Monica D. Murgia

Where art, creativity, and fashion meet
April 21st, 2011

Fashion Critics – The Writing is on the Wall

Fashion and textile exhibitions are not a new phenomenon in the museum world.  What is new, however, is the public new-found admiration and interest in them.  The New York Times recently featured an article examining museums’ installing fashion exhibits.  (Museums Are Finding Room for Couturiers By GERALDINE FABRIKANT Published: April 20, 2011)

Halston-2-2
Simply Halston exhibit at the Indianapolis Museum of Art, 2008.  Image courtesy of the museum.

Critics dismiss this cultural shift as a preference for “fluff over fine arts,”  or simply a sophomoric obsession fueled by reality TV shows.   Tyler Green, editor of Modern Art Notes, believes that fashion exhibitions lack substance and scholarly investigation.  Or do they?

Venomous attacks such as Green’s are unfounded, and well, a bit outdated.  Curating a museum exhibition on any subject is as scholarly as an investigation could get.  A subject is proposed, research is conducted, and curators painstakingly create a written and visual narrative.  The written component includes a detailed object list, wall didactics, and an exhibition catalog.  (Academic terms for the descriptions of the object and maker, the writing on the wall explaining the exhibition, and the tempting book available at the gift shop)  Becoming a curator is academically rigorous; requirements include: conducting original research, lecturing to the public, publishing articles and books, and presenting at conferences.  Clearly, curators showcase the best of their scholarly pursuits.  So why the rancor?  And just why was Fabrikant, a senior writer for the business section at the Times, citing antiquated debates and quotes?

The Model as Muse: Embodying Fashion. Met Museum. 2009.

The real contention revolves around defining fashion.  Is fashion art?  Is fashion a serious discipline?  Is fashion worthy of investigation on an academic, social and cultural level?  These questions have been addressed by great philosophers including Socrates and Foucault, yet the debate persists.  But why?

Fashion exists in a perpetual duality: it is as serious as it is superficial.  Creating clothing requires creativity, mathematical expertise for a precise fit, and a continual quest for innovation in fabrication and silhouette.  On a micro level, fashion choices communicate individual identity.  Non-verbal communication accounts for about 90% of an individual’s message.  Clothing, therefore, speaks for you.  On a macro level, clothing signifies economic, social and cultural groups.   Aside from personal identity, clothing also gives wearers a sense of communal belonging.

Gothic: Dark Glamour. Museum @ FIT, 2011.

Yes, fashion is art.  And anyone that is an art aficionado knows that there is a stratification of art.  There is highbrow, there is low brow, and everything in between.  For many years, graffiti was considered tasteless vandalism.    Now, street artists’ work, like Banksy’s, sell for millions of dollars on the contemporary art market.

Banksy’s Street Art.

Fashion also is a subtle indicator of political and social movements.  Changes in clothing often predate the movement itself.

Womens_suffrage

Women’s Suffrage Movement. 

Black Power Movement.

 

 

Despite the seriousness, fashion can still be fun.  The daily choice of self-expression is experimental.  It is a creative way to invent yourself, the image you want to project to the world.  To a large degree, what people chose to wear is an unconscious act.  Most of us don’t wake up wondering what the political ramifications of our outfits will be.  This is why fashion, as a discipline, is scoffed at.  The very act of waking up and dressing is minimized.  For the majority, dressing has become an involuntary act, like breathing.  If we don’t think about it, does it make it less important?  No!  Perhaps the remedy is redirecting the focus to making it fun.  Clothes that don’t fit our mode of expression can be discarded.  The act of trying new garments to achieve “that look” is what philosopher Foucault was talking about when he said: The task is not to find ourselves, but to invent ourselves. Why leave such an important task to chance or reflex?

Model as Muse: Embodying Fashion. Met Museum, 2009. Photo courtesy of daydreampilot.com.

When museums’ showcase a fashion exhibit, it is a way for the public to reconnect with the past on a very personal level.  We can learn something of our own personal style by reflecting on what has come before.  Seeing what people wore makes the past more real, more tangible.  We can envision ourselves in the garments.  We can literally feel what it would be like in their shoes.

Chopine. On a Pedestal: From Renaissance Chopines to Baroque Heels. Bata Shoe Museum, 2010.

 

 

Not everyone will read the didactics and object lists.  But they will have a real visceral experience of stepping into the past or mind of the designer.  But for the critics and journalists who continually bash fashion as art, I must ask: Have you taken the time to read the curator’s work?  If you haven’t, the writing is on the wall.

Fashion Independent: The Original Style of Ann Bonfoey Taylor. Phoenix Museum of Art. 2011. Image courtesy of downtowndevil.com.

 

 

GHTime Code(s): nc nc nc nc nc nc nc nc 


March 29th, 2010

When did “smart” people start taking interest in fashion?

Plato

Very early.  Plato was one of the first.  He started talking about beauty in his work Hippias Major (aka What is Beauty), which was written around 390 BCE.  So what did Plato figure out about beauty?  Well Hippias Major is a conversation between Socrates and Hippias.  They start debating on the definition of beauty.  The whole dialogue doesn’t really go anywhere, since neither candidate can formulate an answer that encompasses the entire concept.

So the question becomes, did Plato determine anything relevant about fashion?

Here is an interesting quote from Hippias Major:

Socrates: See here, then.  What do we say about the appropriate: Is it what makes – by coming to be present – each thing to which it is present be seen to be beautiful or to be beautiful, or neither? (294a)

(Huh?  I think Socrates meant to ask: “Is it more important to be perceived as beautiful or to actually be beautiful?)

