The Issue of Authorship

[jogu]

good question, i never rly thought about it that much. for me the most important aspect is the product. i drop quite a bit per season on clothing and i find its not usually always on the same designers. last summer i loved the things at jil sander, this summer my favorite was mihara (looks like next summer also!). i dont rly care too much about where the clothing comes from, i only care if i like it or not.

however, over the yrs ive started to appreciate the person behind the designing. i like to read about them and often times i find i like wot the person has to say which might explain why i like their clothing as well. i wont just follow them season to season becos of who they are though, as is the case with raf. current season and next are poopy to me and despite me being a huge fan in the past i dont plan to buy anything at all (except jil sander, saw some pieces id like).

[Faust]

I understand what you are saying, Zam -hence my own ambivalence. Maybe Geoffrey can chime in on this topic.

[laika]

It was Laika, but she told me that in person and I don't remember seeing you in that bar.

hey, quit being so possessive...i get around, you know?!

[STEALTH]

Knowledge of the designer is essential for me

Just as is a basic awareness of anything in one's life

Ignorance is never a virtue

I do not want to be a walking billboard for some decadent coke-snorting dick-heads

Nor do I want to align myself with a particular clique or cult who wear things just to hide their own innate lack of style , identity and self awareness / esteem

This is why certain designers have never been of interest to me

I associate them with middle aged middle class taking a slouch on the wild side

[Faust]

hey, quit being so possessive...i get around, you know?!

I thought we discussed this?! Women are possessive, men are territorial... Actually I don't know what that means, I just like saying that... And you are MINE!

[Avantster]

Good thread and some interesting responses.

The basic question is, can and, more importantly, should you separate the creator from his work? Should you know about the designer before you judge his clothes?

In short, yes we can - what does this mean, though? Separate the creator from their work and one can only judge the clothes according to their existing knowledge and understanding of clothing, fashion, culture, commerce, as well as their own aesthetical and personal inclinations. This of course does have value but it's also the reason why some think Carpe, Julius and Rick all look the same, why others argue that Bernard Willhelm is wackarnolds, and why others think, say, Attolini, Borrelli and Rubinacci all look alike.

To use Fuuma's words if one is not prepared to immerse themselves in anothers way of thinking and aesthetic inclinations, there is only so much weight I would afford their opinions. There is something to be said about the notion of objectivity here - it's become accepted and even assumed that analysis by a stony-faced objective individual has more value. In some cases this may be so, but it's not so useful when trying to understand clothing from cultures outside of one's own.
Said more simply, if your teacup is always full of your own tea, you will never be able to taste what someone else's tea is like. If you don't empty your cup and just try to pour more in you'll ruin the taste and end up with a hot wet mess.

Perhaps it would be much more revealing for one to analyse the clothes before they knew anything about the creator, and also once again after they have undertaken the discipline, time and effort to better understand the creator and their world.

[asho]

Perhaps it would be much more revealing for one to analyse the clothes before they knew anything about the creator, and also once again after they have undertaken the discipline, time and effort to better understand the creator and their world.

I really like this point. For me this is how I got into ccp and raf simons and for this reason it is why the pieces I own are more special to me then luc or rick, even if I get more wear out of the later. Its the same way I have approached music. I hear a song and find out who it is by then try to find a bit more out about them, this can lead to the discovery of a whole realm of new bands or it can remain stalled at that one song. But I had to hear it first, if i had read about a song it wouldn't have been the same, my drive to discover more would not have been so strong.

you need to discover something in the same way you will use it. you hear music, see art, taste food, read books and wear clothes. reading and hearing about cloths is abstract and I think it is weird to consider yourself a follower of a certain designer without ever trying their clothes. It is a sensory thing rather than cerebral. So to that extent the context your clothes are created in is certainly valuable, it is not consumerist garbage for you to discover this after the fact, and it can lead you an a very interesting journey.

[Marko]

Wonderful thread

This is a very interesting and thought provoking thread. The idea of authorship is something I have been thinking about a lot as I have been viewing and thinking about more designers' work on my own, and perhaps more significantly reading other people's reaction and opinions here. It draws me back to studying the same issue with regards to literature.

