Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Undercover / Undercoverism

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Faust
    kitsch killer
    • Sep 2006
    • 37852

    Please stop feeding the troll.
    Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

    StyleZeitgeist Magazine

    Comment

    • Servo2000
      Senior Member
      • Oct 2006
      • 2183

      You've got an unusual definition for trolling, faust.

      I think Chilton has made some really good points and I don't see anyone presenting any particularly cogent arguments against it but I've tended to be more on the side of fast fashion in general than most on this forum and I think Uniqlo tends to be a good example of what fast fashion can be. The only real underlying argument seems to be that it's 'inauthentic' which in this day and age strikes me as trolling, if anything.
      WTB: Rick Owens Padded MA-1 Bomber XS (LIMO / MOUNTAIN)

      Comment

      • Faust
        kitsch killer
        • Sep 2006
        • 37852

        What the fuck are you talking about, no cogent arguments against it. EVERYBODY in the industry, EVERYBODY, knows that these are marketing ploys - the retailer probably loses money but gets people into the store, the designers makes money by prostituting his name. Not a single one of these collabs have produced anything of merit. I don't need some fucking layman keyboard cowboy to wax philosophical about this bullshit.
        Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

        StyleZeitgeist Magazine

        Comment

        • tricotineacetat
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2009
          • 206

          I think I've made a similar point about the Lanvin for H&M merchandise actually looking surprisingly good when it hit the salesfloor - you could tell they didn't use some cheap substitute materials or finishes they wouldn't use on their usual product - anyway, with Lanvin, there is a lot of deconstruction in the make of the pieces and so it turned out to feasible, satisfying results for the most part - those dresses with elasticated waists in silk gazar or grosgrain come to mind - not a bad deal at all given the around-200€-pricetags these pieces retailed for. The same goes for some of the men's jackets - you wouldn't expect those to be fully canvassed as a Dior suit, but for a lightweight sports-constructed jacket you just throw over casually, it was pretty outstandingly detailed and made for it's retail price of no more than 150€.

          In terms of the quality, this excelled some of what Jil Sander was capable of doing for Uniqlo - They did well on the shirting (40€) and the outerwear (around 200€), whereas most of the other pieces were rather forgettable. Those pieces were nonetheless a good deal for what they retailed for (unlike some of the Rick Owens tees that are nowadays retailing for 200€ each and sometimes come with unstable seaming on the collar ribbing).

          Comment

          • Faust
            kitsch killer
            • Sep 2006
            • 37852

            You can keep harping on how good Jil for Uniqlow until you are hoarse. Except some dress shirts that were merely passable, everything else was shit.

            Also, you are missing the point by a mile - Jun has stated his aversion to mass production, and now he is a part of it.
            Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

            StyleZeitgeist Magazine

            Comment

            • tricotineacetat
              Senior Member
              • Aug 2009
              • 206

              Originally posted by Faust View Post
              You can keep harping on how good Jil for Uniqlow until you are hoarse. Except some dress shirts that were merely passable, everything else was shit.

              Also, you are missing the point by a mile - Jun has stated his aversion to mass production, and now he is a part of it.
              I think the point is, with high-end retail prices continuously rising towards the demi-couture realm (does anyone remember when people complained about Olivier Theyskens' prices at Rochas? Rick Owens is slowly but steadily reaching that realm... while the clothes are nowhere near the same workmanship) and 'bridge'/secondary lines filling the price environment that a lot of designer first lines were formerly marketed for (see Helmut Lang back when Helmut was still designing), it becomes more and more difficult to find decently designed and manufactured clothes in the middle market.

              What tires me about these discussions is that it always conjures extreme reactions and leaves very little place for pragmatic observations - or even critical observations of the clothing industry seen from several angles. While designer fashions are publicized far further in today's time as they were maybe 20 years back, we are also experiencing that no decent pair of shoes seems to be available below 800€ retail while you have the most absurd sales on the high end market (60 - 70% off regular collection seems to become a normal habit among some of the larger retailers in the US)... even then, you don't have to look much further than the interest in the Classifieds thread on just how low you can find some high-end clothing being sold for.

