Monday, January 26, 2015

Couture Fashion

NY Times, October 12, 2003

The Triumph of the Repressed

Jean Paul Gaultier, pushing his glasses up on his nose, stood in the middle of the studio and looked at the model Alek Wek being fitted in a black-and-silver lace bodysuit that began as a hood over her head and extended down without a ripple over her neck and shoulders, over the small mound of her breasts, down her long legs and ended at her toes, so that every part of her body was covered in lace except the oval of her ebony face.


''Can you hear?'' Gaultier asked, tapping on her right ear. We nodded and smiled.

The fittings went on like this for several hours one day early last July, with Gaultier saying little, as other models came and left. He would not admit that he was in trouble with this collection, an haute couture show that in a few days he would stage before 700 editors and clients at the École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts in Paris. Couture is that hugely indefensible branch of the fashion world that is the opposite of a business, a fantasy land, where a simple dress can cost $20,000; add feathers and embroidery, and you're talking the price of an Ivy League education. Only a dozen designers qualify to be called couturiers, but the truth is, only three really matter: Chanel's Karl Lagerfeld, Dior's John Galliano and Gaultier. Because of their technical virtuosity, they have brought a new relevancy to couture, though with Gaultier, perhaps because he is Parisian and was 45 when he made his couture debut in 1997, you sense a more generous heart at work. He always manages to see Paris the same way that the photographer Helmut Newton sees Berlin: in autumnal light, with the click of high heels on wet pavement. This summer, in addition to everything else he does, Gaultier became creative director of women's wear for Hermès, the French luxury house and the shrine of establishment taste, giving him an even more powerful base from which to exert his influence.

But Gaultier started this couture collection late, only three weeks before, so that he could finish costumes for Pedro Almodóvar's next film and design some tour clothes for the French rock star Johnny Hallyday, and now the atelier would have to work every night until the early hours of the morning. You could tell from the shabbiness of the studio, though, that Gaultier was used to working under hard conditions and didn't complain about it. Even on days like this, when he had many things on his mind, he would often walk home through the crowded streets of the Bastille, though he was constantly stopped by strangers. Undoubtedly they recognized the bleached blond hair, the alert blue eyes and large protruding ears, a mug that is, in many ways, as symbolic of the new France as DeGaulle's was of postwar France -- before mass immigration, gay liberation, AIDS, radical politics and the triumph and perversity of individualism. With exceptional clarity and aim over the last 20 years, Gaultier has commented on these forces -- whether by presenting men in skirts, or projecting women's breasts as missile launchers, or asserting the beauty of ethnic dress -- so that his clothes have come to represent the defeat of the old France as surely as DeGaulle's proud beak once stood for its glory. To a great many people in France today, to the grande dame as well as to the pierced-and-tattooed man on the street, Gaultier is more than a fashion designer. He is a leading cultural figure.



But now, standing in the studio with his arms folded and his glasses on, Gaultier looked remarkably ordinary, and even more remarkably, he seemed to have nothing in common with his outrageous public image -- the Gaultier who ponced and clowned in the 90's as the co-host of the British TV program ''Eurotrash,'' the Gaultier who once mailed live turkeys to unsympathetic editors, the Gaultier who, in a 1989 show still recalled for its air of Nazi menace, presented models in black boots, coats trussed with harnesses and, jutting out from their felt helmets, a wedge of Dynel that slashed across their cheeks like the blade of a meat cleaver. In her review of the show, Bernadine Morris of The Times wrote, ''This is the seamy underbelly of fashion.''


Seamy perhaps, but hardly Gaultier's personal cup of tea. What is most paradoxical about Gaultier -- and what his appointment at Hermès confirms -- is that behind the outrage and runway antics lies a deeply serious and intelligent man. Though he was once a fixture on the London club scene, where he went to cruise as well as pick up new ideas, Gaultier, the only child of a bookkeeper and a secretary from the Paris suburb of Arcueil, says he is happiest alone. (Well, up to a point, says his business partner, Donald Potard, with a rueful laugh. ''Jean Paul has to be with at least one friend,'' says Potard, who has known Gaultier since they were 4 years old. ''He's a talker. So if he's alone. . . . '') He doesn't smoke, drinks but little and, according to Potard, doesn't take drugs. He rarely attends swank society affairs, though his couture clothes are worn by those kind of people, including Liliane Bettencourt, the richest woman in France; Mouna Ayoub, the former wife of a Saudi industrialist and a major couture buyer; the New York socialite Nan Kempner; and Catherine Deneuve, who basically, after Saint Laurent, wears only Gaultier. (He will be making the rounds next month in New York, though, when his company sponsors the ''Bravehearts: Men in Skirts'' exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.)



Gaultier, who has a small place in Marrakesh and is renovating a house in Paris (''a little English house with a garden''), says he prefers working to going out, in part because ''I'm always afraid I'll say something stupid.'' He also just likes the work. ''I always tell him, 'You work too much,''' Potard says. ''But I think he feels guilty if he's not working.''



There is, not surprisingly, a corollary to Gaultier's personality in his less exclusive and less expensive ready-to-wear. For behind the big bow-wow shows are highly wearable jackets, trousers and knits that are a mainstay of stores like Neiman Marcus and account for a significant portion of the company's annual sales of $450 million. ''He makes the best tailored clothes in the business,'' says Joan Kaner, the fashion director of Neiman Marcus. He is also one of the few designers I know in Paris or Milan who really does design the stuff that bears his name -- not just the show-stoppers, but the jeans, bags and men's wear too.


Gaultier is also deeply French, a fact that cannot be emphasized enough as he takes on Hermès, where he will present his first collection next March, at the fall 2004 ready-to-wear shows. Hermès has been run by the Dumas family -- more recently by Jean-Louis Dumas -- since 1837, when it provided coaches and saddles for aristocrats. You can't get any more French than the Dumas family or Hermès, which sells about $1 billion worth of scarves, watches, perfume, leather-bound agendas and, of course, bags, including the famous Kelly, for which there is a six-month wait.



