Fashion Theory

[Anonymous No.15187236]

Does anyone here actually know anything about fashion theory here?

I'm interested in learning more about 90s anti-fashion culture and they way that each of those figures ended up being more or less co-opted into the fashion cultures and consumerism they were originally protesting against.

[Anonymous No.15187334]

>>15187236
>be margiela
>be really fucking good at making clothes
>find conceptual niche
>present weird shows that attract tons of attention
>people dig what youre doing
>other people copy it
>its no longer anti fashion

congraulations u know now how margiela and the anti fashion of the 90s worked
great thread

also designers arent co opted by consumerism, its their job to create clothes to be consumed.
what good is a shirt if no one wears it?

[Anonymous No.15187413]

>>15187334
>Does anyone here actually know anything about fashion theory here?
You could have just said "no", anon.

>designers arent co opted by consumerism, its their job to create clothes to be consumed.
This is actually, literally the opposite of Margiela especially early in his career. His whole entire philosophy was about re-purposing existing things in a playful way, not having an actual label and then he left after the brand was bought out.

Like anti-fashion's entire purpose was to undermine the glamour and seriousness of the fashion world. Lots of them bought and transformed thrifted clothing or created minimal, well made basics that were not meant to conform to the seasonal sales structure of a traditional fashion brand.

[Anonymous No.15187644]

>>15187413
Did he sell clothes or not?

[Anonymous No.15187653]

>>15187236
>Does anyone here actually know anything about fashion theory here?
A bit. I've read Svendsen, Entwistle, Marx (not that one), and Hebdige, and know enough of general cultural theory to draw some connections between fashion theory and Barthes, Foucault, et al. I doubt I would trot out much of that knowledge here, however.

[Anonymous No.15187666]

>>15187236
>>15187653
To actually address your question, if you wanted to start at the ground floor, you'd probably want to read Marx (that one, this time), along with Adorno and Horkheimer, Benjamin, Certeau, Bourdieu, Hebdige, and Fiske. Butler may also be helpful, but seems like a bit of a departure. Entwistle offers a gloss in The Fashioned Body, and Stuart Hall's essay on denim may be relevant (my memory is foggy). Except Entwistle, none of these address 90s anti-fashion directly, but they do each discuss a part of the process of commodification. I'm sure there are many more relevant sources, but I'm working from memory here.

[Anonymous No.15187667]

>>15187236
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kle_lPRtNs
here anon, i just wrote my dissertation on anti-fashion and this is a v good breakdown

[Anonymous No.15187672]

>>15187413
It's ok to buy in to consumerism, but being completely ignorant isn't ok. Ideas sell better than products, that's why beer companies shoe people having fun, car companies show happy pretty people, and anti-fashion fashion companies have long spiels.

[Anonymous No.15187695]

>>15187236
there is no theory worth looking at

[Anonymous No.15188314]

>>15187644
We all get it, bro. How can he critique a society while being part of one. V deep observation.

But one of his pieces from the early 90s was literally a DIY guide on how to turn your old socks into a sweater.

>>15187653
>>15187666
I mean, i've read enough general philosophy and understand the philosophical roots of the ideas. My interest is more in the actual history of it or more specific examples of the expression of these ideas within the medium. It doesn't seem like a lot of histories actually exist. I will look into The Fashioned Body and that denim essay.

>>15187667
Do you have a bibliography you could link or any particular book recommendations that you found most useful or illuminating?

[Anonymous No.15188325]

>>15187236
it doesn't exist. there's absolutely no single or cohesive "antifashion" philosophy to which the designers ostensibly associated with subscribed to, and none of them worked outside of the fashion system. they were all incredibly influential on fashion both contemporaneously and now.

if you want actual "antifashion," you'll have to look much further afield

[Anonymous No.15189857]

This youtube documentary is good ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kle_lPRtNs&has_verified=1

[Anonymous No.15189860]

>>15189857
thanks retard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kle_lPRtNs

[None !IGORsW/P/E No.15189872]

Why is there this disgusting devious faggot culture on /fa/ of replying in roundabout manner? Is it just AI?
Also, you need to be aware that most of the threads I hide so I don't see replies you make in a different thread. Reply directly.

