Fashion and it's Friends

Whilst being at university for 3 years a lot in my life changed. Most obviously my style. I took my first footsteps into Primark (er..what a lovely experience), I also began my first wave of 'charity shop shopping' with my friends and once spent a whole friday night trying to make a fuscia pink silk skirt. I'd rather oddly convinced myself it was a brilliantly artistic and innovative way to make clothes that I didn't see in the shops. And as I spent around £40 (money I will never see again) in John Lewis, I remember feeling full of hope and pride that I was going to construct a garment so beautiful I'd have a queue of friends wanting to be fitted for ones similar...

Ahem. Famous last words. Cue to me four hours later sitting in a pile of pink fabric, pins, zips and my own self pity. I still don't know to this day how I managed to ever get my head around believing this was a good idea. It was only on my fourth attempt when my friend asked me if I had ever made a skirt before that I realised I had as much hope of making a Vuitton-esque creation as he did of finding a girlfriend.

So this post is dedicated to my friends and our fashion throughout university. I was lucky enough to live with two incredibly stylish girls in my second year who lured me out of my comfort zone in order for me to truely experiement with fashion - how could I ever thank them. Well I've promised them the skirt episode will never happen again...However I have been tempted by old Vogue templates. No? Maybe I'll leave it to the experts.

A couple of my best friends feature in this post and although there have been times (Mr Wakeford especially) that we have raised eyebrows regarding their ourfit choices, all I can say is at least they had the guts to raise eyebrows in the first place. Who else could pull off a velvet jacket on New Years Eve and get nothing but compliments? (and alot of odd stroking). Although much of his style is based upon what he can get in a skip (don't ever ask him about his Levi's) and the odd charity shop buy for under a tenner, he has a brilliant sense of style and without a doubt the only person who could look at something on the hanger that everybody else would steer clear of for fear of being looked at in jest and actually pull it off. Congratulations Stu, you'll never get a girl, but at least you've got some style.

Another of my best mates, Miss Case has an eye for some rather interesting pieces. She too holds investment in velvet - this time in the form of a mustard coloured dress. She also once owned a pair of leather trousers (I know no other girl who could look as hot in them) and has so many corsages she could probably open her own shop. She's a bit of a clothes whore. She's a clothes hoarder. She is one of my only girlfriends who I have fun shopping with because we are completely honest with each other. There are no niceties when we shop, no "Yeah, it's very you" or "Oh yeah, you look so cute in it". We are more to the point with the "As if you are gonna buy that" and the "It's actually disgusting". It's fun because even when she tells me she thinks my clothes are hideous, it doesn't stop me from buying them it just makes me want them more. She is confident with her clothes and that is one of the things I love about her. And she's the most hilarious drunk you will ever meet. Fact.

THE END.

Fashion Errors of Modern Society

Now I am not usually one to moan about things I dislike about fashion; anything neon (obviously), River Island and conspicious consumption (I heart Thorstein Veblen)...to name a few. This is because I don't enjoy wasting my time expressing dislike for things in fashion I have no passion for - I mean how long could I moan about how the inventor of crocs should be condemned to eternal fashion 'hell' alongside the 'Mac in a Pac' guy and Rachel Zoe? I'd much rather revel in the things I do. However recently I've had a bit of a 'fashion block' and I think I've finally put my finger on it.

The things I do adore about fashion are grand and vast, including the way fashion can be outrageous and the way it affects everybody, whether you like it or not. I recently stumbled across two quotes that made me quite frustrated and confused with different people's reactions to fashion. Some people say fashion is friviolous and flaky, but these people who mock fashion, do so because they don't understand it and they are scared of it. Not everybody who follows fashion becomes a conformist or becomes part of a specific harem of airhead girls who flick through the glossies every month and wear horizontal stripes in February because Vogue says so. Fashion for me is about enjoying designs, creativity and extroverness. Of course I like (ok, love) shopping, but I'd much rather be backstage at a David Koma show or sitting front row at William Tempest than wandering around Topshop for 2 hours on a saturday.

"Fashion is what you adopt when you don't know who you are" - Quentin Crisp.

