, or ridiculous Oscar parties where people are just watching it for the clothes!

Consumers fall for it hook, line and sinker every single time and the masters of ceremonies profit of off it tremendously, so why change? Because of a few sacrificial lambs?

It makes me tremendously sad about the state of events in the world, but relieved at the same time. It's about time people started to wake up and pay attention and speak/act out for once.

As much as I love bloggers, that whole movement throws more gas to the fire because how many bloggers out there are actually giving out solid information about designers and fashion? The first one that pops into my head is Susie Bubble. I think she is wonderful.
The majority are going crazy about the next Jeffrey Campbell shoe.

And that's the thing, these companies have conditioned these consumers, to be part of the game too, through blogging about their products while offering no innovation and no information to have an intelligent discussion on.

So, here are some designers like McQueen, who was all about information and context above entertainment and some "master" breathing down his neck to produce and produce and produce at all costs?

No wonder everyone is going crazy. How can you force someone who cares about their process and their expression, to not care anymore, BUT still produce quality, profitable work?

I think we're all seeing the consequences of such actions and I've said this in another thread, this is just the TIP of the iceberg.

 

[tigerrouge]

Saturation is an issue, and while the new interactive mood of the media world is great for giving people a say, that freedom might come at a price. Creativity often arises in direct relation to restrictions - the inventiveness of people trying to find a way around strictures, fighting to have their voice 'heard', their pent-up energy forcing change.

But if there's nothing to fight against, and previous social revolutions are understood at the level of being a look you can buy at Topshop, and after that purchase, someone can upload their half-thought-out ideas about the future of fashion on some blog that's merely one amongst ten thousand, repeating the same phrases that everyone else uses, while magazines concerned about falling sales trade on the diluted fame of celebrity offspring, using photographers who must have nightmares about being surgically separated from the technology that produces their work, with girls who seem in no physical condition to offer resistance to anything, in shoots where there's as little imagination as there is clothing...

And then someone will launch a new publication that'll try to provide an alternative take on things, but which will follow the slightly futile path of using essentially the same people while hoping to produce a different result.

I suspect that if you want to produce anything of worth, you have to find the whetstone that'll sharpen you - wide-open opportunities might not be the making of any person or movement that's going to make a proper difference.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I don't know, it happened back then, too.

I remember when I was a child, in the early '80s, picking up clothes and bags in shops and my mum saying that the problem was that they reminded her of the '60s...

Also, there were songs in the charts like 'Just what I always wanted.' by Mari Wilson and 'Move Over Darling.' by Tracy Ullman; both of which had them done up in '60s gear and hairstyles and the latter was a cover of Doris Day, of course.

The whole of the '80s was a recycling of previous decades.

Most, if not all, decades are, in retrospect.

Yes, but this IS the difference! Back then, and most people who are older than say 35 today have absolutely no understanding for vintage. They think that something seeming like the 60s or 80s is a bad thing, when it should be perceived as positive.

In that statement that your mother made, there was a need for the new, a belief in that what was new was far superior to the old. That is/was, of course, a necessary axion of fashion - always has been - because how else can you make people pay money for a new wardrobe each season? The answer is compulsive shopping - something that becomes much more likely with the internet around - every customer gets to see so much more of what is available. So clear seasonal changes are no longer necessary.

And, of course, on a non-business level the change toward a less season-oriented view can be the result of the wealth of resources on past trends. It's sort of hard to pass something off as novel when everyone has the archives of all the collections since 2000, and older references as well.

 

[brooksie]

Chloehandbags…..fashion as we know it, has always recycled ideas or elements of previous eras. For me, that’s no problem. What interests me is HOW it’s used in the context of the contemporary era. The difference from the 90s to the present, is that there seems to be too literal usage of these past ideas. Many times the idea is shown exactly as if was shown back when it was 1st popular. It’s not integrated into the present time as apart of a whole, but it becomes the whole. I’m someone who loved historical fashion, so I’m not complaining about using it….after all a good idea is a good idea, no matter the era, but how does it fit w/in the contemporary context? That’s my question.

The 80s had plenty of vintage elements….the dominant look was very much 40s inspired, for example tho plenty of other eras were represented too. However, you’d never mix up the 40s w/ the 60s or the 60s w/ the 80s I’d think. That era had a very distinct look in terms of what people think of the decade and what people actually wore.

Lapin…..it’s interesting that you say that you identified w/ the early 70s because that was a major transitional shift in both fashion and music. There was no real hardcore “it” look then, but a combination of several. That was a window of time when you could do much of anything and it would look right…if you did it w/ flair!

