uh guys don't let xenox's use of long words/sentences fool you into thinking his babble has any coherence whatsoever to it
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Similarities
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by XenoX101 View PostBelieve me, I have a great appreciation for many of the designers discussed here and I think some of the WAYWT posters here are of a kind you don't see very often. All I was curious about was why for the most part it is only a handful of designers that are discussed and worn, less so than other forums, I'm not refusing to understand SZ, on the contrary, trying to understand why this is the case. Once again, I respect the designers that are talked about here, but as a side note I respect many more designers which aren't talked about or are but aren't seen (e.g: Dries Van Noten). Of course, you can do as you please, you don't have to justify the choices you make, but this is a forum and I'd like to think people are happy to discuss such things.
2. Dries is discussed here--have you looked at the many threads devoted to his collections in the D&C part of the forum? And Faust, Zam, and myself all own (and presumably wear) pieces from him.
You need to show that you've done your homework if you expect people to take the time to engage your posts.... so far your "questions" just point to a lack of close observation....I mean the ephemeral, the fugitive, the contingent, the half of art whose other half is the eternal and the immutable.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by XenoX101 View PostBelieve me, I have a great appreciation for many of the designers discussed here and I think some of the WAYWT posters here are of a kind you don't see very often. All I was curious about was why for the most part it is only a handful of designers that are discussed and worn, less so than other forums, I'm not refusing to understand SZ, on the contrary, trying to understand why this is the case. Once again, I respect the designers that are talked about here, but as a side note I respect many more designers which aren't talked about or are but aren't seen (e.g: Dries Van Noten). Of course, you can do as you please, you don't have to justify the choices you make, but this is a forum and I'd like to think people are happy to discuss such things.Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
StyleZeitgeist Magazine
Comment
-
-
Well, I guess XenoX101's answer will be that, even if those designers are sometimes discussed here, Julius, Rick Owens and Ann D are constantly, and are well represented in the WAYWT when Dries van Noten, just to name one, is not.
And that's true.
But I don't see any difficulties in figuring that, even if people around are able to recognize great qualities in some designer's work, it doesn't appeal much to most of them - not dark enough, not keen enough on fabrics, not audacious enough on structural patterns - ; thus they do not buy, they do not wear ; thus they do not feel like saying much about it.
What's to understand in that ? The great difference between fashion and music is accessibility to the medium. Let's say the satisfactory medium for music is recording ; what is the equivalent for fashion ? You can't be satisfied only with pictures or runway videos. You have to experiment the garment yourself. That doesn't necessarily mean that you have to own it - even if, in the end, this is what the clothes are meant for : owning and wearing - ; but at least you'd have to go to défilés, to showrooms, to shops... Not anybody can do that.
You see, you can love any music you want from the deepness of your armchair, and be satisfied like this ; I doubt you can use the same with fashion, because it is highly frustrating to hold a garment only in pictures. Therefore, one tends to stick to what echoes the most to what one sees as his personality, and probably, in the same time, to what one perceives as quite accessible and familiar, thanks to his frequentation of a community like this one. Composing an outfit needs time and money : unless you are rich enough to give in wild experimentation, you'll put your efforts in finding something that fits you in all senses. No wonder then your interest mostly goes to things you're likely to add to your wardrobe rather than to what may look like distant curiosities.
(Damnit, why don't you people speak french, like anybody else !)I can see a hat, I can see a cat,
I can see a man with a baseball bat.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by the breaks View PostOh and that question (just like the earlier one) is to BSR.
1/ douchiness features are showy materials and patterns (you know, silk everywhere, gaudy prince-of-wales and so on), hyperbolic structure of shoulders (almost pagoda-like), wide peak lapels even on single breasted jackets. Isn't it enough?
2/ no, I did not say that. But as others have already said (Laika, Faust, MM...), when you buy your RTW suit at the cost of bespoke Savile Row or almost, you'd better buy the philosophy that is sold with your suit. And that philosophy is...guess what?pix
Originally posted by FuumaFuck you and your viewpoint, I hate this depoliticized environment where every opinion should be respected, no matter how moronic. My avatar was chosen just for you, die in a ditch fucker.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by the breaks View PostMaybe with some example images.
I'll stay out of the douchey or not argument, but I will say, BP looks like a completely different person here than in the other pics that have surfaced on this forum. And I think this perceived aesthetic inconsistency is troubling to many people here.
...I mean the ephemeral, the fugitive, the contingent, the half of art whose other half is the eternal and the immutable.
