random fashion thoughts

[DudleyGray]

Some of this dichotomy seems to stem from intrinsic vs extrinsic definition. If I'm defining myself intrinsically, I'm a dandy and a writer, despite the fact that I haven't completed so much as a short story since high school and don't consider myself skilled at the craft. Yet, I cannot conceive of what it would be to exist beyond a perspective of authorship and protagonism, of breaking maxims like 'show don't tell' or taking editorial considerations into account, such as pacing or concision. Otherwise, music and skating are things that I do moreso than things that define me, and I only feel like a musician or skater while I'm engaging in those activities. Extrinsically, well maybe some things are better left open to interpretation, but I consider myself a dandy in that realm as well. Dandyism is the only constant.

I've been surrounded by skate culture all of my life, but didn't start skating until recently (gotta before I get too old) and have consistently for the past year. Still, I'm not a skater since I haven't been doing so for very long. Obviously I also suck.

No such thing!

[clamence]

I'm unsure whether Guram Gvasalia talking about brands replacing religion is a brilliant insight into late modernity, or merely self-aggrandizement.

[stagename]

I'm unsure whether Guram Gvasalia talking about brands replacing religion is a brilliant insight into late modernity, or merely self-aggrandizement.

It's mostly a repeaet of what a lot of people have been saying since the mid-to-late 90s?

[clamence]

Well, I'm aware, yes, but you're right; I should have phrased my post slightly better. He talked more about the role of social media in terms of creating a sense of belonging that the traditional structure of religion did (according to him) for people before that. He was less making a comment on the worship and iconography of the brands and more the role they play in creating social cohesion and structure. It has been my understanding of what I have read regarding the role of branding in contemporary society when compared to religion is far more focused on the semiotic and imagological aspects of the brands, and less the cohesive structure created by a community branding assumes, especially within the context of social media. The latter insight has only come around incredibly recently.

[Faust]

That may be so, but to equate it with religion is pompous and fatuous, and only goes to show what a self-important, arrogant prick he really is.

[stagename]

Well, I'm aware, yes, but you're right; I should have phrased my post slightly better. He talked more about the role of social media in terms of creating a sense of belonging that the traditional structure of religion did (according to him) for people before that. He was less making a comment on the worship and iconography of the brands and more the role they play in creating social cohesion and structure. It has been my understanding of what I have read regarding the role of branding in contemporary society when compared to religion is far more focused on the semiotic and imagological aspects of the brands, and less the cohesive structure created by a community branding assumes, especially within the context of social media. The latter insight has only come around incredibly recently.

Oh no no, I mean Maffesoli started talking about consumer tribes in the late 1980s and since then a number of concepts have emerged, the analysis driven by a movement by people away from the modern institutions such as nation and church and towards a post-modern fragmented self to define their identity, so scholars at the very least have talked about brands taking over other institutions at the center of community/social links (ie religion) for at least since the mid 90s. You can check Cova's concept of linking value (published in 1997 so devised probably in the early to mid 90s), for example. It has nothing to do with social media (think car clubs). There are papers (eg religiosity in the apple newton community) that take this analogy all the way.

Aaaanyway. ;)

[clamence]

There is a difference, however, between community and tribe. An interesting distinction between the two is noted here with reference made to Maffesoli and Cova and his definition of the tribe, versus congregation around a brand as an actual community, which is far more specific. The two are, of course, related, but not the same, and I think it is important to make a distinction between the two. Communities exist within the tribe in a more specific and targeted way than Maffesoli defined, and the tribe is far more fluid than the communities existing as internal groups within the tribe. The tribe would be "avant-garde" oriented, whilst the community would be "Carol Christian Poell" oriented. This is slightly different than the understanding advanced by Maffesoli, and far more germane today as social media allows for the building of communities in far greater number than the tribes which had to exist before the resources and infrastructure for their congregation. People are more likely to find common ground in a hashtag for a specific brand than they are for the general category of the brand (#carolchristianpoell > #avantgardemensclothes).

Maybe it's all just semantics at this point, but I think it's an interesting expansion on the aforementioned ideas that has come about more recently. I make the distinction merely out of preference for using Muniz and O'Guinn to define the difference that is far more visible in the age of social media.

[Faust]

Oh no no, I mean Maffesoli started talking about consumer tribes in the late 1980s and since then a number of concepts have emerged, the analysis driven by a movement by people away from the modern institutions such as nation and church and towards a post-modern fragmented self to define their identity, so scholars at the very least have talked about brands taking over other institutions at the center of community/social links (ie religion) for at least since the mid 90s. You can check Cova's concept of linking value (published in 1997 so devised probably in the early to mid 90s), for example. It has nothing to do with social media (think car clubs). There are papers (eg religiosity in the apple newton community) that take this analogy all the way.

Aaaanyway. ;)

I always love when you bring some theory down on us. Seriously, thumbs up.

[Faust]

There is a difference, however, between community and tribe. An interesting distinction between the two is noted here with reference made to Maffesoli and Cova and his definition of the tribe, versus congregation around a brand as an actual community, which is far more specific. The two are, of course, related, but not the same, and I think it is important to make a distinction between the two. Communities exist within the tribe in a more specific and targeted way than Maffesoli defined, and the tribe is far more fluid than the communities existing as internal groups within the tribe. The tribe would be "avant-garde" oriented, whilst the community would be "Carol Christian Poell" oriented. This is slightly different than the understanding advanced by Maffesoli, and far more germane today as social media allows for the building of communities in far greater number than the tribes which had to exist before the resources and infrastructure for their congregation. People are more likely to find common ground in a hashtag for a specific brand than they are for the general category of the brand (#carolchristianpoell > #avantgardemensclothes).