              Something tells me that fashion is losing touch of the customer, or that the often discussed fashion tribalism is in fact so small, it might be more suitable to address the customer directly as couture has always done.

              I realize this is far extending the discussion from it's original starting point, but I felt this point would be valuable to raise.

              Comment

              • Faust
                kitsch killer
                • Sep 2006
                • 37852

                It is a valuable point - maybe we should put it elsewhere.

                I am not sure what new I can say here - maybe someone else will, but a few points to reiterate.

                1) We are in a market economy - designers and stores (both are complicit) will charge what the market will bear.

                2) The recession wiping out a lot of middle class, the market is going back to how it actually always was, up until 50-60 years ago, super expensive and affordable.

                3) Inflation is driving prices up, there is no doubt about it. Prices of raw materials are skyrocketing - especially wool and cashmere, cotton as well, but artificially. Where it becomes tricky is when you start putting in multipliers through the supply chain and all of a sudden a 10% increase at point A because a 100% increase at point F.

                4) I am not sure that fashion is losing touch with reality. LVMH just posted record sales yet again - recession be damned. It seems rather that the fashion landscape is changing, that's all. It will probably end up like point 2.

                You seem to be implying that somehow these designer collaborations will save the day. They won't, because the result is the same mass produced inanities with a different name tag on them. They are not designer fashion, no matter how many photos Lagerfeld takes of them. What MAY save the world is young talented designers exploiting market inefficiencies that are caused by greed and arrogance. The higher the prices of established designers, coupled with decrease in quality, become, which points to their disdain for the consumer and fuck-you-pay-me attitude, the more opportunity will be there for others to step in. This is how companies like Honda, Google, Apple, and Netflix are born - they come into a marketplace where the established players are so thick with the fat of their profits and faith in the status quo, that they become complacent and arrogant.
                Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                Comment

                • lmaozedong
                  Member
                  • Jan 2010
                  • 69

                  Does this collaboration really have to be ALL good or ALL bad? There is far too much splitting going on in this thread.

                  I don't think that it's a foregone conclusion that +J was all shit except for the shirting, Faust. Although I don't think people think it was AMAZING BEST THING EVAR!!11 like you seem to suggest they do, it certainly had some good pieces of outerwear, etc. Some of it was good, some was bad--just as I suspect this UC x Uniqlo collaboration will be (and as most things in life are). I think some interesting tech-streetwear pieces could come out of this, and I've always enjoyed Undercover's subversive t-shirt graphics--though I hardly expect these things to win over the SZ crowd. At worst, there's always the possibility that more people will become interested in the concepts that Jun is working with. Undercover hardly seems like a name that will cause droves of fashion-plebes to bumrush the store, the way Lanvin or CDG x H&M did. At the same time, there is perhaps the risk that such a collaboration will destroy the "sanctity" of the brand name, though that seems to me to be more a matter of perspective than anything.

                  Comment

                  • lowrey
                    ventiundici
                    • Dec 2006
                    • 8383

                    Originally posted by lmaozedong View Post
                    Does this collaboration really have to be ALL good or ALL bad?
                    probably not, but the main point, or the main target of criticism here is the integrity of a designer who has sworn against mass consumption and is now teaming up with a company literally named FAST RETAILING.

                    Originally posted by lmaozedong View Post
                    At worst, there's always the possibility that more people will become interested in the concepts that Jun is working with.
                    seems unlikely - I think its safe to say that a majority of people who buy Uniqloxwhatever either already know the label and have bought it before, or don't know it and probably won't. for every 1 person out of 100 that become interested in UC because of this, there will be at least 1 that is dissapointed in Jun working with Uniqlo.


                    Originally posted by lmaozedong View Post
                    Undercover hardly seems like a name that will cause droves of fashion-plebes to bumrush the store, the way Lanvin or CDG x H&M did.
                    come on.. you think most people who shop at H&M knew much or anything about CDG? There isn't a single store selling CDG in my country, and every H&M even in smaller cities sold out of the collection the day it came in, solely because of hype that was generated through ad campaigns and online. These kids lining up were first and foremost H&M customers, and lets face it, they still don't know anything about CDG even after they bought a crappy shirt.
                    "AVANT GUARDE HIGHEST FASHION. NOW NOW this is it people, these are the brands no one fucking knows and people are like WTF. they do everything by hand in their freaking secret basement and shit."

