Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Politics of Universe Making

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Servo2000
    Senior Member
    • Oct 2006
    • 2183

    Politics of Universe Making

    Echoing Merz' point I thought the core of what the 'H*****' thread discussed was an interesting point presented in a very strange manner.

    Many designers seem to be constructing a universe for their work to inhabit as a result of the totality of their vision (i.e. Rick Owens) and the larger ones even begin to take on the title of 'lifestyle' brands. The desire to aestheticize our own world is nearly universal so the results are worth examining. What do we stand to gain and to lose from accepting a piece of someone else's vision into our own?

    It reminded me of Raf recently discussing the resurgence of 'designer' people (in regards to how a woman in the 90s might be a "Jil Sander Woman" or a "Yohji Man") and its relation to the supposed individuality of creating 'your own' look from multiple designers. Perhaps this was an attempt to diffuse the invasion of anothers universe into your own?

    Themes to be considered also include:

    Originally posted by pierce4
    the use of architecture, vision of human beauty, uniforms, world building
    WTB: Rick Owens Padded MA-1 Bomber XS (LIMO / MOUNTAIN)
  • Fade to Black
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2008
    • 5340

    #2
    may or may not drop more detailed input here in the near future, but just want to take the time to say this is an excellently crafted thread incorporating the most poignant element of its ill-fated predecessor. I've always believed Servo should be a Mod.
    www.matthewhk.net

    let me show you a few thangs

    Comment

    • pierce4
      Member
      • Mar 2010
      • 68

      #3
      This is the book in question, which was recommend by a German friend when I asked the question how it could have happened. Certainly there are similarities, from personally designing furniture, uniforms, buildings...




      One of the reasons I like rick owens so much is that even though he always claims to not work in any conceptual sense, he does say that his work has a thread of "Broken Idealism".

      Comment

      • laika
        moderator
        • Sep 2006
        • 3787

        #4
        beautifully recuperated, Servo.

        More of a note to myself than anything at the moment, but the first thing that came to my mind when i read the other thread was Wagner's notion of the total work of art.
        ...I mean the ephemeral, the fugitive, the contingent, the half of art whose other half is the eternal and the immutable.

        Comment

        • mesko
          Senior Member
          • Nov 2009
          • 208

          #5
          It would be especially interesting to hear personal reflections on this matter from people here who in some way engage in design/craftmanship/whatnot. I believe many of you create your own garments (for example ZamB and Heirloom [who also makes music]), and I believe wire.artist is an architect, no?

          Comment

          • Faust
            kitsch killer
            • Sep 2006
            • 37852

            #6
            I think we should name some designers first, before we fly away on the air balloon of abstraction. If you mean designers like Yohji Yamamoto, Ann Demeulemeester, Veronique Branquinho, etc. I think these designers don't create a world, but rather recreate parts of it in their own way. Life is too complex of a thing, so we choose cultural artifacts that speak to us, that we find value in, and proceed from there. If you look at the influences on the 3 aforementioned designers, they are very clear and palpable.

            I don't see how Rick fits in here, though, but it would be interesting to find out.
            Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

            StyleZeitgeist Magazine

            Comment

            • neonrider
              Senior Member
              • Jan 2008
              • 150

              #7
              perhaps besides the real point of the post, but it occurs to me that some designers end up inadvertently creating a "lifestyle" because (as you all know) it's cheaper accessories that command the steepest margins. ie, there's a financial advantage to scope.

              as for creating a world, i think there's a great quote about real genius being the ability to craft a detailed universe. perhaps it's relevant to every kind of designer. certainly, it's important to me me that a designer have a coherent vision, that i feel matters, and perhaps express when i build my, in merz's words "bubble".
              ""assuming the economy doesn't force us to eat the rich and object-tan their hides" -- merz

              Comment

              • zamb
                Senior Member
                • Nov 2006
                • 5834

                #8
                Well,
                to not be so overly intellectual or philosophical about it, let me declare from now, regardless of how wealthy I become, how successful a business I own, you will never have the opportunity to sleep on your Zam Barrett sheet, wake up and walk to your bathroom on a ZB rug, brush your teeth with a ZB toothbrush, bathe with a ZB washcloth, bubble bath and dry your body with a ZB towel!

                You wont decorate your house by painting it with ZB paints, nor ever have the chance to cover your windows with ZB drapes...............
                I detest the idea of lifestyle brands, I find the whole concept, the idea of megalomaniacs, who want to become little gods and invade every area of the lives of their clients.

                I want to make clothes, and a few accessories and items that complement them, I am interested in other forms of art and design,
                and fields such as politics/ philosophy/ religion/ journalism etc, I would love to contribute in those fields, and often find inspiration that drives my work in those areas ......and wouldn't rule out doing furniture etc, but for me its always been more of seeing those projects as one off ideas, rather than an extension into a lifestyle brand.