The validity and importance of authorial intent and psychoanalytic criticism is something that will always be contested. It raises the question of beauty. The way one judges a particular piece will always be impacted by what one values. On one side there are those who view the purely visual aspect as important. On the other there are those who find the beauty in the designer's philosophy and artistic vision. Of course these are not mutually exclusive, but it seems to me that on this forum people gravitate toward the latter. This is a special community, and in all criticism the more deeply one cares about the subject or field the deeper they will delve.

Fashion is different than many other forms of art because it is more an outward reflection of self. What one is wearing is much more visible in everyday life than, as examples, what books a person reads or what music they listen to. This is the case whether or not one wishes it to be.

ps. I am having a difficult time processing all my thoughts and very nearly deleted this all as I doubt what I said is very insightful or sensical. I will think about this more and maybe post again.

[christianef]

garments are ultimately a lot less complex. the multitudes of an individual may make it tricky to attach too much significance. one may resonate with rimbaud's noted youthful, mischievous, nomad behavior/lifestyle but could easily be repulsed by his sexual relations with verlaine. so which do you let influence how much you like his poems. it would be easy to become completely enthralled by what we read or learn about a designer's background/ outlook on life and a 5 second conversation in real life could completely skew everything. it happens to me all the time. in fashion specifically the face of the designer can be a big selling point so for PR sake alone you can get a very filtered view of thier actual personailty. it will still generally factor in though i think it's natural.

[gerry]

Funny you should pick Margiela, who is all about letting the work speak for itself :-) I think my story above shows that you can discern designer's intentions, including identity formation, through the clothes.

I use Margiela because he is a designer whose work is frequently appropriated... Yet I am not interested in the majority of the works that have been influenced by him. I am not interested in the painted pants that today's Maison is putting out but I would be in a pair of the "originals." It has to do with the intention behind them... or at least the perceived intention.

[gerry]

garments are ultimately a lot less complex. the multitudes of an individual may make it tricky to attach too much significance. one may resonate with rimbaud's noted youthful, mischievous, nomad behavior/lifestyle but could easily be repulsed by his sexual relations with verlaine. so which do you let influence how much you like his poems. it would be easy to become completely enthralled by what we read or learn about a designer's background/ outlook on life and a 5 second conversation in real life could completely skew everything. it happens to me all the time. in fashion specifically the face of the designer can be a big selling point so for PR sake alone you can get a very filtered view of thier actual personailty. it will still generally factor in though i think it's natural.

I think it's entirely possible to be repulsed by someone's personality but still have respect and feel accord with the ideas (or aesthetic) they present. I do find the entire fashion designer as genius mentality pervasive over here in New York but I don't understand how it came to be... especially with designers who are incredibly commercial...

[Faust]

/\ It's a marketing myth. A fairy tale they sell, and sell well.

[christianef]

I think it's entirely possible to be repulsed by someone's personality but still have respect and feel accord with the ideas (or aesthetic) they present. I do find the entire fashion designer as genius mentality pervasive over here in New York but I don't understand how it came to be... especially with designers who are incredibly commercial...

i do too. so would this mean you're separating the work from its author? in some instances this respect/accord can excuse the repulsion. roman polanski was recently back in the news for raping the young girl a long time ago and it seems to have become a footnote for many of his fans. so are they separating the work from its author? or are they so connected to the authors idea and visual philosophy and the death of his wife it excuses everything.


im split on guys like rick owens who's print media, atleast, almost every time seems to equally intrigue me and alienate further from his aesthetic. while ackermann's antidotes of botched romance really make me connect with his la perdu approach to women.

[laika]

Y
I don't remember whether it was laika, kira or gerry that said this, but there was something expressed once along the lines of ..being enamoured/fascinated with the designer, and the coherent universe/context they have created for their clothes, and by that extent their wearers, to exist in..(VB being perhaps the most obvious example, but there are many more..)

i'm always more partial to personal interpretation of other people's vision than most literal takes, i guess..

It was indeed me--i seem to be having this conversation often in recent weeks--and I meant it critically. It's nice to find a personal affinity with a designer, but it's definitely not an objective criterion for what's good. I would actually say I have a weakness for VB, because I have such an affinity for her little world...but if i'm being objective about it, i certainly recognize that existing in such a limited frame of references left her stagnant as a designer.

[Fuuma]

Against interpretation!!!!