You and educo are definitely on to something in terms of the media/celebs. The media and the celebs push products and looks very hard now. It's a full package thing....aspirational lifestyle in a box! Given that the fashion industry and celebs are “married” to each other so blatantly these days, they combine to have an authority on these matters that I find terrifying. There’s been such a push for conformity that there’s almost no chance we’ll see a celeb show up somewhere having a “Bjork moment” …more’s the pity I say. "Safe" is the name of the game here.

educo…bloggers are basically diary keepers, IMHO. I approach them as if they are talking to themselves who might say something I wish to overhear! Unless they impart some info or are seeking a dialogue w/ the public, I’m not interested. SusieBubble (or Diane Pernet) is a good example of the latter. Unlike most bloggers, she’s uninterested in the usual fashion suspects. She’s interested in the smaller, lesser known designers/looks/etc and in sharing that w/ her readers. Her site is more like a “watering hole” for a certain type of fashion person that may not find each other w/o something like her site. Most bloggers have far more conventional approach than she.

tigerrouge…that’s just it tho, we have PLENTY to fight against these days. I suspect this is why the past is such a big deal now….it seems so much easier. It feels as if there’s a desire to go back to a “simpler time” even if that time might be WW2!!! Part of this does have to do w/ super saturation methinks. Given that everything comes so fast and is gone so fast, methinks people are somewhat disoriented. The past stays still! If things are instantly accessible and removed from their historical context to boot, why work for any connection to one’s own times? LOL…perhaps that IS our times, as scary as that sounds.

 

[chloehandbags]

Chloehandbags…..fashion as we know it, has always recycled ideas or elements of previous eras. For me, that’s no problem. What interests me is HOW it’s used in the context of the contemporary era. The difference from the 90s to the present, is that there seems to be too literal usage of these past ideas. Many times the idea is shown exactly as if was shown back when it was 1st popular. It’s not integrated into the present time as apart of a whole, but it becomes the whole. I’m someone who loved historical fashion, so I’m not complaining about using it….after all a good idea is a good idea, no matter the era, but how does it fit w/in the contemporary context? That’s my question.

The 80s had plenty of vintage elements….the dominant look was very much 40s inspired, for example tho plenty of other eras were represented too. However, you’d never mix up the 40s w/ the 60s or the 60s w/ the 80s I’d think. That era had a very distinct look in terms of what people think of the decade and what people actually wore.

Ah, but I would argue that, at that time (during the '80s, for example), you often did not really notice the essential 'eighties-ness' these recycled fashions, from other eras (e.g. the '60s, or the '40s, or whatever) were actually heavily tinged with.

At the time, the '60s inspired stuff seemed very similar to the original '60s stuff to my mother (who had, obviously, lived through the '60s, herself and was an artist; so, a very visual person), for example; it did not seem to be, glaringly, an '80s take on the '60s.

Whereas, looking back, it is extremely easy to see that '80s 'overlay', of course.

So, I would argue that what may look, to many of us now, on the current day runways, as too literally '80s, or whatever, will almost inevitably look very obviously of this time, too, with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[brooksie]

^^^That's just it tho, people see the influences now quite obviously because they ARE very obvious...intentionally. Using some elements of an earlier period isn't quite the same as seeking to do a literal remake of that period w/ a few modifications (say fabric choices). Having a 60s inspired purse in 1982 isn't quite the same as having the whole Biba look in 2006, right?

 

[ErnstLudwig]

"Fashion is always a reflection of the times"

well looks like nothing distinctive/new is going on in the industrialized countries right now if they are only using influences of the past... hell you can't even get inspired by subcultures anymore

 

[iluvjeisa]

Ah, but I would argue that, at that time (during the '80s, for example), you often did not really notice the essential 'eighties-ness' these recycled fashions, from other eras (e.g. the '60s, or the '40s, or whatever) were actually heavily tinged with.

At the time, the '60s inspired stuff seemed very similar to the original '60s stuff to my mother (who had, obviously, lived through the '60s, herself and was an artist; so, a very visual person), for example; it did not seem to be, glaringly, an '80s take on the '60s.

Whereas, looking back, it is extremely easy to see that '80s 'overlay', of course.

So, I would argue that what may look, to many of us now, on the current day runways, as too literally '80s, or whatever, will almost inevitably look very obviously of this time, too, with the benefit of hindsight.