For all their differences, Gaultier and Hermès hold one vital thing in common: each is a lone entity in a world dominated by luxury groups. Farida Khelfa, a star model of the 80's who has observed Gaultier closely for many years (she was until recently the director of his couture studio), sees it as significant that Gaultier, an only child, has aligned himself with the ultra-solitary Hermès. ''Hermès is just Hermès, no attachments,'' Khelfa says. ''I think it's very important for Jean Paul to work like that -- he has to be the only one.'' And don't forget, Lagerfeld, who is German, is employed at the discretion of the Wertheimer family of Chanel, and Galliano, who is English with Spanish roots, works for LVMH Moët Hennessey Louis Vuitton, which owns Dior. Gaultier and Hermès have no such ties.



In 1999, looking for capital to open Gaultier shops in New York and the Far East, Potard, a stocky, engaging man who once taught French in Tarboro, N.C., went to Dumas with the improbable suggestion that the luxury house invest in the maverick designer. Three days later, Dumas agreed to buy 35 percent of Gaultier's business for $26 million. ''Jean-Louis knows the value of things, and he knows the value of people,'' Potard told me one afternoon at Gaultier headquarters near the Bastille. ''Plus, we have the same way of running a company. We don't like debt; we don't spend money through the window.'' Potard, whom one American retailer described as ''very tight but very smart,'' certainly didn't waste any money on his office. It's easily the smallest, least impressive office of a fashion C.E.O. I've seen, its only memorable detail a classroom portrait taken when Potard and Gaultier were kids. After some difficulty, I picked out Gaultier. He was the kid with the biggest ears.



When I saw Dumas at the Paris men's shows in early July, he used almost the same words Potard had to describe his affinity with Gaultier, saying, ''We both put creativity and the quality of the product first,'' and noted with some pride that his office at Hermès is located next to its fabled ateliers. Dumas, clearly, is no fan of the aggressive marketing favored by Bernard Arnault, the chairman of LVMH, a strategy that many people in the fashion industry believe has shifted the focus toward celebrity and hype. Dumas made his own feelings plain six years ago when he hired the Belgian minimalist Martin Margiela, who is rarely seen or photographed. Margiela's clothes for Hermès were so quiet as to be mute. Last spring, with Margiela's contract due to expire in October, Dumas called Gaultier to ask if he knew anyone who might want the job -- and was dismayed, he says, when Gaultier recommended several designers, including Hussein Chalayan, but not himself.



Later, when I checked this version of events with Potard, he broke into a huge laugh and proceeded to describe one of the singular mating dances in fashion history: ''The real story is that Jean-Louis asked Jean Paul to give him some names, and when Jean Paul told me whom he had mentioned, I said, 'Of course, you proposed yourself.' And he said, 'No.' And I said, 'Don't you want to do it?' And he said, 'Yes.' And I said, 'Why didn't you propose yourself then?' And Jean Paul said, 'Because he didn't ask me.'''


Potard shook his head: ''These people are too polite! So Jean Paul calls Jean-Louis and invites him to lunch. They meet, and Jean Paul says, 'I will gladly do Hermès,' and Jean-Louis says, 'Oh, I was hoping you would.'''



Gaultier has already begun work on Hermès and expects to incorporate many of his own ideas, while keeping a sense of tradition. ''It has to have some line in it that is Hermès, that goes through the years,'' he says. ''What I can bring is something a little more feminine. Martin was only doing a Greta Garbo sort of woman. Me, I can bring a little more shape. And I will use the scarves and the prints.'' With Gaultier at Hermès, retailing executives also see an opportunity for the house to expand its apparel business, which accounts for only 15 percent of total sales. Dumas indicates the company is prepared to raise its fashion profile. But, as Domenico De Sole, the chief executive of Gucci, points out, Gaultier is only one part of the equation. ''You need to get your stores and salespeople geared up if you want to be successful,'' he says.


''And that requires a huge amount of time and investment. Gaultier will bring a lot of attention to the brand, but a lot will really depend on what Hermès wants to do with it.''

There is a small sting contained in the Gaultier-Hermès union. In 1996, Bernard Arnault rejected Gaultier's offer to design Dior and gave the job to Galliano, who was then at Givenchy. ''Mr. Arnault had some very harsh words about Jean Paul,'' Potard recalls. ''At the time, Jean Paul was presenting his TV show in England, and apparently Mr. Arnault hated it. I guess he thought Jean Paul was a talentless clown.'' Instead, Arnault offered him Givenchy, which, after Galliano, Potard says, seemed a slight. ''Jean Paul was quite affected by this attitude. It pushed him. He said, 'O.K., they don't want me; I'm going to do better than that.'''


And that's how Gaultier came to do haute couture. Today the house has some 70 full-time seamstresses serving a clientele of 80 women, a respectable number given that there are probably fewer than 500 women in the world who buy couture. ''Of course, we don't make money on the couture -- it would be a lie to say we make money,'' Potard says. ''But it's an incredible promotion. By doing this we really changed the image of the house. People who didn't understand his fashion before, suddenly did when he started doing couture.


From being the 'bad boy' of French fashion, he became the couturier Jean Paul Gaultier.''

In the studio before the July show, Gaultier regarded a delicate-boned Russian model named Anastassia Khozissova standing in a white python bodysuit. Annelise Heinzelmann, who is the head of the atelier -- and who looked like a woman who didn't stand for much nonsense -- came in, followed by two seamstresses carrying a long black-velvet Madame X dress. They helped Khozissova carefully step into the dress, inching the black velvet over the white python. It was Gaultier's intention to effect a different spatial dimension with his clothes, much as the Dutch designer Jurgen Bey has done with everyday objects like chairs that appear to transform into walls. And now, on Khozissova, the black gown amazingly did that; it seemed at once part of the white second skin and separate from it.



But Gaultier had given himself an awesome challenge. For in addition to designing some 30 different bodysuits, one for each girl, he had to come up with more than 60 other outfits that played off this idea of transformation. One bodysuit alone -- worn by the model Suzanne Von Aichinger and considered the centerpiece of the show -- had required more than 50 hours of fittings in the studio of the custom corseter, who is known only as Mr. Pearl. He had built a corset into the flesh-tone lace of the bodysuit and created a second one to wear over it.