[Anonymous No.15190007]

>>15189872
fuck off tripfag

[Anonymous No.15190011]

>>15190007
eat shit

[Anonymous No.15190012]

>>15187236
I can tell from the words you type that you're stupid and uninteresting.

[Anonymous No.15190014]

>>15190011
Based Igor

[Anonymous No.15190019]

>>15189860
It might please you to know that I downloaded your recommendation and will be viewing it tonight in bed.

[Anonymous No.15190374]

>>15189872
This board is majority narcicistic suburban bred college sophomores spending daddy's money studying graphic design who refuse to understand that lifting weights and joining clubs is much more likely to get them laid.

[Anonymous No.15190397]

>>15189872
OP here, are you implying that I made this thread about you because I will tell you, from the bottom of my heart, that I have no fucking idea who you are or what you are referring to.

>>15188325
This isn't really an answer. I am looking for critical analysis of antifashion and the various designers the label is ascribed to. I don't naively think that they all share some kind of unified ideology.

>>15189857
>>15189860
I hope more people post this documentary. I have watched it. I am hoping for something a little more in depth, written perhaps.

[Anonymous No.15190403]

>>15187413
>undermine the seriousness of the fashion world

...by being more serious than anyone else in fashion? you're not very smart are you?

anyways just go read some veblen and entwistle, barbra vinken has a good book as well on the fashion system

>>15188314
>le epic sock sweater

you know the more margiela i look at the less impressive it is. the ideas are laughable like art school undergrad dogshit, his saving grace was he did actually know what the fuck he was doing as evidenced by his work at hermes

[Anonymous No.15190427]

>>15187236
the theory is it's anti fashion anti consumerism therefore you can charge more money for it

[Anonymous No.15190454]

>>15187644
u wot

[Anonymous No.15190487]

>>15190454
Refer to >>15190427

Ignore limpwrist windbags who think fashion is real art

[Anonymous No.15191110]

Anything that is not explicitly "fascist" will be subsumed by neoliberalism. Most of what the far left does is just breaking down barriers holding back global capital.

Had Margiela been an open anti-semite, he would not have been able to operate a business outside of cash sales.

[Anonymous No.15191123]

>>15191110
"Fasism" here is the name that the liberal order givers to anything that threatens it. The name it gives to anything it teaches you to hate at a deep guttural level.

[Anonymous No.15191150]

Art is to deny reality

t. degenerate yohji yamamoto

[Anonymous No.15191189]

>>15190403
>by being more serious than anyone else in fashion
This is historically inaccurate. Margiela's shows, especially the early ones were very playful and unserious. Say what you will about the brand today, but when it started it wasn't austere. It was full of life.

>the ideas are laughable like art school undergrad dogshit
This is exactly like when morons go to an art museum and see Duchamp or even just a normal abstract piece and are like "I could have done that!". Well guess what? You didn't.

[Anonymous No.15191195]

>>15191110
I always forget that this place is still full of dumbfuck Nazis that think the only discrimination in the world is against them.

[None !IGORsW/P/E No.15191197]

Margiele reminds me of Pelevin

[Anonymous No.15191460]

>>15190403
Laughable, and non-impressive, are they? Let's see some of your ideas.

He's renowned for a reason. You may not be a fan of his work; I'm not, but Margiela's appraisal is very warranted.

[None !IGORsW/P/E No.15191465]

everyone is gay

[Anonymous No.15192121]

>>15189872
lol that’s funny coming from someone who constantly samefags w/o his trip on

[Anonymous No.15192133]

>>15192121
nothing is worse than being a faggot

[Anonymous No.15193566]

I like the margiela shoulder, but I don't think I could ever pull it off.

[Anonymous No.15193582]

Anti-fashion is just ideas from postmodernism/anti-art applied to fashion. There's not much to discuss that hasn't already been analyzed to great depths in other media like painting, music, literature and architecture.

[Anonymous No.15193592]

>>15193582
I think it is slightly different in this context though because at its core, fashion is about clothing which has always been a commercial art while Painting, music and literature are less so and their respective anti-art movements were protests of those are forms commercialization.

Anti-fashion seems to me to be more about a realignment of the values of clothing design away from clean perfect new garments and planned obsolescence toward an embrace of reuse and the natural patina that garments take on over time.

[Anonymous No.15193596]

>>15191189
>margiela is famous for being one of the most if not the most serious designer of his generation
>this is talked about in numerous publications and in depth in both documentaries on him
>he wasnt serious

uh sure ok whatever lmao

>>15191460
yeah making a sweater out of socks is stupid, making a belt out of playing cards also stupid, jewellery out of corks? also stupid. im not ignorant im extremely aware of how important margiela is to fashion and deservedly so but, the deification of him is bizarre and not everything he did as incredible as internet fashion posters would have you believe

the man made clothes ffs but the way hes written about you would think he was the messiah and the more of his work i look at the more i realize this

[Anonymous No.15193602]

>>15187236
Anti fashion really isn’t a hard concept to understand. Basically that the fashion industry is a scam and that it’s whole point is to sell you shit and get everyone to think similarly. So in response you dress yourself in whatever you resonate with regardless of brand or popularity.

[Anonymous No.15193609]

>>15193592
the key to understanding antifashion is through understanding the broader cultural framework in which it existed, such as art music literature philosphy design politics etc
this isnt a art v fashion discussion stating that just misses the point entirely

[Anonymous No.15193619]

>>15193596
The show margiela did on a kids playground where he let the kids make the invitations and just run around during the show was notoriously stuffy and no fun. That's why it's still known to this day.

[Anonymous No.15193622]

>>15193609
did you read what I wrote, man?

[Anonymous No.15193691]

>>15193596
I think you are confusing renowned for "serious". Margiela is really respected for his irreverence and in clever efforts at taking the piss. He's anonymous and refuses to speak with press which I think is why people assume he's serious, but that's all projection because margiela never puts very much of himself out there except in his work.

[Anonymous No.15194406]

Ann Demeulemeester is such a babe.

[Anonymous No.15194414]

Ann d

[Anonymous No.15195407]

>>15194406
Definitely one of the more interesting designers to come out of the movement. It's also interesting that she was able to remain completely independent even today.

[Anonymous No.15195892]

>>15193619
being serious and having fun with a show arent mutually exclusive......
>>15193691
next youll tell me rei kawakubo and yohji came to paris for a laugh hahaha

[Anonymous No.15195894]

>>15195892
I just learned it from that antifashion doc the othe rnigjht

[Anonymous No.15195974]

>>15195892
>being serious and having fun with a show arent mutually exclusive......

But margiela doesn't have fun remember. He can't undermine the seriousness of fashion because he's more serious than anyone else in fashion. To quote a genius from earlier in this thread: >>15190403
>you're not very smart are you?

Like, look dude. You're obviously just fucking around and making provocative shitposts that don't even amount to arguments because you're bored. We've all done it, but at least remain consistent within the same thread, or if you're not going to figure out what you said earlier when you come back to a thread hours or days later, consider not responding at all.

[Anonymous No.15196276]

>>15195974
no one said margiela doesnt have fun.
youre arguing a retarded semantic point despite everyone in fashion(including himself) describing him and his work as serious you somehow think he was just having a big laugh

[Anonymous No.15196290]

>>15195894
if you watched the documentaries on him, (we margiela, margiela in my own words) its explained why he shys away from the press, hes too serious/not good with the media. he was not an entertainer the way his mentor was, so he preferred to have clothes speak than him try and explain them. its well documented that these werent assumptions made about him but admissions from the man himself

[Anonymous No.15196292]

>>15196276
>you somehow think he was just having a big laugh

Incorrect, what I said was this>>15187413
>anti-fashion's entire purpose was to undermine the glamour and seriousness of the fashion world.

Then you said>>15190403
>..by being more serious than anyone else in fashion? you're not very smart are you?