This quote made me annoyed because it is simply not true. In fact it is so untrue, if you take out the 'don't' then it would make sense. It is foolish to think that fashion isn't everywhere - I don't say this because I am addicted to fashion, but it's because it's everywhere. It's not just hanging from rails in shops, or looking immaculate in magazines or strutting down a catwalk or being sewn in a factory. Everyday you wake up, you make a concious decision (because who do you know that gets dressed in the dark) to put particular pieces of clothes on depending on where you are going and what you are doing. It is a simple fact. You wouldn't wear jogging bottoms to an interview and you wouldn't wear a skirt to the gym.
Now, I'm not saying that this is the 'all being' of fashion because maybe it is just pure logic for some people, but by wearing a suit to an interview you are providing an instant impression of smartness - which only a suit can imply. You go wearing the joggers and you ain't getting a call back.

People put on clothes for a night out because they want to feel sexy, confident and relaxed. Nobody wants to go out dressed like an idiot - because deep down everybody knows how they want to be portrayed. Clothes are the most instant first impression you can give somebody without speaking to them. It may be vain and it may be shallow but if somebody looks at you from a distance, they will automatically make an assumption about you based on your attire.

What Crisp is trying to say here is that fashion can lead people astray and make you think that you should all be wearing whatever 'trend' infiltrates Vogue, ELLE or InStyle. And to some extent he is right, because a lot of people think if they grab the first thing on the front rail of French Connection then they are 'In Fashion' and it's just not true.

Fashion is something that you don't 'adopt'. It isn't a choice, it is something that everybody has the chance to experiment with. Whether or not you do it well, that's up to you.

Fashion Photographers

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a blog piece about two incredible fashion photographers; Nick Knight and David LaChapelle. Their work has been consistently praised throughout their careers for creating beautiful larger than life images, using bold colours and being extremely extrovert in their use of props, models and locations.

The second two innovative photographers I wanted to write about are Juergen Teller and Corinne Day. Although all four photographers are fantastic, they all share different asthetics and these two photographers have especially striking images that speak to you, that lift up their message through the pages so the reader can understand that they are not looking at a ‘pretty’ photograph in a surreal place, instead they strip it down artistically to enable a completely different side of photography.

Both can be called fashion photographs but both of them have developed unconventional ways of portraying fashion and their lives. Barely shooting with extravagant locations they take fashion out of the typical realm it is so used to being comfortable in, and shakes up an image by being able to question fashion whilst not disrespecting it.

This article is showing an insight into the 'real' side of fashion photography, that an image can be beautiful even when stripped of it's comforts of photoshop, props, glamour and advertising.

JEURGEN TELLER

JEURGEN TELLER likes to photograph the truth. The very first pictures he took were of a typical landscape in Tuscany and since then he’s excelled himself with shoots for Italian, French, English and American Vogue, ‘W’ Magazine, Self Service, Purple and i-D, although he is first to admit he doesn’t like to think of himself as a Fashion Photographer.

Teller photographs what he likes; people and their emotions. When he first started out, Teller was photographing for record covers and portrait work, when he was taken under Nick Knight’s wing after admitting coming from Germany he felt overwhelmed by the innovative style of magazines such as i-D and The Face. Since he moved to London in 1986, Teller’s photography has been exhibited worldwide in Paris, Munich, The Netherlands and Scotland, to name a few.

 Rather than envision a photograph himself and play it out his way, Teller is a team player and in most of his work, he enjoys the subject in front of the lens to give him creativity to work with and never forces uncomfortable pictures, which sits alongside his vision of truth in photography and knowing he’s got the perfect shot. It is obvious to say that his work doesn’t fall into the same category of the fairytale fashion pictures, but his pictures send a powerful suggestion to take desires further and to delve into a more grunge, underground eclectic fashion scene.

Teller has an innate ability to portray real accuracy behind a picture, and feeds off the reaction of his subjects for a romanticised yet direct picture. His photographs summon a closer sense of uncovering the reality in an industry built upon images that promote an idea of perfection; it is almost as if he is tearing down the airbrushed, glamorous image to replace it with realism.

His photographs for Marc Jacobs support this truth, quirky and unlike most fashion adverts they stand out because there is no direct selling technique – no beautiful women adorned in beautiful clothes, he creates a subtle breath of fresh air amongst the so called ‘perfection’.

Although respectful of the glossy fashion spreads laid out in magazines, he has no interest in them as they do not portray, well, truth; his pictures are never retouched and have a strong essence of genuineness that is very hard to locate normally in a fashion photograph. His work represents an understanding of fashion beyond the commodity.