At 5 a.m. on the day of the show, Gaultier went home to catch a few hours of sleep. But the problems with the collection would persist right up to the moment of the show, when Mr. Pearl, and Von Aichinger's corsets, went missing for nearly an hour, leaving 700 guests to wilt in the gathering heat of the Beaux-Arts.


The greatest influence on Gaultier's early career, he told me, was his grandmother Marie Garrabe, a beautician who practiced faith healing on her clients while she coiffed and beautified them. Because his parents both worked, Gaultier spent a lot of time with Garrabe, who, unlike the rest of his family, seems to have been a genuine character. Under her care, Gaultier was allowed to watch television and look at fashion magazines, which he would steal when short of funds. Then, as now, the Paris couture was covered extensively by all the French dailies and on radio and television. ''My only fashion school was what I saw in the newspapers and on television,'' Gaultier says, breaking into the tremulous voice of a commentator. '''Today, Louis Féraud did Mexican, Saint Laurent's collection was feminine and very strong,' et cetera. For me, all my knowledge came from journalists.''



Throughout his career, Gaultier's shows have been peopled with the strange spiritual descendants of Garrabe and the women he observed in her home beauty parlor -- women with unnaturally teased hair, whitened faces and skirts seemingly made from the lace tablecloth. But, as a child, with no regular visitors to his house except for Potard, Gaultier embellished his circumstances. ''I was lying all the time,'' he said in 1994. ''I wanted to be interesting because I thought my life was boring. And when I started to work in the fashion business, I was a little ashamed of my relatives. Maybe they were not as elegant as I wanted them to be. But after a while I knew they deserved more because they are nice mentally. They are even nicer than some of the people who are fashionable. So after that, I said to myself, No more lies.''



In 1976, after a brief journeyman period at several houses, including Cardin, Gaultier presented his first collection. It featured a studded leather jacket worn with a tutu and tennis shoes and earned him a small notice in Le Monde. At his side was his boyfriend, Francis Menuge, who had given up law school to help Gaultier. ''My obsession became his obsession,'' Gaultier says. Their partnership would prove amazingly fluent and productive all through the 80's as Gaultier pursued themes like androgyny, recycling (as early as 1979 he used lamé to line surplus camouflage) and fetishism, a look that acquired pop approval when Madonna wore his corsets for her 1990 ''Blonde Ambition'' tour. Like Thierry Mugler, who projected the era's sexual deliriums with latex and Amazonian bodies, Gaultier brought a sense of performance to fashion. You didn't just go to a Gaultier show; you went dressed in Gaultier, and you prayed that panic wouldn't ensue among the 3,000 gaudily decked and daubed guests.



After Menuge's death from AIDS in 1990, Gaultier went into retreat for several years. Potard stepped in to run the business, but Gaultier has not found another person to share his life. ''I will not cry about that fact,'' he told me. ''I had the luck to love someone and to have done something with him. So I am lucky. There are some people who have never been in love. I have been in love one time and maybe I will be again.'' The difficulty, he says, is finding someone who can share the same emotion, ''who will not be bored with me explaining something. It doesn't have to be another designer.'' He grimaces and laughs. ''No, no, I don't think so.''



As much as Gaultier was attuned to the social forces of the 80's, some part of his brain still heard those enchanted radio voices of his youth. Today, Louis Féraud did Mexican. . . . This is the sense, more than any other, that his couture shows impart -- of Paris as you imagine it to be. I remember several years ago going up to Marie-Laure de Noailles's old house in the 16th Arrondissement, a house that once received Cocteau and most of the Surrealists and Dadaists and where, on a wet January morning, Gaultier staged his spring couture show. If he had once used his fashion to agitate for acceptance of different kinds of self-expression, he was, in those empty rooms, betraying a weakness for all things French, which, in an age of marketing and global brands, were suddenly his alone to possess: the tiny knots of the models' taut turbans, the jeune fille trench coats, the dark gray pantsuits sparkling with savoir-faire.



Now at the Beaux-Arts, nearly 30 minutes after the July couture show was supposed to have begun, the tension backstage was unbearable. Mr. Pearl still had not arrived with the corsets. Gaultier tried to sound chipper as he spoke to Potard. ''It was a nightmare,'' Potard recalls. ''Mr. Pearl is a wonderful person, but he has no idea of what time is.'' Finally, at about 8:10 p.m., Mr. Pearl appeared, announcing it would take another 30 minutes to lace Von Aichinger into her outfit. At 8:45, as a voice on the loudspeaker intoned, ''Numéro dix-huit. . . . Passe-passe,'' Von Aichinger stepped out on the runway and neatly twirled, receiving the loudest applause of the night. No one knew of the drama backstage or the previous three weeks, and doubtless they did not know, when the first guests reached Gaultier afterward, why he had tears in his eyes.


Next year Gaultier will move his offices and workrooms, which are scat-tered around Paris, to a 50,000-square-foot building with an elegant stairway on the Avenue Saint-Martin. It will finally give him a proper house.

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2011/01/27/fashion/20110127-gaultier-10.html

http://www.style.com/video/fashion-shows-by-designer/jean-paul-gaultier/1043971092001


Video of show watched in class on 2/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiJ8hkYFnic



After reading the article and watching the video and slide show explain how Gaultier's past, coming up, scuplted the overall style and influence of his work. Also, look closely at the style.com video and identify different components and points which support what is noted in the article -- you are matching up points in the article with components in the garments on in the links. Please be clear and type into an email to me rmalik@rbrhs.org by January 5, 2015. Email me with questions if you are not clear about the assignment.