                I like the way the Belgians work. and for the most part up until about fifteen or so years ago, fashion companies were relatively small to mid sized family owned business and there were no "lifestyle brands".........well, except Pierre Cardin.
                all of this Nonsense was started by Mr. Arnault, Armani and Ralph Lauren

                Another thing I find annoying is this whole idea of an everlasting amount of nonstop collections by designers.............even small companies who cannot afford it or lack the creative range/ expertise to venture into so many areas.
                you now have, pre-fall, fall/ winter/ resort/ holiday/ pre-spring/ Spring summer............ and probably a whole bunch of others.........who the hell needs so much clothes?.

                Two collections a year is enough,
                Last edited by zamb; 08-10-2010, 09:39 PM.
                “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
                .................................................. .......................


                Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

                Comment

                • Faust
                  kitsch killer
                  • Sep 2006
                  • 37852

                  #9
                  Fuck, I was looking forward to ZB toothpaste and toilet paper.
                  Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                  StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                  Comment

                  • fenrost
                    Banned
                    • Mar 2009
                    • 623

                    #10
                    another great thread! something to add perhaps, later.

                    Originally posted by zamb View Post
                    Another thing I find annoying is this whole idea of an everlasting amount of nonstop collections by designers.
                    agree, but, i dont find it annoying, at most times just tiring.

                    Comment

                    • casem
                      Senior Member
                      • Sep 2006
                      • 2590

                      #11
                      Zamb, I really appreciate your business philosophy and wish more people shared it! Unfortunately, capitalism encourages unending growth (if it's not growing, it's dead!), to that I say, if it never stops growing, it's cancer. There's always a tipping point where something is ruined by over expansion.

                      Anyway, to the topic at hand. I think, in general, creating a coherent aesthetic world is part of what being an artist is about (if we can extend this honor to fashion). I suppose it could be egomaniacal as the original thread suggests, but the important difference I see is, art/fashion creators offer a world as an escape or vision of possibilities that we would not otherwise encounter in our everyday lives; something to pull us off the tracks of our routine to consider something new. It's an act of giving rather than an act of coercion. Whereas Hitler or other dictators wished to turn their vision into our everyday lives.

                      This whole thing is very complicated though as it gets wrapped up in marketing and capitalism. What begins a creative impulse can turn into a marketing gimmick, a new creative world can end up just offering you a world of new shit to buy. Marketing's greatest and most insidious achievement is being able to sell us much more than is actually there, attaching a dream, emotion and meaning to objects increases their worth exponentially. The creation of an identifiable designer vision goes hand in hand with this. "I have to buy this object because it represents me!"

                      I tend to relate things to music because that is what I do, so I've been thinking about this a lot lately in regards to Philip Glass. On the upside, he's created a complete musical world that is unique and instantly recognizable, which is as much an achievement anyone can ask for. It's brilliant because once the world has been made, it can almost continue apart from it's creator (I'm sure I could write Glass' next opera myself). The pessimistic view, however, is once that world is established and holds a certain currency, you can get off on selling endless diffusions of your original idea (whether it be another Philip Glass arpeggio, Warhol portrait, or CDG fragrance).

                      So in summary, I don't know if it's good or bad, but nothing rarely is.
                      Last edited by casem; 08-11-2010, 02:09 AM.
                      music

                      Comment

                      • pierce4
                        Member
                        • Mar 2010
                        • 68

                        #12
                        "This whole thing is very complicated though as it gets wrapped up in marketing and capitalism."


                        At first I was thinking that the individuals who do the world building had some master plan from the start, but I'm starting to lean towards the idea that its the consumer or the subject that puts them in the position where they start to do it. We want to consume, we want to be ruled and actively seek out people to put in the position of building the "universe" for us.
                        We buy their products or pay taxes, the money they then use to construct the "universe" which usually tends to be one that displays wealth and power, be that architecture, monuments, gold palaces...if they don't build it, we stop believing and look for someone else.

                        So I'm starting to be convinced now that fashion designers who do world building are a modern form of embryonic kings, where the millennium old human trait of ruler and subject, present in every civilization, are manifesting in a modern and less dangerous way.

                        Comment

                        • pierce4
                          Member
                          • Mar 2010
                          • 68

                          #13
                          I'm using "we" very loosely here by the way ;)

                          Comment

                          • Faust
                            kitsch killer
                            • Sep 2006
                            • 37852

                            #14
                            OMG, Casey, you are just a regular Marxist!!!
                            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

                              #15
                              Yeah, I forgot the initial point I wanted to make that is relevant to this thread. One important way designers - any fashion designer, actually - construct a universe is by decontextualizing things. They can do that by simply putting their name on the garment. The power of their name strips the old context and gives it a new context dominated by their name. They've successfully done it with denim, for example. Gucci was instrumental to the whole designer denim craze by making a $1,000 feathered hippie jean (in 2000 or so?) that didn't even make it to the floor - was sold out on the waiting list. Of course it wasn't jeans, it was Gucci jeans that people paid for. Prada did the same breakthrough for sneakers, etc. Thus they broke the old context - denim as workwear/streetwear, sneakers as athletic/streetwear - and made a new context.
                              Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

                              StyleZeitgeist Magazine

                              Comment

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