Toto, I Don't Think We Are in Kansas Anymore: The Debate of Artistic Change

The two blogs that I chose to comment and leave posts on both involved discussions of art and fashion or a synthesis of the two I call, fashionable art. The first blog combines the art scene with architecture. The blog suggested that the fashion world borrows heavily from the art scene, and perhaps the time has come for the pendulum to swing the other direction, and the art scene borrow from the fashion crowd. The blogger, Guy Dammann fears the art world is stuck in a rut, because artists go for long periods of time producing no new or significant change in work style. The fashion industry on the other hand is constantly moving forward in a frenzied state. This frenzy is caused by the two huge weeks each year of fashion shows. Designers are forced to set up collections with new inspirations and ideas and exhibit them. He ponders the question “What if the art world had the equivalent of fashion week?” He suggests these “tests” of innovation would help inspire and measure progress. He points out that artist’s have gone through great measures to build a name or a brand image and are afraid to strike out of their comfort zone. This comfort zone makes them stagnant, which is the opposite of what art, should be, inspiring people to create new ideas and thoughts. The second post discusses the functionality and wear-ability of Couture clothing. After seeing the designers of Heatherette’s spring/summer show 2008, she was left with a few questions. I tried to respond to her basic question, does Heatherette really think anyone is going to wear that, with an answer about the fine line where fashion and art meet.

The comment I left at each of these blogs is provided below with the blog’s address:

Comment:
I agree with the general idea of this piece. Art is supposed to be about creativity and inspiration, and thinking outside the box. If you try to stay within your brand image for fear of retribution or criticism you can become stagnant. Fashion is like a revolving door, constantly in motion. Yes, we do hark back to other eras or time periods for inspiration because there are only so many ways of reinventing the wheel (or dressing the human body). Even so, the fashion world moves at a whirlwind pace.

The speed at which fashion moves is so quick that when a designer has a terrible season (can anyone remember Marc Jacobs circa his controversial days at Perry Ellis?) they are able to redeem themselves in roughly 4-6 months with a new collection. It’s like clockwork; we watch the fall/winter, 2007/08 show and before the clothing even hits the stores the designers are on to their next collection. The stakes aren’t nearly as high in the fashion world as they are in the art world. Dammann’s point is well taken, that if it has taken you an entire lifetime to cultivate an image, you unlikely to throw it all away on a capricious whim. Fashion is all about experimentation, you win some, and you lose some. Yet, the art world is less forgiving, one bad collection could define you. We can laud a fashion designer and ask “what were they on when they designed that?” However, the very next season they can be the darling of fashion week. Fashion represents creativity and the ability to live in a whimsical world of fantasy that is ever changing. What’s so wrong with that? Isn’t that really what art is all about? The art world is far more rigid and less likely to forget your artistic faux pas. Maybe we shouldn’t criticize artists for experimentation, but embrace the fallibility of human kind because at the end of the day its
better to have gone all out than played it safe. (Link to page)


Comment:
While I agree with your stance that clothing is a form of functional art that one can incorporate into your everyday life. I think couture is not mean to be a “joke” rather its meant to be artistic expression. Couture should be viewed as a blend of art and fashion with the pendulum swinging more towards the artistic side. Haute couture shows are known for their originality, not practicality. Surprisingly, most pieces or looks that you see at a couture runway show are never manufactured or available for sale. I think Heatherette like many other fashion houses, earns money through direct sales of a prêt-a-porter (ready to wear) its cheaper line of clothing, and uses the fashion show as a way to create an aura or certain cache. Heathertte has definitely capitalized on this idea. Their name is synonymous with kooky, crazy, fun clothing. Their theatrical theme shows make them enjoyable to watch. They literally transform the runway to the Land of Oz making the audience realize that ‘we’re definitely not in Kansas anymore.’ I hardly can imagine a place where Dorothy’s outfit would translate, but it was fun to see a modern twist on an old classic. (Link to page)