I think people didn't recognize it because they simply didn't have much access to fashion references. I think you're right that there will be elements of this time as well in the clothes. The difference is that with our access to fashion references, we're more aware of those.

It seems, though, as certain features pervaded all of fashion more easily in the 80s. Like it seems that Claude Montana's broad shoulder look really changed the overall look from slender to bulky around 1983 or so. Then a large number of others also went toward that look. There seems to be less of such domino effect trends now. But I could be wrong.

 

[chloehandbags]

I think people didn't recognize it because they simply didn't have much access to fashion references.

Well, as well as being a trained artist, my mother was always very interested in fashion and had books on fashion and fashion history.

I'm not saying that she wouldn't have seen slight differences (especially advances in the materials used etc.) - I'm sure she did - but I am saying that, from her reaction, they didn't seem to be half as obvious as they would later appear, in hindsight.

I think we just become very used to the prevailing 'nowness' that tints everything and it is only later that we can truly see what exactly that 'nowness' consisted of?

I think you're right that there will be elements of this time as well in the clothes. The difference is that with our access to fashion references, we're more aware of those.

It seems, though, as certain features pervaded all of fashion more easily in the 80s. Like it seems that Claude Montana's broad shoulder look really changed the overall look from slender to bulky around 1983 or so. Then a large number of others also went toward that look. There seems to be less of such domino effect trends now. But I could be wrong.

Yes, I certainly think you're absolutely right that there seems to be less consistency and unity in ongoing trends, now.

In other words, I think fashion has a far more schizophrenic feel to it - often yoyo-ing between one thing and another (and back again), each season.

I seem to remember a smoother development and transition of trends, in the '80s, which I far preferred.

The trends seemed to be far more genuine and part of a true zeitgeist, too; rather than, largely, artificial and just whipped-up in an attempt to make people part with their money, each season (although, I think they still managed to?).

Although fashion moved faster in the '80s than it had, almost certainly, ever done before, the cynically full throttle confusion of Fast Fashion was still (thankfully!) a thing of the future.

 

[chloehandbags]

Also, in the past, people seemed to accept (and embrace!) the fact that different designers were all, simultaneously, marching to the beat of the same drum (albeit, in their own way).

Whereas, now, all too often, a designer will be accused of plagiarism, if there are any noticable similarities, at all, between his work and another's; even if he shows just a few days after the other designer he is being accused of copying.

This must, surely, often have the effect of making designers feel that they must try to ignore any zeitgeist and instead, constantly, show something completely new and different and/or only develop ideas that are, very obviously, their signature?

I don't think this is a healthy development, personally.

 

[agee]

Ok, yes, we can look elsewhere for creativity. We can even look outside of fashion for creativity. As someone who works in the scientific field rather than fashion that is probably what I will do.

That said, I still remember the day ten years ago when I got hold of 1970s Vogue Paris and realized where the best art of the later part of the 20th century had been hiding. I guess that moment in fashion history has now truly come and passed.

But what those issues of the magazine showed me is that when creative genius and loads of money combine with excentricity and work ethic - there is nothing better. Nothing. No higher kick of beauty. It's hard to imagine an avant garde magazine getting to that level. I am still searching, of course.

Yep, I hear you. And to be fair, Anna Wintour, Bernard Arnault and others have played the same role that aristocratic women played in the past and that is, to varying degrees sponsor new talent. Furthermore, I do believe that these folks have a sincere interest in developing talent and creativity and in bringing beauty and fashion to the world, but in their cases given the nature of their jobs, they cannot always be altruistic about these matters. Anna can love several up-and-coming designers and want to feature their work in Vogue but she has to serve the taste of her readership and, quite frankly, feature the clothing of the design houses that advertise with Vogue. Arnault is probably living a similar dichotomy, where one day he is looking to recruit / underwrite the next Galliano or McQueen, and the next day he, or one of his minions, is cussing out Conde Nast because he feels like he is not getting the right amount of bang in the editorials for the advertising bucks he shelled out.

So I can definitely see how the money and the talent can come together and create epic beauty and I think that we should have expectations of beauty and high quality and not accept highly paid editors, designers and photographers phoning it in, but at the same time it is counter-intuitive to me to expect the establishment to be the incubator of the new and avant garde on an ongoing basis, yeah I get and appreciate that these halcyon periods will occur, but I think that it is incumbent on me to seek out the new and unexpected in fashion and not expect it to come to me, and these days that information is available at my fingertips, so it is not as if I need to take off my fuzzy slippers and start attending design school fashion shows, although I probably should since there is a pretty decent one in my area.