Hippias: I think it’s what makes things be seen to be beautiful.  For example, when someone puts on clothes and shoes that suit him, even if he’s ridiculous, he is seen to be more beautiful. (294a)

(ie Duh!  It’s better to be perceived as beautiful.  The clothes make the man, Socrates! Any idiot can look good with the right props.)

Socrates: The if the appropriate makes things be seen to be more beautiful than they are, it would be a kind of deceit about the beautiful, and it wouldn’t be what we are looking for, would it, Hippias? (294b)

(So, in other words.  Clothing and fashion make liars out of us.  By relying on clothes, we are projecting a fraudulent idea of beauty.)

Hey, Plato!  I take that personally!

Hippias vs Socrates: who is the winner?

Let’s skip through history and talk about Baudelaire next.

Charles Baudelaire (1821-1867)  was a poet and art critic  that recognized the importance of appearances.   France was changing at his time.  The Industrial revolution was bringing technological advances and more leisure time.  Art trends were changing.  Painters had traditionally only worked on religious or genre scenes.  For the first time, artists were beginning to examine normal, everyday subjects.  They were acting as social anthropologists, recording the fashion and behavior of the people of their time.  Painting begins to record the gestures, fashion, and postures of the ages.

Portrait of Baudelaire by Gustave Courbet

In 1863, Baudelaire wrote The Painter of Modern Life.  In this work, he discussed the new paintings and what they were documenting about French culture. What set him apart from other art critics is that he also analyzed fashion and fashion plates.  Baudelaire realized that fashion is a critical part of history.  Fashion and its documentation offered records of the latest styles, how to wear them and how to move in them.  These records are an intimate view into the past.

Moreover, Baudelaire believed it was artist’s duty to capture the mysterious beauty of daily life.

The painter genius is not merely a flanure [wonderer] but searching for modernity, the quality that is new.. .He makes it his business to extract from fashion whatever element it may contain of poetry within history, to distill the eternal from the transitory. p. 12

Marilyn Monroe does her duty

Why I personally love Baudelaire?  He encouraged the use of cosmetics.  In 19th Century Paris, cosmetics were becoming increasingly accepted.  Prior to this point, the only women that wore make-up in public were prostitutes and actresses – and these two careers were often blurred.  Baudelaire declares that all women should wear cosmetics.  He even devoted an entire section of his book to the subject, entitled In Praise of Cosmetics. Here is his verdict:

Woman is quite within her rights, indeed she is even accomplishing a kind of duty, when she devotes herself to appearing magical and supernatural; she has to astonish and charm us; as an idol, she is obligated to adorn herself in order to be adored.  Thus she has to lay all the arts under contribution for the means of lifting herself above Nature, the better to conquer hearts and rivet attention.  It matters but little that the artifice and trickery are know to all, so long as their success is assured and their effect always irresistible.  P. 33

Vindication for the countless hours I spend at Sephora!

Ladies, blame it on Baudelaire . . .

And btw, Plato, it’s my duty to look good, fraudulent or not!

Why this radical stance?  Baudelaire’s logic was simple.  Nature is nothing other than the voice of our own self-interest – thus nothing other than evil tyrant.  Virtue, then is always artificial, a construct of man.  Women’s duty is to elevate themselves above Nature by using the artificial to enhance their appearance.  Cosmetics should be visible to challenge the vice of nature.

Baudelaire summary: Fashion is ultimately an outward manifestation of men and women’s attempt to show virtue.  Its function is to remedy evil with idealism. By controlling our appearance, we are harnessing the powers of nature into a force of good.

The last smart person for the day: Stephane Mallareme

Mallareme is a later fashion theorist and poet who took a completely opposite attitude to Baudelaire.  Mallarme believed there is no difference between Nature and art.  Mallarme goes as far to say that Nature is a false concept, and that man-made and natural have no real distinctions.

While Mallareme was highly regarded as a poet and literary figure, he did something very unique that positioned him as a fashion authority: he started his own fashion magazine, La Derniere Mode, or ‘The Latest Fashion’.  Even more astonishingly, Mallarme is the editor, designer and author of the entire magazine.  He assumed pseudonyms for the different columns.

Each edition of the magazine consisted of advice, black&white engravings of costumes Mallareme designed, editorial content describing the drawings and latest fashions, advice and correspondence columns, detailed information on dress shops, and reviews on the theater, books, and other activities.

So, how was this important?

Mallareme became a fashion insider, which gave him a much different experience than other theorists and critics, who participate from the sidelines.  Mallareme was able to examine and create fashion rules, philosophy, and language of persuasion from the inside.

How can we see this as relevant today?

Take the decline of fashion editors and the rise of bloggers.  Marc Jacobs, Rodarte, Dolce e Gabbana and more have chosen to set lead bloggers at the front row of fashion shows a mere seats from Anna Wintour and other top editors of esteemed magazines.  Other once overlooked fashion participants, like stylists, now have feature TV shoes.  I die!!

America's favorite stylist, Rachel Zoe

Mallareme’s magazine project was eventually handed over to another editor.  It lasted for eight issues, and had approximately 900 subscribers.  The failure was attributed to a lack of funding from obtaining advertisements.  La Derniere Mode promoted local dress shops and commercial establishments, but never solicited advertisement funding from them.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers