Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Crutches of Fashion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Ochre
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2009
    • 363

    The Crutches of Fashion

    Architect Philip Johnson gave a famous lecture at Harvard University detailing what he considered to be "The 7 Crutches of Modern Architecture." In it, he explains how architects can rely on characteristics of architecture that provide a false pretense of success. You can read the short lecture here.

    The Seven Crutches:
    - History
    - Pretty Drawing
    - Utility
    - Comfort
    - Cheapness
    - Serving the Client
    - Structure


    For example, Johnson claims it is easy to reference a historical building to justify your own. Just because it or an aspect of it exists in history or has some sort of historical precedent, does not make your work successful.

    I believe clothing is a lot like architecture in many ways and I've recently been thinking we should open a dialogue about the crutches of fashion. Clearly, this art form is not devoid of flaws. And I think now might be a good time to be critical of those things even if they exist within some of the designers we wear and support.

    We could start by mirroring and expanding upon some of the ones Johnson outlined.

    Cheapness
    I think this is responsible for much of what fast fashion has to offer. I would be very curious to see how people would respond to some of the clothes offered at H&M or similar stores if they were 3 or 4x the price. How much of what is appreciated is due to its affordability and not of the physical designs? Obviously there is a converse to that as well since many of the clothes are modeled after high fashion and they invariably retain some redeemable formal qualities. And of course the design becomes flawed when you feel it or it falls apart after minor use.

    There are many more that we can talk about but I just wanted to get the topic started. I need to get back to my real homework, unfortunately. But I was also thinking about the crutch of concept. I think some CCP could easily fall into this category.

    I should make a note that this thread is not intended to make us look like a bunch of miserable old men and women bickering about what is wrong with the world. I know some people here practice fashion design both professionally or as a hobby and we all consume it. Hopefully this could help us better understand the clothes we appreciate and also make us aware of perhaps not so obvious flaws in other designs.
  • zamb
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2006
    • 5834

    #2
    interesting that you would start the discussion with cheapness............
    Don't know if your list is in order of importance, but cheapness is number five among the seven you listed.........

    also, if fashion does have crutches, why should you list the same ones as the ones discussed in your class, couldn't they be completely different 9at least some of them0 from the ones pertaining to architecture
    “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
    .................................................. .......................


    Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

    Comment

    • Ochre
      Senior Member
      • Sep 2009
      • 363

      #3
      I think you may have misunderstood me. The ones I listed are from Johnson's lecture on architecture and not my own for fashion. And they are in no order of importance.

      I believe some crutches are completely different, however, I would argue that due to fashion and architecture's similarities, there are some that are very similar. I'm only suggesting we could begin the discussion by taking some of the ones Johnson has already outlined and interpreting them from a frame of fashion.

      Comment

      • kuugaia
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2010
        • 1007

        #4
        Nice thread Ochre.

        Bringing up the Comfort part of the lecture:
        Some people say that chairs are good looking that are comfortable. Are they? I think that comfort is a function of whether you think the chair is good-looking or not. Just test it yourself (except I know you won't be honest with me).

        I don't have much to contribute to the thread but I liked this part. For the look, some of us could go through any pains and not even admit it's tiresome to wear something. Especially women... But I suppose this ties into 'cheapness' as well. If there is a cheap shoe that feels uncomfortable to walk in, then we're going to regard it as a poorly made shoe. However if it's an expensive and highly aesthetically pleasing shoe, the phrase "you're meant to break it in" or "it's meant to be like that" is used to justify it. Or worse, we can say "...it's comfortable" (when really it's not).

        Comment

        • diorowen
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2010
          • 415

          #5
          ^
          the same goes for architecture, taking example guggenheim museum, by frank gehry. it fail to act as museum, due to the curvy wall it has in the interior where people cant even hang a painting there. however, as an sculpture piece, it is highly aesthically pleasing for some people.
          therefore from my thinking, every designing works(including fashion, and architecture) have their own concept. whether it is functionally comfortable, or it is highly aesthetically.
          and a design can only be determined as successful if they can fulfill both requirement.
          and for your second point about cheapness, I think its more like personal feeling toward something.