CORINNE DAY

CORINNE DAY takes a hard approach to fashion photography. Her self-confessed documentary style take on fashion has earned her a few critics back in the 1990s with her intimate and edgy photographs of a 14 year-old Kate Moss. The pictures taken in 1993 shocked the fashion industry whose magazines of the time gleefully indulged in nothing but glamorous fashion pictures.

Perhaps it was Day’s exhaustion with fashion that led her to give up her previous career as a model and teach herself how to photograph. The backlash of critique over the Moss pictures seemed to push her – in the right direction – to begin photographing fashion in a barely ever exposed light. It bared it in a bleak and uncomfortable manner, but expressed truths and new levels of fashion photography. After all why refuse a man a steak because a baby can’t chew it? Day’s opinion of fashion shows the frustration she encounters with superficial images that don’t depict the truth. After the release of the pictures of Kate Moss, Day persisted with her photographic skills for seven years but concentrated on portraying the detailed and very personal ins and outs of her life.

She titled the exhibition ‘Diary’ and amongst the years of built up photographs there were overpoweringly beautiful yet candid shots of her and friends. Perhaps the exhibition - which was also made into a book - provided a form of a pent-up anguish towards the fashion industry that needed to be released in order for Day to make a well received return to fashion a year later. She has continued to use her frank views hand in hand with fashion to develop stunning and unusual photographs.

Day has always shown no regret with regards to how her images conjure up an argumentative view of fashion. She is able to understand both the alluring and the direct side to photographing fashion which enables her to produce pictures that have elements of both.

She is a distinctive photographer because she knows what the fashion industry survives on and starves them of it poetically. Although her more recent images have adjusted nicely in Vogue, there is a gleam in her pictures that offer a reader more than glamour, more than ‘nice’ and ‘pretty’, she has effortlessly shown the minutiae of fashion and her life. She is able to capture the quintessential fashion photograph – and very cleverly manipulate, almost squeeze every typical element to produce a ‘now this is my fashion’ photograph.

What Style Means to Me

A very memorable lady once said “Fashion fades but Style is Eternal”. Who knew back then that Coco Chanel’s words would carry forward the truth for decades in fashion? In honesty, not me. When I was in my teenage years I adored the fashion trends of the season – yes of course now the shock and ‘What was I thinking’ factor inevitably creeps up every time my mother decides to open the photo albums and take that not so chic route down memory lane. I relished the Friday my pocket money was due and not long after it had been withdraw from my father’s bank account it was in the hands of the poor lady in New Look who had to serve me every week.


Looking back yes the cringe factor is through the roof, but it’s shaken off with the unforgettable feeling of being stylish. I loved the way I got to pick whatever I wanted to; after years of my sister and I being matched in the same outfits, I felt very compelled to make a stance with my clothing (bye bye neon lycra biking shorts – yes seriously). I never wonder, even to this day, why people love to buy, make, design or produce clothing because to me it feels as normal as breathing. Clothing is everything, and not in a superficial ‘I must have this’ way, but in a feel good, individual, creative outlet type of way.

Whether its from the back of somebody’s boot on a cold Sunday morning or from the sleekest most polished shop off a high profile street corner in a fashion capital, style is everywhere. Style isn’t always about knowing which Louboutin shoe matches that Miu Miu bag, or deciphering whether that Chloe skirt compliments this Westwood blouse. Impressive, yes but style is a whole aesthetic in itself. It is wonderful to see such a rainbow of style in places such as Brighton and London, Asia and across Europe and the US, but it is frustrating to see not all of these ‘styles’ would make it onto the street style pages of glossy magazines.

Having the latest and most key piece from a designer’s collection unfortunately in my opinion doesn’t make somebody stylish, it knowingly turns them a generic trend setter vacuumed into a very sickening consumption process that would have Thorstein Veblen turn in his grave.

Style is beautiful because it is not restricted to fashion either. Fashionistas may laugh at the sorry woman who rocks her crocs and bum bag down the street but would be taken aback by the volumes of literature, paintings and music collection scattered at her underground library at her ‘stylish’ home in Notting Hill. We may roll our eyes at the lady who hasn’t joined the canvas bag train and instead uses the same old tesco bag for her lunch, yet seem to ignore the fact she rejoices in the theatre, plays and musicals every week. It is these sorts of people that carry the style torch for the supposedly unfashionable.