                    STYLEZEITGEIST MAGAZINE | BLOG

                    Comment

                    • Faust
                      kitsch killer
                      • Sep 2006
                      • 37852

                      should post some of those hilarious youtube videos from the first CDGxHM days.
                      Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                      StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                      Comment

                      • lowrey
                        ventiundici
                        • Dec 2006
                        • 8383

                        that shit went way, way past the funny/sad territory, to straight up disturbing
                        "AVANT GUARDE HIGHEST FASHION. NOW NOW this is it people, these are the brands no one fucking knows and people are like WTF. they do everything by hand in their freaking secret basement and shit."

                        STYLEZEITGEIST MAGAZINE | BLOG

                        Comment

                        • genevieveryoko
                          Senior Member
                          • Sep 2009
                          • 868

                          Originally posted by lowrey View Post
                          probably not, but the main point, or the main target of criticism here is the integrity of a designer who has sworn against mass consumption and is now teaming up with a company literally named FAST RETAILING.
                          Would it be fair to say that Undercover x Uniqlo is not the same thing as Undercover? And that the things that Undercover stands for, such as on that one label discussed earlier, can still stand true when we are talking only about Undercover? Or would that be too much to ask...

                          Originally posted by Faust View Post
                          I don't need some fucking layman keyboard cowboy to wax philosophical about this bullshit.
                          I'm sorry, I can't help but laugh at this, regardless of who or what it's directed at and whether or not it's deserved, this shit is hilarious
                          http://genevievelarson.tumblr.com/

                          Comment

                          • lmaozedong
                            Member
                            • Jan 2010
                            • 69

                            Originally posted by lowrey View Post
                            come on.. you think most people who shop at H&M knew much or anything about CDG? There isn't a single store selling CDG in my country, and every H&M even in smaller cities sold out of the collection the day it came in, solely because of hype that was generated through ad campaigns and online. These kids lining up were first and foremost H&M customers, and lets face it, they still don't know anything about CDG even after they bought a crappy shirt.
                            No, people don't know the CDG that we all know and love--but CDG has a lot more exposure to the common people than I would imagine Undercover would through (mostly bad) stuff like Play, those zip wallets, and all the other collaborations that they've participated in the past. Undercover (at least to me) seems like a much more underground cult brand. You do make, a point, though--many of the people who will buy this stuff probably will not ever be seriously interested in the brand or in the philosophy behind it. My point is that it's quite possible that a minority would, though.

                            Comment

                            • genevieveryoko
                              Senior Member
                              • Sep 2009
                              • 868

                              Not to invalidate the depth and breadth of this discussion, but I find it rather, I don't know, interesting how much people have to say on this. It's just that I've never given two shits about these designer collaborations, one way or another, because I don't see them as really having anything to do with the designer's high-end line (besides referencing it). Considering how much I love CDG, for example, I just can't find it in myself to take the time or energy to be offended by, let alone pay much attention to, their collaboration with H&M. I mean, I do things I don't always believe in for money too - although I try to keep it to a minimum.
                              http://genevievelarson.tumblr.com/

                              Comment

                              • nqth
                                Senior Member
                                • Sep 2006
                                • 350

                                I dont think we can just blame the market economy only for the super high price of designer rtw. In most case, the high price is nothing more than to keep the stuffs elusive and suggest an air of luxury.

                                I usually like the collaborations but rather with less known designers, such as projects that Uniqlo used to do in the past. The big name collab are driving the brand blind crazyness and perhaps eat out market share of young and less known designers.

                                I think the big brands shld concentrate in more effective production to lower their price - if they really want to make their fashion affordable for clients. Rather than make few super high priced clothes and then sell tons of cheap copies with H&M or who ever else.

                                Comment

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