Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Undercover / Undercoverism

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ISM
    Junior Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 8

    #91
    uniqlo x undercover is the stupidest thing uc could have done.


    i mean, just a few seasons ago, jun put this message ON EVERY GARMENT, BAG, AND SHOE. EVERY SINGLE PRODUCT!


    2010 Autumn-Winter UNDERCOVER/UNDERCOVERISM
    The mentality of reverse running
    Current ready-to-wear collections are primarily aimed at celebrities or fashion insiders. This fashion produced for the catwalk only lives in the magazines, it is totally detached from reality. This ‘unreal’ system is sustained by the fashion and marketing industry. On the other side mass produced and cheap clothes now determine fashion trends. But is there any passion embedded in this soulless mass production of cheap garments? Promotion and marketing consume most of the money the sales of these clothes generate. Ordinary consumers are attracted to fast fashionchain stores and even form long queues outside them. Money has become the new authority, this is the new trend. Everything has become associated to money. Is this what fashion is ultimately about? What role does fashion or design play in this scenario? The reason why we at UnderCover like to pursue fashion is because we believe that fashion enriches our daily lives. Although our clothes may not be the one, they are still properly designed. We try to embed love and passion into every single item we design and produce. This is our style. It would be great if more consumers would support our philosophy of this. Our aim is to build a community of like minded people who strive with us towards a different reality where the true values of fashion matter again. Last collection’s theme was Less But Better. With our integrating issues of daily life. We call it UnderCover



    and now he is doing EXACTLY what he is preeching for people not to do.

    i personally have lost a lot of respect for this brand.

    Comment

    • Archaics
      Junior Member
      • May 2009
      • 17

      #92
      .....
      Last edited by Archaics; 02-08-2014, 07:15 AM.

      Comment

      • Faust
        kitsch killer
        • Sep 2006
        • 37852

        #93
        Too true, ISM, too true.
        Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

        StyleZeitgeist Magazine

        Comment

        • Faust
          kitsch killer
          • Sep 2006
          • 37852

          #94
          /\ Nonsense. Not to say bullshit.
          Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

          StyleZeitgeist Magazine

          Comment

          • ISM
            Junior Member
            • Jul 2011
            • 8

            #95
            Originally posted by Archaics View Post
            I think if at this point Jun's objective is to make his clothes and design philosophy more accessible and to infuse some meaning and worth into fast fashion then these collabs are the right way to go about it.
            ehhh, we all know designers say that they are trying to spread their idea of great design through broader distribution, but the people who are seriously shop these designers and know about these brands know its all bullshit and money related. fast fashion and high fashion together - it just doesn't work, especially for designers like jun.

            just look at cdg h&m. you cannot take a brand like comme des garçons, who feeds an extremely educated group of fashion enthusiasts and rich men and women, and allow a brand like h&m to take all the old designs and patterns and give them rights to sell them to the masses. its almost disrespectful to cdg buyers. as we all know, the results were HORRIBLE and I am sure everyone at CDG regrets that.

            you have to realize that there are about 20-40 of the world best boutiques buying undercover each season (browns, dover street, ikram, ect) that have a clientele that expect nothing but perfection from this brand. it really ruins a brands image, philosophy, and to go mass produced, this sort of design is not meant to be bought by the masses.

            as for the nike thing, that was a little bit different. the prices were still up in under covers level, it attracted runners (but i mean come on, who jogs in a 600 dollar nylon jacket), and distribution was pretty limited.

            i don't think jun is doing this because he wants to push his ideas through, he is already an established designer, he can do that through his own brand. i think that undercover is just financially doing bad and could not adjust to the economy. this is where they are making up for the loss.

            Comment

            • ISM
              Junior Member
              • Jul 2011
              • 8

              #96
              Originally posted by Chilton0326
              Archaics, I love your post, and totally agree with everything you say.

              Furthermore, as a Jun Takahashi fan, the end result of the Uniqlo collaboration doesn't even concern me much.
              its one thing to look at UC online and be a fan, but do you actually spend money buying UC??