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Sophisticated design

 
Vintage Chanel


Chanel No. I
Just her name was enough to define a pair of shoes, a hat, a pocketbook, a suit, perfume, jewelry-an entire look. It conveyed prestige, quality, impeccable taste and unmistakable style. It was a sign of excellence. Coco Chanel had no patience and too much talent, for anything less. By her death last week at 87, the French couturiere had long since established herself as the 20th century's single most important arbiter of fashion.
Her innovations were basic to the wardrobes of generations of women: jersey suits and dresses, the draped turban, the chemise, pleated skirts, the jumper, turtleneck sweaters, the cardigan suit, the blazer, the little black dress, the sling pump, strapless dresses, the trench coat. Sometimes, the determining factor was practicality: Chanel wore bell-bottom trousers in Venice, the better to climb in and out of gondolas and started the pants revolution. Sometimes, it was purely accidental: after singeing her hair, she cut it off completely, made an appearance at the Paris Opéra, and started the craze for bobbed hair. But always, a Chanel idea commanded respect.
Ostrich-Boa Hats. Born outside Paris in 1883, Gabrielle Bonheur Chanel (never called anything but Coco for "Little Pet") was orphaned at six and raised in the desolate province of Auvergne by two aunts. From them, she learned that little girls should sew, sit up straight and speak politely; for sewing, a skill that forever eluded her, Coco substituted horseback riding. From Etienne Balsan, a millionaire cavalry officer who brought her to Paris at 16, Coco acquired the habits and tastes of the wealthy. She liked them--all but the ladies' predilection for ostrich -boa-draped hats. To provide an alternative, she opened a millinery boutique in Deauville,won enough acclaim to set up shop in Paris in 1914.
She started with several hats and "one dress, but a tasteful dress," added sweaters, and within five years had made Maison Chanel a fashion house to reckon with. Coco introduced the tricot sailor frock and the pullover sweater, unearthed wool jersey from its longtime service as underwear fabric and put it to use in soft, clinging dresses. She ushered in gypsy skirts, embroidered silk blouses and accompanying shawls. Even then, Chanel clothes were as high-priced as any Paris couturier's: but only Chanel delighted in having her styles copied--and made accessible at low cost to millions.

"There is time for work. And time for love." said Coco Chanel. "That leaves no other time." In the '20s, Chanel filled her off-hours with Arthur ("Boy") Capel, a wealthy English polo player whose lavish gifts of jewels served as the keystones of Coco's astonishing collection, and whose blazer--lent to the designer on a chilly day at the polo grounds--became the source of her famous box jacket. From the Duke of Westminster, Chanel's most renowned amour, came more jewels: these she had copied, setting off the costume-jewelry vogue. With a personal fortune rumored by then to be close to $15 million--most of it the result of the pungent success of Chanel No. 5 --the designer calculated that she had little to gain, and quite a name to lose, from marriage to the Duke. So she finally turned him down, explaining with characteristic bluntness. "There are a lot of duchesses, but only One Coco Chanel."

Cool Reception. In 1938, with the war coming on and the Italian designer Schiaparelli moving in on the fashion front, Chanel retired. For the next 15 years, she shuttled between Vichy and Switzerland returning to reopen her Paris salon in 1954 only to boost lagging perfume sales. Her jersey-and-tweed suits won a cool reception from the press, but soon nearly every knockoff house was competing to turn out the closest replica. Chanel had long since refused to join the cabal designers who tried to prevent style piracy. "I am not an artist," she insisted. "I want my dresses to go out on the street." Out they went by the thousands, easy to copy, because of the straightforward design, and cheap to produce because the fabric was standard. Even a copy of a Chanel could claim its cachet. Private customers paid $700 for the original: buyers. Buyers intent on knockoffs paid close to $1.500.

In the '60s, Coco sprang no surprises, only refinements on what was her classic look: the short, straight, collarless jacket, the slightly flaring skirt and hems that never budged from knee length. Wearing the broad-brimmed Breton hat that was her hallmark, her scissors hanging from a ribbon around her neck, and her four fingers held firmly together in spite of severe arthritis, she would feel for defects. Working directly on the model, she often picked a apart with the point of her scissors, complaining that it was unwearable.

Her fashion empire at her death brought in over $160 million a year. Here clients constituted a litany of the best-dressed women, not of the year but of the century: Princess Grace, Queen Fabiola, Marlene Dietrich, Ingrid Bergman, all the Rothschilds and most of the Rockefellers. A musical version of her life, enhanced by Katharine Hepburn but stripped of most of the real drama, put Coco on Broadway. She was on a first-name basis with people too famous to need first names: Cocteau, Colette, Diaghilev, Dali, Picasso. Yet at the time of her death, the woman Picasso termed "the most sensible in the world" had a Paris wardrobe consisting of only three outfits.

"If Mademoiselle Chanel has reigned over fashion," mused Jean Cocteau some time ago, "it is not because she cut women's hair married silk and wool, put pearls on sweaters, avoided poetic labels on her perfumes, lowered the waistline or raised the waistline and obliged women to follow her directives; it is because--outside of this gracious and robust dictatorship--there is nothing in her era that she has missed."

In addition, please read "Chanel" the article at Style.com (click on Chanel). After reading the articles. Please watch the shows on the links below. There are about five shows from different seasons of Chanel. It will give you an idea of how the present design director Karl Lagerfeld designs Chanel today, but has maintained the signature characteristics of Chanel.

Question: Please identify five signature pieces, styles, fashion trends Coco Chanel made famous. Identify the times she was coming up in -- the events of the time and how they inspired her looks and some of her signature components in her garments. Why do you think some of her styles are still so prominent in most of todays wardrobes?




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpFw4yZ_ubg


http://video.style.com/watch/throwback-thursdays-with-tim-blanks-karl-s-chanel-and-coco-s-chanel-the-evolution-of-a-fashion-house



http://www.style.com/fashionshows/designerdirectory/CHANEL/video/.


Based on what you read and watched about Channel, give me a paragraph about 1. who she was as a designer, 2. why she stood out for her time, 3. how Lagerfeld has kept her vision present (details) in the Chanel designs today and 4. specific styles and ideas in fashion she is known for (not only clothing as referenced in the article). Answer in a post below and remember to post it. Before posting copy and paste what you wrote on a word page in-case it does not post so you have the assignment. It is due on June 1.