Now you're trying to pretend I'm arguing some kind of "semantic point"? But what is the semantic argument here? Are you trying to pretend you meant "serious" as some kind of a compliment? That Margiela would never besmirch the fashion industry because he was so "serious" about the craft of making clothes, because it's pretty obvious to me that you meant from context that he was pretentious and humorless. These are usually the implications of calling an artist too serious.

[Anonymous No.15196301]

>>15196290
This again is not correct information.

>its explained why he shys away from the press, hes too serious/not good with the media.
He did media for the first couple of shows but decided that he did not want his brand to be a cult of personality and that doing the interviews undermined the message we wanted to send about fashion as an art form which is that they it is a collaborative process. It's literally the reason all employees of MMM wear white lab coats. I mean hell, it's the reason the documentary We Margiela is called "We" Margiela. He's probably an introvert, true enough, but you're really stretching here to make it fit the word "serious" which you obviously used as an insult.

Let us not forget that you also said:
>you know the more margiela i look at the less impressive it is. the ideas are laughable like art school undergrad dogshit,

[Anonymous No.15196833]

>>15187236
You can actually find a really good amount of content on YouTube, When I was studying fashion I found better interviews on YouTube than in the course material.

Specifically on these two as well, there’s a really good documentary on the two of them and their first stores

[Anonymous No.15196949]

“Fashion theory” has a always been a vague field which actually covered fashion history and occasionally some developments in technique and material science. The attempt to develop a theory of fashion, drawing on philosophy and economic theory, is a recent development made by a small number of /fa/ /lit/ crossposters. The goal of this group is basically to develop a method of understanding and expressing why an outfit is /fa/ or not without using the inconsistent and narrow rules spouted on /fa/ and fashion youtube. If anyone in this thread thinks they could count contribute, I’ll post the discord.

[Anonymous No.15197153]

>>15194414
just finished bad blood last week. a good book f that hoe

[Anonymous No.15197195]

>>15196949
something ive been thinking about is how luxury items are received by different social classes. The poor and lower class tend to overvalue and "flex" expensive clothes and the minute payday comes around they spend it on whatever they can afford and are broke until the next. If they could delay gratification and save/invest what little they earned they could build a better life for themselves. I did it in my early 20s. I've seen this behavior often with friends, at work, etc. Its a macrocosm of the Stanford marshmallow experiment where a hallmark of the more intelligent is simply the ability to wait. Most millionaires do not rock gucci they shop at Ross and live middle class lifestyles.

[Anonymous No.15197919]

>>15196301
>obviously used as an insult

if i call Yohji Yamamoto a serious designer do you also fly into an autistic fit of rage?
>>15196301

what in the fuck are you going on about we're not even disgareeing on anything youre just being obtuse

youre upset someone doesnt think margiela is the messianic figure youve made him out to be in your head


see i can do it too :^)

[Anonymous No.15197963]

>>15196949
>the attempt to develop a theory of fashion that uses philosphy and economics is a recent development made by 4chan posters

please post this discord i can't wait to laugh at the nonsense youve come up with

[Anonymous No.15198709]

>>15197919
No one here thinks margiela is Christ, just pointing out your ridiculous ever-shifting nonsense. You got rekt bud. Just move on with your life.

[Anonymous No.15198726]

>>15187236
Nice thread, OP. I'm still reeling from someone calling Rick Owens and his wife
>two pajeet hijiras, one dying
last night on /fit/

[Anonymous No.15198729]

>>15187334
>be me, anon
>go on vintage shopping sites to score some Margiela
>it's all fucking meme clothing in artificial fibres

[Anonymous No.15198732]

>>15191150
Bought a shirt by him the other day.

[Anonymous No.15198810]

>>15198709
>sperg out for a week over the word "serious"
>bro i totally rekt u just log off mate
>>15198729
yep basically theres good clothes but theyre buried under a mountain of shit v neck sweaters with elbow patches

[Anonymous No.15198836]

>>15198810
Just replying to see if you'll reply again. I get the feeling you can't let yourself not be the last person to comment when you get in an argument. That way you can feel like you won.