          well for the crutches of fashion, in my opinion, fashion and architecture has too much similarities.(thats why I love both:p),
          therefore the crutches of fashion will be the same, neglecting the design scale difference.

          well, would love to hear others opinion :)
          still trapped in my juvenile state

          Comment

          • PaintedBlack_7
            Senior Member
            • Sep 2010
            • 141

            #6
            Originally posted by Ochre View Post
            I think this is responsible for much of what fast fashion has to offer. I would be very curious to see how people would respond to some of the clothes offered at H&M or similar stores if they were 3 or 4x the price. How much of what is appreciated is due to its affordability and not of the physical designs? Obviously there is a converse to that as well since many of the clothes are modeled after high fashion and they invariably retain some redeemable formal qualities. And of course the design becomes flawed when you feel it or it falls apart after minor use.
            am i the only one here who pairs high end items with H&M accessories ?

            some of them are not bad, real leather, made in italy or sweden stuff to decent quality. its the actually garments are junk.

            and i recently found out im one of the few on here who will actually get something tailored?!

            Comment

            • PaintedBlack_7
              Senior Member
              • Sep 2010
              • 141

              #7
              Originally posted by kuugaia View Post
              Nice thread Ochre.

              Bringing up the Comfort part of the lecture:
              Some people say that chairs are good looking that are comfortable. Are they? I think that comfort is a function of whether you think the chair is good-looking or not. Just test it yourself (except I know you won't be honest with me).

              I don't have much to contribute to the thread but I liked this part. For the look, some of us could go through any pains and not even admit it's tiresome to wear something. Especially women... But I suppose this ties into 'cheapness' as well. If there is a cheap shoe that feels uncomfortable to walk in, then we're going to regard it as a poorly made shoe. However if it's an expensive and highly aesthetically pleasing shoe, the phrase "you're meant to break it in" or "it's meant to be like that" is used to justify it. Or worse, we can say "...it's comfortable" (when really it's not).
              most people would call that person an idiot. i don't know about you or your freinds, but the people im around would just say it's uncomfortable probably not wear it unless they really liked it (girlfriend and one of her pairs of louboutins)

              Comment

              • diorowen
                Senior Member
                • Aug 2010
                • 415

                #8
                ^
                nah, you're not the only 1. I also pair some of the cotton on $5 shirts with some other designer piece. I guess price doesn't really become a mindset for good looks here.
                get something tailored? you mean alter? or specially tailor something for you?
                everyone did alter I believe, because finding a piece that will fit you perfectly is sometimes hard/. thats why we have master ZamB alteration :p..
                still trapped in my juvenile state

                Comment

                • zamb
                  Senior Member
                  • Nov 2006
                  • 5834

                  #9
                  Well,

                  I refuse to think that if we can look at any crutches fashion has, then should be see as the same as architecture,

                  I dont see marketing and PR on that list, while I think that they are important, I think they are, if any, the two biggest crutches that it would have..................I also think that (pretty) drawing plays a different role in fashion that it does in architecture............

                  Great illustrations are sometimes necessary in fashion, Also flat sketching for the purpose of putting ideas in visual form, but we dont wear sketches, so if these sketched dont translate to either aesthetically successful or functional pieces, the sketches become rather irrelevant.

                  I also dont think that cheapness is subjective, even though if comes in varying forms..............

                  Good materials can be used to make cheap garments, if they are not cut and sewn properly.
                  There can also be cheapness in the cut and fit of the garments,
                  Basically, cheapness is manifested in the improper approach and misuse of any stage of the garment making process that yields a sub-par result, whether its intentional or not.

                  on the subject of H&M, I've never seen anything there that i personally like for myself, the only think i was able to buy there is a scarf.
                  I think that once someone gets to a certain level or technical and aesthetic appreciation for clothing and fabrics it becomes difficult to purchase clothing from these type of companies. the biggest problem being that they lack a certain kind of "Soul"..............
                  “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
                  .................................................. .......................