Monday, May 5, 2014

Fashion 80s

September 5, 1993

Piety on Parade: Fashion Seeks Inspiration


As returning vacationers empty their mailboxes of fall department store catalogues and glossy magazines, they may well wonder whether the financially strained fashion industry is seeking salvation from above. The fashionable woman is pictured cloaked in a shroud, shod in high-laced boots worthy of Chaucer's pilgrims and draped in a clutch of crosses.


It isn't just Christianity's symbol that is being fervently appropriated. Runways, fashion advertisements and magazine layouts are rife with what could be the wardrobe at a religious summit meeting: Hare Krishna silks, hooded and rope-belted monks' robes, clerical tunics, the plain garb of the Amish and even the black gabardines of the Hasidic Jews. Nothing, it seems, is sacred.
Fashion designers, always adept at rationalizing their latest fixation, insist that beneath the multidigit price tags and status labels lies a bona fide message of spirituality. An Age of Self-Denial
"We are in a period of being more humble, of spending less, of being more frugal," said Robert Lee Morris, a jewelry designer whose use of the cross helped spark the trend. "These crosses just emphasize that sense of self-denial. Also, there's the AIDS crisis. Literally, we're keeping our pants up, and holding back -- using our will power to control that hedonism we had in the 80's."
Calvin Klein, who pared his models down like initiates to a couture convent, and whose Eternity perfume is closed with a cross-shaped stopper, said: "I look at the robes that are worn in the clergy, or the pristine white shirts that choirboys wear, or the way the Amish dress, and it all comes together for me."


Yet it is not difficult to see why some scholars of both fashion and religion are skeptical. Especially when the messages of religious garb -- uniformity, chastity, regimented social station -- are so markedly at odds with the goals of the modern fashion industry. That industry's real religion is change; religious dress demands adherence to tradition.


"Clothes that look simple and plain seem like a good effort to respond to society in this depression," said Katell le Bourhis, director and conservator in chief at the Musee des Arts de la Mode et du Textile, at the Louvre. "But it's a misconception, because those clothes are the same price as the extravagant ones." Troubled by the Context


While monastic dress may be a more reverential backdrop for the cross than Madonna's ear lobe and torso, theologians fear that its use as a mere fashion accessory will probably have the same profane effect.


"The way to discount a symbol is not to walk away from it and ignore it, but place it in a decorative context rather than religious context," said Margaret R. Miles, the Bussey Professor of Historical Theology at Harvard University Divinity School. "I regret that the religious symbolism is being trivialized and secularized in this way."


But fashion loves to seize movements of the moment, and religion has marched into the forefront. The rituals and rigors of the 90's are all about recovery from 80's excesses, be it an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, or a jail term for insider trading. Monastic dressing is fashion's little penance.
"There is a heightened awareness we all have that religion is surprisingly an issue in people's lives in the latter years of the 20th century," said Richard Martin, curator of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. "What is the most secular time in history turns out to have major religious wars, and minor religious wars that occur even in the city of New York." He added, "Fashion designers are looking at cultural diversity in the same way as sociologists, looking at signs of differentiation, not the melting pot." Not 'a Religious Signature'


The designer Donna Karan pushed crosses with conviction this season, chains slung across the model's bodies and tight chokers protecting pale thin necks. "People said, 'How can a nice Jewish girl do a cross?' " she said. "I don't see it as a religious signature."


She said the spiritual aspect was only "a calming of the clothes, the antithesis of the hardness of power dressing," but added: "There is an imbalance in the world, a lot of anger and fear. So when you sense that, you try to look into your spiritual self."


How does all this soft sell play in a tough economy? The cover of Saks Fifth Avenue's fall catalogue is a somber high-necked dress by Ms. Karan, accessorized with a cross. Rose Marie Bravo, president of the store, said the dress, and several lower-priced copies, have been best sellers.


"But we have gotten a few letters asking, 'What is the significance of the cross?' " she said. "It's not the easiest look for the consumer, and I think it's gone a bit overboard."


The Neiman Marcus fall catalogue contains more than 50 crosses in its 150 pages. "We've gotten no adverse reaction," said Joan Kaner, senior vice president and fashion director, of the catalogue, which has just arrived in homes. "We do not look at this as religious symbolism. Like many of the designers who use crosses on the runway, we feel it fits the monastic clothes." Reflecting Religious Change


As much as the look says about the fashion industry's current cult of spirituality, it also reflects the waning of religious uniforms.


"Many communities have changed what was traditionally called a habit," said Sister Catherine Quinn, co-vicar for religious of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York, who added that those garments were adapted from European widows' wear. She said that, in particular, the women in religious orders took the call for renewal in the 1960's by the Second Vatican Council as an occasion to modernize attire typically imposed by male church leaders.       


The disappearance of the habit from daily life, and the nostalgia that may evoke, could be reasons that designers feel free both to adapt and to sample it.


But even if it lacks the deliberate provocation of Madonna's gyrations with the rosary, and heavy-metal bands' cross-shaped tattoos, drawing from religion can still offend. Which is exactly what happened last spring when the designer Jean-Paul Gaultier accessorized his black wool suits with the trappings of Hasidic Jews. French Vogue recently photographed the clothes in a Hasidic neighborhood in Brooklyn, rekindling the animosity. Unlike the nun's habit, this form of dress is still in daily use in a community whose tensions neither the designer nor the magazine were able to understand.


By its very nature, though, fashion is provocative, since one of its functions is to create sexual allure. The allure of the pure, from baby-doll dresses to waif models, is a recurring theme in fashion collections. 'Nothing Sexier Than a Monk'


The designer John Bartlett created a rope-belted monk's coat last season, which will be carried by Charivari, Bergdorf Goodman and Barney's New York and was recently bought by the actor Robin Williams. And this season Mr. Bartlett went Hare Krishna, with loose orange robes. "Personally speaking, there's nothing sexier than a monk or a Hare Krishna," he said. "They're so inaccessible."
Right now, particularly in the fashion business, representations of sexuality have been hugely complicated by the devastation wrought by AIDS. Somewhere along the way to the fancy-dress benefit, the paradox struck: what fancy dress suits a benefit designed to raise money to fight a cause regularly diminishing the guest list?