Style isn’t about looking so made up you’ve come alive from a Karl Lagerfeld sketch, or vice versa looking so ‘underground cool’ that you physically couldn’t leave Shoreditch; it’s about how you carry yourself. Eyes roll with the cliché ‘I mix designer with high street and vintage to create a unique look’ gabble and it’s so often than not people are always trying to be that one step ahead they’re breaking necks to achieve it. I find the most stylish people are the one who create the simplest outfit choices.

Style most definitely does not exist in the ‘what’s hot and what’s not’ pages, in fact I’d call these so called fashion pages the extinguisher to styles exuberant and uncontrollable flames. I pity the people who live their lives by the fashion rule book, heaven forbid navy and black, or shoes with socks. It is when a stylish woman bowls up breaking all these rules and looking completely desirable that it gives a slap on the wrist to these fashion DO’s and DON’Ts. Where would the likes of Maison Martin Margela, Vivienne Westwood and Comme des Garcons be now if they slept with this book under their beds at night, before designing their collections?

Fashion is about change; it’s about reinventing classics, looking towards the future and breaking moulds. But style is about being true to yourself, there is nothing wrong wearing head to toe Dior if you feel comfortable in it, because that’s the person and the style you want to portray. Nor does it matter if you have only ever set foot in charity shops, because what works for you makes you stylish. It’s a sorry day when women moan about the latest trends because they don’t suit them, it’s almost an embarrassment to fashion. What does it matter if the ‘gone by the time you’ve saved for it’ fashion doesn’t fit your frame, because if you have original style every other trend merely becomes a spec.

Style is about embracing yourself and what you love, not about what the fashion pages love, or what your friends love. Enjoy wearing the latest ‘looks’ or don’t, because at the end of the day if you feel like a shrinking violet in your attire, it shows the hold that fashion has on you, and how your style has faded away.

ALL IMAGE ARTUR WESOLOWSKI. http://supermodels.nl/photographers/arturwesolowski

A History of Fashion

Some critics say – and dare to call them ignorant – that fashion is merely a vanity obsessed industry built by shallow narcissists thriving on conspicuous consumption for the masses. This is one – rather pessimistic – way of looking at the fashion industry.

Another, and most obviously, the correct way of thinking, is that fashion is a force built up by creative individuals looking for an outlet for their inspirational thoughts. After all, there are huge amounts of inspiration taken from the arts, politics, economy and society, it would be extremely ill-mannered to assume that fashion is merely clothing.

Over the years, fashion is an area that has seen extreme developments and changes in terms of the creative process, design, production and promotion, and the industry is as popular as ever. With well over 100 years of documented fashion a fierce debate surrounds the originality of particular fashion houses today – 20plus, with some being established from as far back as 1837 – there is obvious reasoning as to why these designers can no longer produce work – but are their replacements tough enough to carry on already well established fashion houses?

If it wasn’t for the likes of Worth, Poiret, Chanel, Madame Vionnet, Lanvin, Hermes – an endless list - who all liberated women from the corset and introduced true fashion, the question remains – where would we be today, or more importantly what would we look like?

If 20th century fashion was to be separated into two halves, one would be the womanly, feminine era – the definition of a classic silhouetted body and the other – well a rather experimental period in fashion. There appeared to be a fashion time bomb waiting to explode, and as society begun to let loose with morals and social attitudes, fashion followed suit. This came via experimentation with bold colours and fabric changes, silhouette change and the attitude towards fashion became more carefree, and wild as ready-to-wear was popularised with the middle classes.

As time has passed, so have many of the founding members of iconic fashion houses, the ones that set a very high bar for fashion designers to follow. Some of the most successful and innovative fashion houses of all time no longer have the original designer who established the brand. Givenchy has had many designer changeovers, from 1996, taking on John Galliano, Alexander McQueen and Julien MacDonald before finally settling on Riccardo Tisci in 2006.

Hannah MacGibben has taken on the crucial role for Chloe since Gaby Aghion left the company she built in 1966, and 7 designers have taken on the challenge of the fashion house. Since its establishment in 1932, Nina Ricci has taken a similar pattern for designers, with 5 from 1954 until two years ago when Olivier Theyskens was assigned the role. For fashion houses worth an awful lot of money, it seems rather dangerous for the design role to be flitting from person to person like sand through feet.

