22 February 2010

Thinking fashion five (Marc Jacobs)

Last Tuesday I overheard someone in the Photographer's Gallery cafe (do check out the fantastic Deutsche Börse Photography Prize exhibition there, which contains the work of RRN favourite, Sophie Ristelhueber, among others) saying how in times of economic stability skirts get shorter. This certainly holds true when we look at Marc Jacobs latest offering - there's not a knee in sight.

Jacobs is the only designer who can make yellow clothes appealing to me.

One could say 'conservative'. But what dictates 'conservative'?

Is 'conservative' long skirts?
Is 'conservative' muted tones?
Is 'conservative' loose silhouette?

Are we allowed to use the word 'frumpy' in a positive way? Apparently (according to dictionary), 'frump' means: 'an unattractive woman who wears dowdy old-fashioned clothes.'

But what happens if an 'attractive'* woman wears supposedly 'dowdy old-fashioned clothes'? [CHAOS!]

Can 'dowdy' be good?
Can 'dowdy' be cool?
Can 'dowdy' be sexy?

What does this oft-cited phrase, 'old-fashioned', actually mean? Think about it.

Can we change language and thus change fashion?

Yes. We change the language of fashion. [Intuition, interpretation, cycle, self, forward, utilisation, courage.]

Mr. Jacobs does it all the time.

*Attractive is physical/intellectual/spiritual confidence/contentment. It is not necessarily about size, age, colour or creed.


Anonymous john said...

Saw this article today with 'dowdy' mentioned in the headline which doesn't even make any real sense to what follows:


Dowdy is in the eye of the beholder, but ironically, what is considered dowdy can flip 180 degrees and become instantly cool depending on who's wearing it at a particular time.

Fashion is forever fickle.

23 February, 2010 01:22  

Post a Comment

<< Home

\\Newer posts// \\Older posts//