"On some level, these garments may be commenting on a sexual environment that for more than a decade has been dominated by the shadow of AIDS," said Nina Felshin, an independent curator and writer. "At the same time, because religious garb tends to be sexually ambiguous, as a fashion statement it continues our popular culture's questioning of fixed gender and of gender roles. As weird as it may sound, I think it is not very far removed from cross-dressing transvestism and androgyny."
There is also the underlying tension of waif-like virginal models being cast into the decadence of a material world. "In 19th-century brothels in Paris, the hookers wore a lot of costumes, and nun costumes and bridal costumes were the two most popular," said Dr. Valerie Steele, who is the author of "Fashion and Eroticism" (Oxford University Press, 1985) and who is working on a book on fettishism and fashion. "It's easy for us to confuse purity of line -- no ruffles -- with spiritual purity. No one is wearing hair shirts. Religiousness has to do with belief and behavior.
"This is not that. It's about a look."


Find some designs, accessories, looks which were inspired by religion as referenced in this article and paste onto one word file page. Email to me with your name on it to print out or print out yourself and bring to class. This is due on May 13th. You can do this at home, in class, but please have by this date to me. Check with me that I received if you send before the 13th. There will be a brief quiz and discussion about the article on the 15th.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Ready To Wear - Calvin Klien

New York Times
STYLE

STYLE; The Calvinist Ethic

Last October, Frances Stein ran into her old friend and boss Calvin Klein in Paris. It had been years since she had seen the designer, who was in the process of selling his company to Phillips-Van Heusen. The next day, they went to see the ''Matisse Picasso'' exhibit at the Grand Palais and afterward went to lunch at a cafe that Stein knew on the Rue de Verneuil. A woman of mercurial chic, who has spent the last 22 years designing accessories for Chanel, Stein first met Klein in the early 1970's when she was an editor at Vogue under Diana Vreeland. Almost a decade earlier, Vreeland, with her usual farsightedness, pushed Stein toward Halston, then a milliner at Bergdorf Goodman. ''Get to know him,'' she said. And Stein did, becoming part of one of fashion's most glamorous circles. Surrounded by his court of Halstonettes, and catering to a new breed of socialite who hung out with rock stars and Pop artists, Halston cultivated an air of superiority that set him apart from the rag-trade ethos of Seventh Avenue, where Klein started out in 1968 as a coat designer. Though friendly with Klein, Halston was privately dismissive of the younger man's talent, once saying, ''I wouldn't know a Calvin Klein from a load of coal.''
In 1976, though, Stein left Vogue to work for Klein. Even then the boyish Klein was a man for the masses. Here was a designer who, when he got on TV to talk about his clothes, didn't try to sound posh or even articulate. He sounded like a guy from the Bronx cruising a girl. ''I like when some girl comes out on the runway,'' he said on a 1979 tape, ''and she looks really sensational, and guys just sit there and die ovvuh huh. Because of the way she looks, because her body, and the way she looks in the clothes. I mean, that really gets me crazy.'' Klein was ''Saturday Night Fever'' without the polyester and the shaking ilium.
Though he may have lacked Halston's fierce talent, and his chops for decadence, Klein had no trouble getting what he wanted from people. ''There's nobody in the whole world more seductive than Calvin when he wants to be seductive,'' Stein says. She spent three years in Klein's studio, with two other design assistants, Zack Carr and John Calcagno, a period both Stein and Calcagno describe as remarkably free and open, when the sensuality that would define Klein's style fully emerged. In fact, it never hit me until now just how good his clothes were in the 70's -- how very nearly a linen skirt or a blouse left casually untied at the neck not only evoked the era's sexual freedom but also transcended the limitations of design.
Given this rich legacy, and the $438 million payoff he was about to receive from Phillips-Van Heusen, Klein must have felt shortchanged by the reaction he got when he and Stein arrived at the cafe and Stein introduced him to the wife of the proprietor as ''my friend Calvin Klein.''
The woman beamed with recognition. ''I wear your underwear, and my son wears your jeans!'' she exclaimed. ''Oh, I know you.''
Stein says: ''Calvin just went green. You know, he is very reserved, but I think he would have preferred that she had said, 'I wear your evening gowns.'''
Klein's fame and his influence on the popular imagination -- from, yes, his underwear and jeans to his Modernist designs and groundbreaking advertisements -- loom large this week as one of the great names in fashion formally steps off the runway. This Tuesday, when the Calvin Klein company presents its spring 2004 collection, Klein will be there, along with Bruce Klatsky, the chief executive of Phillips-Van Heusen, who has already had to live through one embarrassment -- Klein's interruption of a Knicks game in March and his subsequent admission of substance-abuse problems. Though Klein will continue to be involved in the company, Tuesday's kisses and kudos will be showered on the new women's designer at Calvin Klein, 32-year-old Francisco Costa.
In the same way that great ballplayers are remembered hardest for their last trip to bat, the history of fashion is written on the exits. Saint Laurent, whose retirement two years ago provoked front-page tributes and a rush of orders from desolate clients eager to snag a smoking before his couture house closed for good, is said to still go regularly to his office, as if summoned by ghosts. Balenciaga simply closed his doors one day and returned home to Spain, saying nothing. Dior, at least, as the writer Holly Brubach has pointed out, had the good fortune to die while still in his prime, thus sparing himself the fuss but also the prospect of living beyond his time. Klein's exit feels bigger somehow: more reconfiguring, more uncomfortably borne.
Klein's celebrity these last 30 years has not been that of a folk hero, and it's certainly not that of a designer, although he is one. Klein is a pop star. And here is how you can tell. Take that scene in the Paris cafe and transfer it to a mall in Iowa or a hipster pod in the Shibuya district of Tokyo, and the reaction will always be the same: Oh, I know you. By putting his name on two formerly mundane products, underwear and jeans, and surrounding them with an iconography of sex and sensation, Klein blasted out of the small-frame category of fashion. Picking up on the way rappers dressed, he made it cool for white kids to drop their pants. He made it cool for guys to pump up and wax (and long before ''Queer Eye''). And by concentrating all his visual powers on youth, in whatever fix or state of undress it was in, he made America seem cool to the rest of the world.