Maybe it's all just semantics at this point, but I think it's an interesting expansion on the aforementioned ideas that has come about more recently. I make the distinction merely out of preference for using Muniz and O'Guinn to define the difference that is far more visible in the age of social media.

Have you ever checked the amount of garbage under #rickowens on IG? The hashtag is all but meaningless in that case. I am also struggling with the notion of what kind of a community can Instagram foster? As opposed to a forum, or even a Facebook group. In my mind community requires a conversation of some sort, not a mere exchange of images or Instabragging.

[clamence]

I am not going to contend that the communities exist in the same manner as a forum, as the infrastructure for such a community as a forum is entirely different. Even a quick glimpse through some brand specific hashtags show interactions, as well as conversation rooted in the subject of the hashtag.

The first constituent facet of community is a sense of belonging based on the brand the community coalesces around. Gusfield noted this to come in the form of differing feelings based on whether or not someone was part of the specific community. One will, if one loves Rick Owens, gravitate towards someone more if they are a fellow constituent of his community (Rick Owens), than his tribe (Perhaps designer clothing). A fan of Rick Owens is more likely to feel a certain kinship with someone who wears his brand than someone who is external to the brand, even if they are similar, and part of the overarching tribe (Yohji Yamamoto, perhaps). The next element commonly found in a community is ritual and tradition. Though, of course, these communities are relatively new, there are still rituals therein, and though not necessarily tradition, the aforementioned rituals become tradition rather quickly. Rituals, I contend, in fashion based online communities, often come in the form of meet ups or congregations or memetic devices. The common creation of memes as shared points of reference within the community is commonplace in online fashion communities. The meet up and congregation aspect of the communities involve people finding one another through methods like hashtags, and meeting up to participate in activities related to the brand (shopping, etc). The last aspect of community, which is collective morality and community action. This is what is lacking most from Instagram in it's inability to have dialogue or conversation in the same way forums and Facebook groups do, but that's why I concede it wasn't the best example. I should have honed in more on Facebook groups, which are far better examples of it, and still very much current, as well as relevant to the overarching category of social media, however, I think there is merit in trying to analyze such trends as they occur elsewhere.

Is Instagram a good (I try to avoid value judgements, but you know what I mean by this I am sure) community? God no. However, are there communal aspects found within hashtags that may bring people together under the pretences of a brand? I think yes, which is what a brand community is, even if Instagram has less infrastructure to recognize such a community than a group or a forum, which are often offshoots of the overall tribe in and of themselves, set up specifically for communicating similar ideas, which is what a hashtag does; unites people under a common banner, often with the specificity of branding.

(Keep in mind that it's really hard for me to defend a community which is largely vacuous "flexing", but I don't think it's entirely devoid of sociological value :P)

[Faust]

Gah, nothing to suck the air out of the room like your passion being dissected and its fluidity ossified by sociological jargon. You're killing me, Clamence!

Better than flexing though - I appreciate the thought you put into your posts.

[stagename]

. People are more likely to find common ground in a hashtag for a specific brand than they are for the general category of the brand (#carolchristianpoell > #avantgardemensclothes).

actually hashtags have recently been theorized as being "mediation devices" that hlep create "brand publics". The authors argue that groups of consumers aggregated around hashtags are not communities (they don't share any markers of a community, ie conscisouness of kind, moral responsability, rituals), but rather publics that are using hashtags in our reputation economy to perform their identity and achieve micro publicity (which is possibly afforded by the 'megaphone' given to them through social media).

hence faust comment about the crap posted. ;)

[clamence]

Cheers for sharing! That's an interesting distinction to make, and I suppose, similarly to Faust noting that discussion was how he discriminated between a community and other form of social grouping, even if similar.

I'll be honest, the way the article explained a brand public as "a medium that can offer publicity to a multitude of diverse situations of identity" seemed very much like Bauman's description of liquid modernity and the necessity for identity, such that it is, to be in a constant flux.

[Faust]

actually hashtags have recently been theorized as being "mediation devices" that hlep create "brand publics". The authors argue that groups of consumers aggregated around hashtags are not communities (they don't share any markers of a community, ie conscisouness of kind, moral responsability, rituals), but rather publics that are using hashtags in our reputation economy to perform their identity and achieve micro publicity (which is possibly afforded by the 'megaphone' given to them through social media).

hence faust comment about the crap posted. ;)

Couldn't agree more!

[goldsamxo]

Little background knowledge before my question / thought;
I've been a self-taught fashion designer for the past two years, currently in school for Design. I have a question about stitches, which I hope you guys may have more knowledge than I do.
The overlock stitches in brands like Carol Christian Poell, Boris, etc. How is that made? Is that just a simple Overlock stitch & I'm completely overthinking it? Just haven't been able to find any details online about it, or when I do - it's a picture or description that isn't related to what I'm questioning. Possible wrong thread? Faust correct me if I'm wrong - just curious..
Or would it be a Flatlock stitch? I discovered that shit & looks similar... Hm...
*Picture below - though you guys already know what I'm referring to*