              Originally posted by Chilton0326
              And I think the people who work for stores like Macy's and Uniqlo aren't purely capitalist either. Behind such goliath-sized companies are people who love fashion too, and when they ask the heads to put their monies behind some designer they love (Kinder Aggugini, Juun J, Takahashi, etc), they're definitely in part just trying to get financial support thrown to a designer they love. This sort of sweetness does happen a decent amount in the entertainment field
              thats a bit nieve. these type of companies are looking for one thing... profits. to say that they are doing these collaborations out of generosity, is stupid. the underlining motive is money. uniqlo thinks that if they can finance jun to make a collection, then they can get lines queuing up at their stores, and make millions. they wouldn't do this if they knew it wouldn't sell.

              Comment

              • Faust
                kitsch killer
                • Sep 2006
                • 37852

                #97
                /\ I think we found our new great contrarian. Full of BS, but keeps chugging. Look, buddy, everybody knows these collaborations are purely done for money from the designer's side and for marketing from the big brand side.

                Rei Kawakubo said the same thing - we are going to do it our way, bla, bla, we are doing everything ourselves. And what did she tell WWD after? I would never do it again.

                We on SZ tend to wax poetic about designers more than anyone else probably, but let's have some reality checks once in a while.
                Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                Comment

                • ISM
                  Junior Member
                  • Jul 2011
                  • 8

                  #98
                  Originally posted by Chilton0326
                  The best example I can offer is Kinder Aggugini
                  oh there's no hope...

                  Comment

                  • lowrey
                    ventiundici
                    • Dec 2006
                    • 8383

                    #99
                    Originally posted by Chilton0326
                    As for Uniqlo, just saying that Jun wasn't their only option. They can make reasonable profits by using almost any major designer. By choosing one who's something of an oddball, I feel it means some people there also dig his work.
                    the most likely picked UC because the label has enough of a cult / seemingly underground status to generate plenty of hype.

                    look, I see what you are trying to say, and I'm sure someone at Uniqlo likes UC, but I think you are still giving them way, way too much credit when you talk about "love" and "sweetness" towards a designer.
                    "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

                    • joey_k
                      Junior Member
                      • Sep 2007
                      • 21

                      At the end of the day designer big box retailer (uniqlo), large corporate company (nike) collaborations do ten times more for the designer than the large company. Uniqlo's profits are not derived from the designer collaborations or initiatives they have done, no matter the scale. Profits for these companies will always be based in the most basic of goods they produce at volume (t- shirts, jeans, shirts, socks, etc.). These collaborations are press initiatives and help to establish many smaller more unknown designers to a wider audience. Yes they also drive foot traffic to the stores in question as well. Many times these are done from a creative branding standpoint by these larger companies, loss and profit are not as important on these projects. Its a way for the larger companies to position themselves better with a more fashion conscious consumer.
                      http://www.josephkeefer.com
                      http://www.theghstsofny.com

                      Comment

                      • ISM
                        Junior Member
                        • Jul 2011
                        • 8

                        Originally posted by joey_k View Post
                        do ten times more for the designer than the large company

                        wow, i don't think I could disagree more. Faust and I gave CDG as a PERFECT example of how bad these collaborations are, they are ONLY for the large company.

                        ok, lets use another example because I think that there aren't enough UC supporters on this site. Lets say Rick announced that in two months he would be doing H&M, or Uniqlo or Macy's whatever. How would you feel about that? I feel like its more than obvious that these "large" companies have asked Rick a million times to do a collaboration, but he's much smarter than that, and is financially doing well right now, so why would he want to jeopardize his company. its really the designers responsibility to stay low profile, and keep serving the small group that have learned to adapt to his way of thinking.

                        when it comes down to it, the majority of people who have bought rick or uniqlo probably don't shop at fast fashion places.

                        I think we should really look at these collaborations as the designers Low Point in a career.

                        Comment

                        • joey_k
                          Junior Member
                          • Sep 2007
                          • 21

                          Originally posted by ISM View Post
                          wow, i don't think I could disagree more. Faust and I gave CDG as a PERFECT example of how bad these collaborations are, they are ONLY for the large company.