Paradoxically, Klein -- so good at foreshadowing the power of image and marketing in our time -- did not create an indelible fashion mark, in the way that Giorgio Armani and Saint Laurent did, or even a host of lesser-known talents like Norman Norell and Bonnie Cashin did. To call his clothes ''elegantly modern'' is to describe the style of at least a dozen other designers. But in a way, it wasn't about the clothes. You may not remember the cut of a Calvin Klein jacket, but you will remember Brooke Shields rolling up on her back to talk about her ''Calvins,'' or Kate Moss reclining naked on a sofa in the Obsession ads, or Marky Mark in a crotch grab. In the simplest terms, Klein's genius was to shift the conversation from being one purely about fashion (what I wear) to attitude (how I look). And in doing that, he changed the whole game.
Klein will be 61 in November, and the effects of aging have begun to show. Shortly after the Knicks incident, when a disheveled Klein tried to engage Latrell Sprewell in conversation as Sprewell inbounded the ball, a securities analyst, assessing the damage, told me almost jauntily that a little scandal might be good for Klein's image -- after all, hasn't he been selling controversy in his ads for years? It's true that Klein's ads have sometimes appeared to mock middle-class tastes by presenting images of wasted youth -- none more so than his 1995 ads showing models in compromising positions, which led to accusations of teenage pornography. And it's true that in the 70's Klein built a reputation for sexual adventure that served, if not surpassed, his reputation as a designer. Klein's public record on this subject is not vast, but what he did say, in a 1984 interview in Playboy, is revealing of a young man who sought to test the era's sexual boundaries. ''I stopped at nothing,'' he said. ''I would do anything. I stayed up all night, carried on, lived out fantasies, anything. . . . Anyone I've wanted to be with, I've had.''
But in reality, there is a difference between the liberal, hypercool attitudes expressed in Klein's ads and his own fairly middle-class beliefs. Because Klein is inevitably linked with Halston and Saint Laurent in the social history of the 70's, I asked the writer Bob Colacello, who knew all three, what he remembered about Klein in that period. He says: ''I first met Calvin in the early 70's, when he was married to his first wife, Jayne. They were this cute young couple from Forest Hills. I don't think his personality has changed. Because he hasn't changed, because he's kept up this kind of middle-class core, Calvin has a greater sense of self-survival than either Halston or Yves did. Yves and Halston saw decadence as a good thing. Yves sits and reads Proust all day. And that's not Calvin. Calvin still has those bourgeois values, and they have saved him.''
I would venture that for many people, Klein will also be remembered longer than Saint Laurent or Halston, simply because he is the first designer who entered into their lives in a real way. He was the first American designer to become household-name famous. I don't mean the kind of fame that the older generation of designers, Bill Blass and Oscar de la Renta, found in the 60's by putting their names on sheets and turning up the baronial charm at the auto show. I mean the kind of name-fame, just three syllables, that rolls around in the brain like a marble in the overhead and instantly clicks with millions of people: CAL-vin KLEIN. He was to experience a celebrity not previously enjoyed by designers -- when your name becomes a verb (''Calvinize'') and a cultural tag line (the joke stitched into Michael J. Fox's underwear in the 1985 movie ''Back to the Future''). Abroad, only Giorgio Armani has achieved that kind of status. In this country, there is also Ralph Lauren. But I would argue that Lauren, while building a bigger business than Klein's (twice the size, in fact), does not have Klein's popular reach, because his style is based on a nostalgic ideal of the Establishment -- Newport, the Adirondack camp, the little polo player -- rather than on democratic tastes. Klein's great strength (and also his weakness) is that for the last 35 years, through every social change and gyration, he has been focused on What's New. It has kept him on the edge and on the mental screens of millions of people.
Just as his name was starting to sink in, Klein blitzed the world with his advertising. Beginning in 1980, with his jeans ads featuring a 15-year-old Shields purring the come-on ''Do you know what comes between me and my Calvins? Nothing,'' Klein created some of the most exciting, enduring and sexually explicit ads the public has seen. At one time or another, he has managed to offend Women Against Pornography, the American Family Association, Gloria Steinem and Bill Clinton (who had some issues of his own, but never mind). He has touched on, if not promoted, promiscuity and heroin chic -- while working, as I say, in the ethos of Seventh Avenue, at 205 West 39th Street, where the only concern is making sure that Bloomingdale's gets its stink water and underpants on time. And by hiring and giving creative freedom to photographers like Richard Avedon, Irving Penn, Bruce Weber, Guy Bourdin, Herb Ritts and Steven Meisel, Klein has done more than any other fashion designer, living or dead, to contribute to the canon of photography.
''He just had a hunger, and I always thought that hunger was his great talent,'' Weber says. Weber, whose image of the Olympic pole vaulter Tom Hintnaus in a pair of Y-front Calvin briefs set off a wave of outrage and grins when it appeared in 1983 on a billboard above Times Square, tells a story that says a great deal about how Klein thinks. In the early 80's, Weber got a call from Klein's office asking him to come and see him. When Weber got there, Klein introduced him to a model named Romeo. ''Calvin said, 'And if you don't like him, you won't get the job,''' Weber recalls with a laugh. Fortunately this was no problem: Romeo looked like James Dean. But, as Weber says, ''it was kind of a new way of talking to people -- it was very intimate.''
Klein's ads (thanks in no small part to Avedon's images) spoke with a frankness that thrilled young people and agitated adults. (The three major network affiliates in New York banned some of the ads as sociologists and feminists picked them apart for signs of cultural rot. There was none, of course: only a bottomless pit of money.) Sam Shahid, who was Klein's advertising director in the 80's, recalls some advice the advertising legend Jay Chiat gave Klein: ''He said to Calvin, 'Ralph owns romance. You own sex. Never lose it.'''