                  Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

                  Comment

                  • kuugaia
                    Senior Member
                    • Feb 2010
                    • 1007

                    #10
                    Originally posted by PaintedBlack_7 View Post
                    most people would call that person an idiot. i don't know about you or your freinds, but the people im around would just say it's uncomfortable probably not wear it unless they really liked it
                    Exactly. They'll still wear it if it looks sick as fuck. I didn't specifically mean 'pain' or discomfort in the literal sense. Eg. my MA+ Backlace boots take forever to put on and are a pain in the ass to do so. But in the end, since it looks sick, I'm still going to wear it no matter the trouble it causes me to get it on and off. If discomfort isn't validated to an extent by aesthetics then I don't think many people would wear anything other than their pyjamas.

                    Comment

                    • diorowen
                      Senior Member
                      • Aug 2010
                      • 415

                      #11
                      ^
                      I think what you mean by "soul" is quite similar to what kuugaia said before about the personal feeling toward cheapness., but me personally, basically I wear everything that I feel comfortable in it, and looks good on me :D..
                      well, how if your MA+ backlace hurts you? in your case, its not pain. but I know some girls does wear a certain heels even though it is uncomfortable and hurt them. dont know why :(..but yeah, if it just troubling you a bit, and it looks sick, it worth our time :D..in my case is my kva sneaker, the one that has laces all around..I spend 30 mins on my first try, and 15 mins now..haha..it is improving!

                      and I guess serving the client basically can be said is marketing in fashion, where designer trying to meet a certain expectation from the clients. as for sketch, I believe its important for first impression toward the design and concept. and still they must be played in different role, due to the scale difference.

                      well, about the cheapness itself, I guess I can't say much for the fashion side, since I have'nt really understand yet. but I believe money does play role and yeah, its subjective :)
                      still trapped in my juvenile state

                      Comment

                      • zamb
                        Senior Member
                        • Nov 2006
                        • 5834

                        #12
                        Originally posted by diorowen View Post
                        ^I believe money does play role and yeah, its subjective :)
                        really busy and there is more i want to address, but could you please explain and give points as to why you think quality is subjective........

                        I will later on give you fundamental reasons why it is, or at least can be objective. here is two for now.........

                        • sewing a denim pants which is a heavy fabric, with a Tex (weight and strength) 21 or 27 thread is a no no by any standard, and thats certainly not subjective..............

                        • sewing a fine cotton shirt with more than eight stitches per inch to minimize the sewing time and the amount of thread used in big scale production to save cost is certainly not subjective..............

                        I guess I approach this from a different perspective...so my understanding is also different.

                        talk lata,
                        got lots to do today.
                        “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
                        .................................................. .......................


                        Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

                        Comment

                        • gaitortrout
                          Member
                          • Sep 2010
                          • 69

                          #13


                          Don't mean to ruin this interesting topic. Just couldn't resist....
                          Last edited by gaitortrout; 11-14-2010, 01:25 PM. Reason: I got importen things to say.
                          pm me.

                          Comment

                          • todestrieb
                            Senior Member
                            • Mar 2009
                            • 239

                            #14

                            Comment

                            • obsolete
                              Junior Member
                              • Aug 2008
                              • 24

                              #15
                              Zamb,

                              I think the "crutches" Philip Johnson refers to are the obstacles or rationalizations within the artist that inhibit creativity. PR and marketing are outside factors that can inhibit notoriety and financial success. I see it like this:

                              History - When an artist sets out to create, sometimes they judge their own ideas as too crazy instead of exploring and acting on them. It is comforting and reassuring to look to the past and reference something that already exists, although it is not something that leads to great innovation or creativity. "If it worked before, it will work again"

                              Pretty Drawings - Sometimes a pretty drawing can mask ones lack of creativity or innovation. Conversely, sometimes an artist with a great vision cannot communicate that vision with "pretty drawings"

                              Utility - See Diorowen's Frank Gehry example

                              Cheapness - Not sure about this one

                              Serving the Client - I think this is obvious. I think great art stems from a singular vision. Zamb, what if your showroom told you that to sell more you would need to add more zippers, more pocket flaps, and some screen prints, etc. I think it would no longer be your collection. And if by changing your collection and it did sell better, would that be success?

                              Structure - We talking structure in the design process? Structure in the physical sense?

                              I didn't take the time to read the lecture so maybe I'm way off the mark here. These were just my quick thoughts regarding the original post.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X
                              😀
                              🥰
                              🤢
                              😎
                              😡
                              👍
                              👎