Fashionably Forward: Art as Inspiration

As New York Fashion week drew to a close, it was apparent to those of us not fortunate enough to get a front row seat, but rather a bird’s eye view, that a synergy of art and fashion is underway. This trend is not about clothing or style, it affects the direction fashion is heading. With the fashion industry in a slump and the world of art booming, design houses and clothing manufacturers are recruiting well known artists to design art into their clothing to try to mimic the art world’s success. This approach seems to be working, because the breakout stars of the most recent fashion week weren’t designers or models, but the artists who lent their creative name and talent to the fashion houses. The famous British artist Damian Hirst, collaborated with Levi Strauss and the Andy Warhol Foundation to create a new line of denim called Warhol Factory -X Levi’s X. Hirst is a heavy hitter in the elite art world, commanding enormous sums for his work. His diamond skull artwork recently sold for a record 100 million dollars. If Levi was trying to think of a way to shake up the old brand image, bringing Hirst on board definitely did the trick. The ambiance created at the Gagosian Gallery for the runway debut of Hirst’s jean line screamed artistic style and marked his arrival on the fashion scene. Hirst is known for his controversial subjects and using death as a central theme. The rhinestone skulls, daggers and crosses he artistically placed on his pants definitely brought a sinister and edgy vibe to the line. The debut of this line with Levi’s was a surprise to many people in the fashion industry. Levi’s jeans are like a Ford car, they are basic, classic, and dependable. Levi’s could have tried every trick and creative process known in the fashion world to conjure high fashion or dangerous allure, but it would never have bubbled into view. Damian Hirst had the alchemy needed to transform Levis into a brand with street credibility because his name is synonymous with Gothic style. Hirst also took his specialty spin art from the canvas to his line for Levi’s jeans. The final products were four fabulous pairs of limited edition brightly colored jeans that could become pieces of artwork if hung on walls not bodies. It is ironic that Andy Warhol’s Foundation stood in as a second in the Hirst fashion fusion with Levis. His disposable art/clothes, Campbell’s soup dresses were the prototype and definite forerunner of the art fashion blend

While Warhol may be given muse credit, Louis Vuitton, though not the earliest bird caught the biggest worm, in its collaboration with Marc Jacobs that gave wings to this trend. Jacobs, an expert in bringing in artists to produce or create special lines of clothing or accessories to shake up a brand’s image, tapped famed Japanese artist Takashi Murakami to make a special edition collection of Louis Vuitton handbags that showcased Murakami’s signature anime style (pictured to the right). Murakami’s success with bright bold colors and design made a stogy line, red hot with yearlong wait lists and prompted new lines for the artist. The Murakami bag a runway success in two senses, it became an iconic piece of fashion and revived Andy Warhol’s original idea and prototype.

This trend appears to be expanding. Modern designers are utilizing art’s ability to inspire by incorporating prints, from distinguished artists into their clothing collections. Celine’s fall runway collection included clothing designed by head designer Ivana Omazic from fabric printed with successful photographer Mike Ningawa’s photos, the image below and to the left showcases the floral photo that is used on the dress.


Matthew Williamson head designer for Emilio Pucci, used geometric prints that to a trained eye bore a striking resemblance to the neo-modern artist Piet Mondrian (top, right). This fusion of fashion and art not only lends creativity and freshness, it helps rid the fashion industry of the superficiality of fashion. Art lends some degree of substance and permanency to the ephemeral world of fashion. It takes a skilled or well-trained eye to pick up the visual reference of art in the clothing. The artistic provenance or inspiration in an outfit, make it wearable art and a classic. The reason is simple. Mondrian doesn’t go out of style; he is timeless and has left an indelible mark in the art world. The combination of art and fashion produces both beauty and brains. Fashion is no longer a pretty face without substance, it is on somewhat more solid ground, for we are no longer a slave to fashion, and we are hungry for art. Designers and artists are showcasing their knowledge of the entire visual art world and those who can identify and attribute the inspiration are part of a clique of well-trained fashionista’s. Yes, they can identify their Gucci from their Pucci, but they also can identify their Manet from their Monet.