Comment
-
-
You can do it the wrong way and you can do it the right way. You can buy the shiny silk double-breasted, power-shouldered, gold-buttoned suit and slick your hair back with axle grease. You don't have to though, regardless of whose suit you're wearing. Looking like a douche bag is not down to the designer of the clothing but the wearer. I'm sure lowrey could wear head-to-toe Andrew MacKenzie and still look good.Suede is too Gucci.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by the breaks View PostYou can do it the wrong way and you can do it the right way. You can buy the shiny silk double-breasted, power-shouldered, gold-buttoned suit and slick your hair back with axle grease. You don't have to though, regardless of whose suit you're wearing. Looking like a douche bag is not down to the designer of the clothing but the wearer. I'm sure lowrey could wear head-to-toe Andrew MacKenzie and still look good.
And isn't it perfectly understandable how someone could look "good," wearing something, but feel like a douche? Isn't that relevant to you at all?...I mean the ephemeral, the fugitive, the contingent, the half of art whose other half is the eternal and the immutable.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by XenoX101 View PostYes, and likewise well dressed people come in all sorts of flavours, I can't understand why there isn't more for example Dries Van Noten, Lanvin, Alexander McQueen, Jil Sander or Number Nine (spring 2007) around here, it seems when there is its only the pieces that are relevant to the standard SZ aesthetic.
The music example is a good one, because I'm sure many of you listen to a wide variety of artists with many different ideas, concepts, sounds, styles and reasons behind them, I'm also sure that this affects your lives to some degree and your mindsets, so then surely it would also affect what you wear/your style, somehow though, it doesn't seem like it.
This is true, realism aside if Juicy Couture made the most incredible leather jacket worthy of comparison to RO or CCP, I sincerely doubt anyone here would be swayed to buying one because of the cache of Juicy Couture and what it stands for (e.g: brainwashing kids into buying velour tracksuits).
Something of note though is that you mention a potential lover of Cdiem and a potential lover of Tom Ford (no pun intended). How many Tom Ford lovers (no pun intended) are on this forum? How many people here love and own/wear pieces from designers outside of the circle of socially accepted designers here? I think you can see where I'm coming from.
1) Lanvin is quite popular here.
2) Lots of people have Prada or whatever in their closet.Selling CCP, Harnden, Raf, Rick etc.
http://www.stylezeitgeist.com/forums...me-other-stuff
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by laika View PostAnd isn't it perfectly understandable how someone could look "good," wearing something, but feel like a douche? Isn't that relevant to you at all?Suede is too Gucci.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Fuuma View PostI made a thread on what people really had in their closets and you couldn't be more wrong;
1) Lanvin is quite popular here.
2) Lots of people have Prada or whatever in their closet.
Originally posted by Mail-Moth View PostWell, I guess XenoX101's answer will be that, even if those designers are sometimes discussed here, Julius, Rick Owens and Ann D are constantly, and are well represented in the WAYWT when Dries van Noten, just to name one, is not.
And that's true.
But I don't see any difficulties in figuring that, even if people around are able to recognize great qualities in some designer's work, it doesn't appeal much to most of them - not dark enough, not keen enough on fabrics, not audacious enough on structural patterns - ; thus they do not buy, they do not wear ; thus they do not feel like saying much about it.
What's to understand in that ? The great difference between fashion and music is accessibility to the medium. Let's say the satisfactory medium for music is recording ; what is the equivalent for fashion ? You can't be satisfied only with pictures or runway videos. You have to experiment the garment yourself. That doesn't necessarily mean that you have to own it - even if, in the end, this is what the clothes are meant for : owning and wearing - ; but at least you'd have to go to défilés, to showrooms, to shops... Not anybody can do that.
You see, you can love any music you want from the deepness of your armchair, and be satisfied like this ; I doubt you can use the same with fashion, because it is highly frustrating to hold a garment only in pictures. Therefore, one tends to stick to what echoes the most to what one sees as his personality, and probably, in the same time, to what one perceives as quite accessible and familiar, thanks to his frequentation of a community like this one. Composing an outfit needs time and money : unless you are rich enough to give in wild experimentation, you'll put your efforts in finding something that fits you in all senses. No wonder then your interest mostly goes to things you're likely to add to your wardrobe rather than to what may look like distant curiosities.
(Damnit, why don't you people speak french, like anybody else !)
Originally posted by laika View Post2. Dries is discussed here--have you looked at the many threads devoted to his collections in the D&C part of the forum? And Faust, Zam, and myself all own (and presumably wear) pieces from him.
Comment
-
Comment