 

[brooksie]

Do you guys remember in “Unzipped” when Isaac Mizrahi did his ‘Nanook of the North’ look and was so excited about it, but then wanted to jump off of a cliff when Jean-Paul Gaultier showed something similar right before the NYC season? (FYI for those who don’t know: The seasons were different pre 99….back then NYC showed last w/ Paris immediately before it) In retrospect, it’s kind of funny that Isaac took it so badly because almost nobody back then made the connection between his collection and Gaultier’s. They were only superficially alike IMHO….each man approached the aesthetics very differently in terms of color scheme, cut, presentation, etc…

Of course if that happened now, he’d be accused of copying Gaultier…no matter how absurd that would be. I think the net has kind of killed off the notion of “zeitgeist” as is being referred to on this thread re:Montana/shoulders in the 80s. I see these sorts of “copying” comments made all the time these days (usually people think everything looks like Prada or NG’s Balenciaga ), but in the past it was simply taken as being apart of the zeitgeist….the mood of the times. Nobody expected a designer to “own” a look exclusively, but that the look was an overall reflection of the times. That two designers (ie Miz/JPG) in two different cities were inspired by the theme of shaggy furry clothes doesn’t seem suspicious to me, then or now. Given how different the Miz and JPG are on every level, it would never have occurred to me that either were ripping off the other. Of course, back then most fashion people only got to see “highlights” on shows rather than the entire thing. Perhaps if people had been able to see everything back then, the reception of the Miz’s collection would have been far different.

IOW, I’m definitely of the belief that the general access to everything has dramatically shifted expectations for the new and “relevant” way beyond what’s realistic for any one designer or fashion overall to attain.

Just for kicks…how do you all think shows like “Project Runway” and the fashion “behind-the-scenes exposes” made for general audiences play a part of these shifting expectations?

 

[agee]

If I saw multiple designers using the same theme in a single season then I would assume that they are working off the same trend report.


P.S. Perhaps if it is only two then I would assume that it is coincidence, zeitgeist or some form of fashion in-breeding.

 

[m.j.]

Just for kicks…how do you all think shows like “Project Runway” and the fashion “behind-the-scenes exposes” made for general audiences play a part of these shifting expectations?

cheap entertainment for everyone so that every one can be stylish and feel fashionable
​

 

[Style Eyes]

A really interesting thread.

I think in the current economic climate there needs to be a balance between creativity and wearability. Perhaps this is why so many designers and brands are sticking to the safe options.

Perhaps I see things differently to others but for me I can see a strong movement in fashion to becoming more democratic and listening to the public. Individual brands are using social media much more to tune in with their customers as well as communicating with them. Anyone can have an influence on fashions and trends through blogs, streetstyle and fashion forums.

Interesting article on technorati on the subject - How social media is influencing the fashion industry

 

[F0F0]

... Anyone can have an influence on fashions and trends through blogs, streetstyle and fashion forums...

And specially now through social media fashion tools like those of Polyvore!

Lot's of folks are sharing their self-created lookbooks to all their friends in their social networks, e-communities and blogs. It's like Advertising 3.0 where consumers create ads that promote brands' clothes and accessories to be purchased or thump up or thump down designer's prototypes.

And where every consumer creations and moves are tracked and monitored you'll have invaluable consumer insight for brands to profit like there's no tomorrow! Expect this information holders to be the next movers and shakers

Ultimately this consumer-centric model will not only affect the fashion industry (both online and offline) but will also infect other industries like home decor where consumers would prefer to browse, discover and get inspired rather than just search or compare prices

Does anybody here has experience using Polyvore's business solutions and care to share her/his story? Who here already has been involved in investing US$20,000 (minimum to spend) on this site?

 

[Lena]

amazing discussion here guys

the one thing i'd like to share, is that fashion seems absolutely irrelevant under the current global socio-economic situation.
at the verge of radiation catastrophe in Japan, social unrest, economic crisis everywhere, all we need to worry about, is fashion...
i'm sure there must be fresh talents boiling out there but at the moment fashion is just a game at the hands of a bunch of corporate dinosaurs

as for style, this is something entirely different than fashion, a personal affair that can still be fun and can help us go on with life-as-usual

on fashion bloggers, yes, i agree with those here who talked of 'online diaries'
i'm not that thrilled with blogging and i seriously don't believe that bloggers are changing the shape of the industry

*fashion industry is both self centered, 'safe' and totally 'dry' at the moment
*consumers are running out of motive to spend-spend-spend under this tight and uncertain economic atmosphere