On an outside reflection, questions could arise in relation to how these designers could stick to the original aesthetics of the brands that have been built up the past, as is it an incredibly difficult torch to pass.

To be given a successfully established fashion house, with a long standing designer who has been praised by all in the industry, who have created looks and silhouettes that are built into fashion history and embedded in society as a high-standing luxury fashion name then put into another’s hands – well, quite a tall order, no?

When expressed as a concern like this, it puts into perspective the brilliant success of particular designers that have managed to stand the test of time and lived up to their predecessors.

Particular expression of course goes to Mister Karl Lagerfeld who, since joining Chanel 26 years ago has more than successfully silenced any critics of his work for the company. Lagerfeld seems to be a fashion force of nature, with no chance of getting a day off to admire his work, his hand must be permanently pen to paper, if not for Chanel then for fashion favourite Fendi, in which he still designs since 1977.

It is designers such as Lagerfeld and John Galliano for Dior and Nichola Ghesquiere for Balenciaga that seem to have completely embodied said fashion houses integral vibe which has secured further development for the brands.                                          

                                                                                                                
Yet there are other ways that designers have developed brands, few of these designers have also changed the brands for the better – Christopher Bailey’s resurrection of Burberry in 2002 has helped the brand enormously, Aquascutum’s outlook in the 1990s was negative, with profits low and much of its original allure long gone. If it wasn’t for the arrival of Graeme Fidler for menswear and Michael Hertz for womenswear, in 2004, the company’s future was looking doubtful.

What caused these changes in fashion? A lot can be said about social change and the economy which whether change is invited or not, has altered the fashion industry in many different ways. After all where would we be today if Amelia Bloomer hadn’t spoken out, if Dior hadn’t created the ‘New Look’ and if Yves Saint Laurent decided against ‘Le Smoking’ Tuxedo. All these designers have impacted on the fashion industry immensely but now it falls upon the new designers to take influences and aspire for change in fashion.

For a fashion house to change designer, it is not only an ambitious and scary prospect, it is one that takes much thought and deliberation. Many established houses have stayed with their original designers, however many of these companies were created when older fashion houses were beginning to switch designers. From the 1970s – Sonia Rykiel, Diane von Furstenberg, Jean Paul Gaultier, Paul Smith and Prada through to the 1980s – Vivienne Westwood, Dolce & Gabbana, Marc Jacobs and Emporio Armani all have no successors.

               

Many old fashion houses have recent changes to their company, yet it would be hard to tell to the untrained eye. Lanvin and Hermes have, throughout time, stuck to their original design yet with Alber Elbaz and Jean Paul Gaultier taking the reins.

There is a need for innovation within the industry, to allow natural change and development, but there is also a need for classic designs, to hold together the structure of the industry, and to remind designers of the true innovators in the fashion industry and the need to keep that flowing, as, after all, it is what made the fashion houses, and you can’t argue with that.

Yves Saint Laurent & Valentino

Once again Stefano Pilati has hit the nail on fashion's preened head and has proved why YSL still is one of the most prestigious labels to show in Paris.  A noted trend appeared to be a cinched in waist with a buckled waistbelt that appeared in an array of colours. My favourite look has to be this blue long sleeved shift dress that epitomises a classic YSL look. I particularily like the light grey accessories used to complete the dress - I may take to this colour sooner than summer -I'm thinking winter scarfs?

Using an array of bold colours including greens, blues, pinks black and white (of course), the YSL collection exhuded an edgy sophistication verging on playful. Mini capes showcased alongside shorter than short black hotpants with an overall clean cut feel - with the odd bit of leather thrown in to keep us on our toes.

YSL SPRING / SUMMER 2010

VALENTINO

I have always adored Valentino's designs, and was disapointed when he retired last year. My first thought was who would be his successor and how would they be able to adhere to such crucial elements of design that Valentino seemed so at ease with? The draping on a ball gown, the fierce colours of his collections and the ability to make the wearer of his garments ooze with sudden sex appeal.

Well, what was all the worry for?

Alessandra Facchinetti has upped her game this season and has produced some beautiful creations. Mixing light creams, beiges, browns and pinks the collection holds elements of glamour, sophistication and has a flirtatious aspect with frills a d draping in all the right places.

VALENTINO SPRING/SUMMER 2010