Digital eye at center of a fashion hurricane
By Suzy Menkes International Herald Tribune
MONDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2005
PARIS This month marks a somber anniversary for the fashion world: a decade since the newly invented digital cameras registered images of fashion shows and put them online 10 minutes after the show ended.
On Oct. 31, 1995, I wrote in the International Herald Tribune about a new initiative at New York Fashion Week: "The day of instant fashion flashed round the world in nano-seconds has arrived - without any fanfare, nor any discussion of its dramatic and awesome implications for the industry."
The following season, in March 1996, I used photographer Christopher Moore to demonstrate to readers how images on the "no-film digital camera" had been transmitted by a public telephone line. (This was before the even speedier photo communications by mobile phone.) I also discussed the arrival of "First View," the Web site that has subsequently been the subject of an ongoing court case.
Looking back from the current world of super-fast fashion, the words I wrote in 1996 seem prescient: "There may soon be no such thing as 'fashion' - meaning a new development in clothing that grows from a designer's creative intelligence, hits the runway, is bought by exclusive shops and is worn by a fashion-aware elite - before the concept is widely disseminated. Instead, everything from Helmut Lang's ribbed hip band on pants, to Comme des Garçons' floral patterns or Gucci's latest belt will be instantly available in some fast-fashion version."
Substitute the words "Balenciaga's sailor pants," for Lang, and you have today's scenario. The digital camera is the eye of the hurricane that has changed the fashion landscape.
I suggested in the article, which embraced the decision by the French Chambre Syndicale to take legal action against "theft of intellectual property and possible commercial piracy or counterfeit," that "shows that were once reserved for professionals have become public property." And I saw a solution: "The industry is faced with an unprecedented crisis that can be resolved only by radical change: by abandoning the current showings six months ahead of the selling season, or by reverting to restricted showroom presentations."
That did not happen. And the frenzy of fast fashion and the global dissemination of shows is now an integral part of the industry. In the past week, people who had not seen the Prada show, but had instantly logged on to style.com, were discussing the pink patent wheely travel bag, the bright lipstick and whether the thick-sock styling was a good idea.
The world is now fashion's audience.
On the credit side, a company with a strong and coherent vision is able to use technology to sharpen up its image. And for the public, the leading fast- fashion stores such as Hennes & Mauritz and Zara offer fashion at an affordable price. On the debit sheet is increased counterfeiting, the growth of low-priced chains and lost revenues for small designer companies.
But whatever the commercial repercussions, what about the essence of fashion itself? No one can now design a product and own its image for more than the seconds it takes to send it into cyberspace. The exterior symbol of a registered logo is the only intellectual property that can be protected.
A "smart" designer today no longer searches for fashion's Holy Grail: the classic product which enters the fashion language as a "Kelly bag" or a "Chanel jacket."
Instead the "it" bag of the season exists in order to nurture the fast-fashion culture at the luxury level. Tom Ford's Gucci system - a quick hit and move on - is now so widely accepted that Gucci Group attributed disappointing YSL figures to the lack of a hit bag.
Chloé's stylish, well-thought out Paddington bag or Balenciaga's Lariat might deserve to have a life after one season. Yet how can they, when "inspirations," if not actual counterfeits, are in every shop window across the world?
Fashion is not alone. Piracy in downloading music and movies presents a headache in other industries. But those problems are essentially commercial and do not alter the creative approach of the film director or musician.
In fashion, there is a difference between ideas that grow organically from a seed planted in a designer's mind and nurtured by societal shifts - and the instant changes forced on designers to get the copyists off their backs and keep the tills ringing. The contrast is between Alber Elbaz at Lanvin offering to women the dresses they did not realize they were yearning for until they saw them - and all the soulless copycat dresses with Lanvin-style gros-grain trimmings (not least on the Milan runways last week).
Designers themselves are ambivalent about fast fashion.
"Copying doesn't bother me, because they can copy my work - but they can't copy the way I think," says Elbaz, who is more concerned about the frenetic speeding up of the fashion cycle on himself.
"It is frustrating, because the day after I do a show I have to choose the new fabrics," he says. "What is missing is the element of fantasy - what I need is more dreaming. Otherwise there is not enough of yourself in it."
"There is a difference between global and universal," he says. "I still prefer the word "universal". I think there is something very fake about global."
Elbaz says that the digital technology is not the first to influence fashion, since the original invention of the camera encouraged streamlined dressing in the 1920s. Before that period, fashion was disseminated by illustration, which favors decoration and embellishment, whereas in the camera eye - especially during the long period of black and white images - the more graphic the better.
Coco Chanel was part of that era and her silhouettes looked as sharp and spare as Man Ray's photographs. She famously said that to be copied was a compliment, and Karl Lagerfeld, a photographer himself, has a similar attitude. Last year, he became a fashion democrat with his one-off range for H & M.
"It does not worry me personally - I like communication and visibility - but then I don't have to think about commerce," Lagerfeld says. "I like the idea of seeing it everywhere. Designers can't live in an ivory tower. And to copy well is as difficult now as it was in the past."
That may be true of Chanel, which represents the summit of haute couture and of high-end ready-to-wear. But does it apply to Prada, which might recently have focused on embellishment, but is more about linear minimalist cutting, style and attitude? The speed with which Miuccia Prada changes tack suggests that she sets out to outwit the copycats.
But Prada says that she does not find the pace of change so easy to handle.
"It's a question of velocity - people want more and more speed and companies are more and more aggressive," says Prada. "It is now a two-month cycle and if you enjoy what you do and want to be first in the class, you have to speed up a lot. "
Prada says that her company was once unique in offering fashionable accessories that changed each season, but now everyone is at the same game.
"But it is wrong to start complaining. You have to face the complexity and violence of this world," she says.
So is it inevitable that fashion continues to be viewed as part of the worldwide entertainment industry, with celebrities as key players and the designers running ever faster to keep up?
The democratization of fashion started with cable television in the early 1990s, as the start-up channels realized that show footage made for easy viewing, presented no language barrier and was cheap. Turn on the television today, from Hong Kong to Prague, and you are likely to see a fashion show.
But not much detail can be defined on a video. The fabrics are flattened, the bags and shoes swing past. It is an innocent world away from detailed digital registration of a collar, eyelet pattern, flower print, embroidered purse or platform sandal - all instantly enlarged at the click of a mouse.
Raf Simons, another thoughtful, self-questioning designer, is concerned about the effect of digitalized fashion on the creative process.
"I don't like it," he says. "Designers used to be islands - now everything is too close together."
Simons, like every other strong designer, is alarmed at how quickly an identifiable fashion look gets into the food chain. He refers to an avant-garde shop in Brussels whose sales person appears to be dressed head-to-toe in Balenciaga - except that it is always from H & M.
In his new role as creative director at Jil Sander, Simons has only a top line, with no other brand dissemination - and he likes it that way.
"I am not sure that real fashion can be for everyone," says Simons, who believes that understanding design requires a particular sensitivity and cultural awareness.
"The luxury of real fashion is that it is something private," Simons says. "It can't be for everyone."