                          ok, lets use another example because I think that there aren't enough UC supporters on this site. Lets say Rick announced that in two months he would be doing H&M, or Uniqlo or Macy's whatever. How would you feel about that? I feel like its more than obvious that these "large" companies have asked Rick a million times to do a collaboration, but he's much smarter than that, and is financially doing well right now, so why would he want to jeopardize his company. its really the designers responsibility to stay low profile, and keep serving the small group that have learned to adapt to his way of thinking.

                          when it comes down to it, the majority of people who have bought rick or uniqlo probably don't shop at fast fashion places.

                          I think we should really look at these collaborations as the designers Low Point in a career.

                          ISM you have to realize what a tiny percentage of the consumer market that sz is in reality. The amount of publicity from these cross overs do work wonders for smaller designers in terms of name recognition to much larger audiences. Not to mention the large infusion into the designers business that goes along with these collaborations.

                          Serving the small group is a core ideal that has to be held on to but at the end of the day that small costumer pool can not propel a designers business into the place where it is profitable. The costs of running a fashion business are astronomical. Rick has had the fortune to have DRKSHDW take off (while having a massive distribution network). Also RO's mainline has been embraced by a much larger mainstream audience also due to its own wide distribution and rapidly growing distribution.
                          http://www.josephkeefer.com
                          http://www.theghstsofny.com

                          Comment

                          • michael_kard
                            Senior Member
                            • Oct 2010
                            • 2152

                            Chilton0326, great points. Thank you for persisting despite the negative (and occasionally offensive) responses you've received.

                            Originally posted by ISM View Post
                            just look at cdg h&m. you cannot take a brand like comme des garçons, who feeds an extremely educated group of fashion enthusiasts and rich men and women, and allow a brand like h&m to take all the old designs and patterns and give them rights to sell them to the masses. its almost disrespectful to cdg buyers.
                            This is a funny thing to say. Maybe you should start wearing Versace (like me )
                            ENDYMA / Archival fashion & Consignment
                            Helmut Lang 1986-2005 | Ann Demeulemeester | Raf Simons | Burberry Prorsum | and more...

                            Comment

                            • hjh
                              Junior Member
                              • Jan 2011
                              • 1

                              Originally posted by michael_kard View Post
                              Chilton0326, great points. Thank you for persisting despite the negative (and occasionally offensive) responses you've received.



                              This is a funny thing to say. Maybe you should start wearing Versace (like me )

                              I agree with Michael Kard.

                              Comment

                              • lowrey
                                ventiundici
                                • Dec 2006
                                • 8383

                                Undercover has for a long time had a focus on experimental materials and techniques, so its no surprise that Jun is interested in working with Nike. what in your opinion is the comparable advantage that Uniqlo brings to the table, then?

                                Years ago I probably would've bought the naive idea that everyone benefits from these particular type of collaborations and designers maintain their full integrity when they sell a half-assed vision through a fastfood fashion giant, but I've learned that the industry isn't a magical candy land filled with good will and unicorns. I know a large part of the designers we discuss here personally and have learned a bit about their integrity, and I believe its impossible to fully maintain it and get into a project like this.

                                I can't speak for UC x uniqlo because it doesn't exist yet, but I don't see why it would be a sudden turning point. Its pointless to compare these to fucking Elton John or anything from film or music because its an entirely different industry.

                                Jil for uniqlo had some nice cuts for women, but felt cheap. the mens wear was watered down and boring. I don't see what it could've possibly brought for Jil, but it brought hype for uniqlo. Lanvin stomped on part of their soul with fugly patent shoes when they designed crap for H&M and dug even deeper when they had the nerve to claim the quality was on par with their own products. 95% of people who bought these rags will never buy Lanvin and the other 5% were already customers of theirs, so what did they benefit as a label. CDG is difficult to compare because they've always down wacky collaborations and offshoots, but the difference is that most of these projects are under their own name, not putting their own label on someone else's crap like they did with H&M. that obviously wasn't a very succesful endeavor for them.
                                "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

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