Klein has also done a lot to further a minimalist aesthetic in America through his clothes, but even more so through his homes and his Madison Avenue store, which was designed by the British architect John Pawson. (Klein has been working for a couple of years on a new apartment in the Richard Meier building on Perry Street in Manhattan and recently bought a 60-room pile in Southampton.) But he has never approached design with much intellectual depth or gravitas. He grew up with a brother and a sister in the Mosholu Parkway section of the Bronx, a middle-class, predominantly Jewish neighborhood, where his father ran a grocery store. Klein's business partner, Barry Schwartz, was his best friend then and is still his best friend. But while Klein received plenty of encouragement from his parents, and went on frequent trips to Loehmann's, there is little evidence in the record that suggests he read books or went to museums or even, like his neighbor Ralph Lauren, cared about the movies. Early in his career, Klein sought out mentors whose taste he admired and whose approval he needed. One was Nicolas de Gunzburg, who, far more significant (to a hungry young designer) than being an editor at Vogue and the son of a Russian aristocrat, always wore the same style of dark suit, black tie, white shirt and black shoes -- a modern uniform.
In a sense, Klein has been both sponge and squeegee -- absorbing what he needs and scraping off the excess. But it's always a surface accomplishment. John Calcagno told me that for one collection in the 70's they mixed together blueberries and yogurt to get the right color. ''I always remember Calvin saying, 'We've got to have fun,''' Calcagno says, adding: ''I think he loved coming to work every day and looking at beautiful things. He'd say, 'Oh, my God, I've never seen anything so beautiful.''' And, in another story from the 80's, Weber recalled a car trip he and Klein made to visit the reclusive painter Georgia O'Keeffe at her ranch in New Mexico. Klein didn't seem especially moved, Weber says, when he pointed out the place where Ansel Adams made his famous photograph ''Moonrise Over Hernandez,'' but at the ranch Klein connected with O'Keeffe. ''Calvin said to her: 'You're no dummy. You knew it was all right to wear the same thing with the Calder pin,''' Weber says. ''She just laughed. Nobody had ever talked to her that intimately.''
Klein's boyish good looks and his affecting modesty -- qualities that were not commonly associated with the arrogant world of fashion -- endeared him to the mostly female ranks of fashion journalists, who, despite his penchant for copying other designers, were to be helpful to him at the beginning of his career. ''Sometimes people look at a coat I made and scream, 'It's great!' and I wonder, What can be great about designing fashion?'' Klein said in a 1969 interview, as he played on the floor of his Queens apartment with his daughter, Marci, then 2. ''Being a doctor, now that's great.'' The illustrator Joe Eula recalls complaining to Vreeland while she was still at Vogue that Klein was just a copy artist, and why did he have to sketch his clothes for the magazine? ''You've got to go to the backbone!'' Vreeland is said to have bellowed. ''He's America!'' And in a sense, she was right. Klein gave American women what they wanted, just as Blass, who could modify a Givenchy coat with the best of them, had done.
Also in the early 70's, a lot of clothing was cheap and badly made and littered with stuff, like the beach at Coney Island rammed by a garbage scow. So a pretty cotton dress suddenly looked like the height of chic. It wasn't as if Klein was the first designer to do simple clothes in subtle colors, of course; Jacques Tiffeau, John Anthony and Claire McCardell come to mind. But Klein, I think, did something that set him apart, at least in the 70's. He focused on the attitude of the woman -- the way she wore her clothes and what little gesture might tell a man she was interested or to get lost. Today this notion has reached a kind of cynical crescendo in the age of Tom Ford and John Galliano -- everybody's got attitude! -- but at the dawn of disco and women's lib, it was a new thing, and Klein captured its first glimmer, in mist-gray pajama pants with a keyhole top winking open over a mahogany-brown bra. Then, to back everything up, he hired print models for his shows rather than the usual runway creepers -- new girls like Patti Hansen and Lisa Taylor, who were already becoming stars because of the photographers.
But if there is a ding in Klein's career, a hollowness, it is that in focusing relentlessly on the new, and often using other designers' work as a graft, he has left few distinguishing marks of his own. One quality of a great designer (and even a few mediocre designers) is that you can apprehend in a second what they stand for: Dior (belle époque romance), Saint Laurent (a sharp shoulder), Armani (the unconstructed jacket), Norell (sequined mermaids). But with Klein, you can't do that. There are only tracery adjectives: ''pure,'' ''clean,'' ''unfussy.''
Critics in the 90's often complained that Klein's clothes looked derivative, first of Armani, then Helmut Lang and Miuccia Prada. Former assistants told me of racks of clothes, by Armani and others, being brought into the studio for sampling, and a former associate, who worked with Klein on his men's wear license, described an episode in which Klein, facing a deadline and apparently at a loss for ideas, sent an assistant out to Banana Republic to buy a pair of cargo pants. Klein's need to be relevant and, at the same time, to run a business built largely on jeans and underwear, no doubt put him under extreme pressure. But it also led to almost comical situations. One day, while walking down Fifth Avenue across from Bergdorf Goodman, Armani noticed that the store had given him the windows. Surprised that he hadn't been informed of this honor, he bobbed over for a closer look. The clothes were Klein's.
A retailing chief who has followed Klein's career for 20 years told me: ''He's the guy who created something with the jeans, who exploded the business among a generation of people. But there's a sense of 'Who's Calvin?' When you boil down what he's done, it's the lowest common denominator -- jeans, fragrance and underwear. But above that, everything's boiled away.''
Really? It seems to me that if Saint Laurent is the battlefield upon which a generation of great fashion was born, Klein is the sky arching over it. It is a bigger view, modern in its expansiveness, and not as complicated or bloody. For what Klein perceived, consciously or not, was that people would be satisfied with the vapor -- a trail of sex, a bit of glamour -- while they found their own way through fashion. In that, there is permanence enough.

Below are CK comercials from the 1990s to 2011. Based on what you have read and what you are about to watch, Klein have a reputation and look he is known for. 1. It is casual, sophisticated, couture? 2. Identify the focus of Klein's campaigns? 3. Overall, summarize what has inspired Klein in his design: his background, where he grew up and some of the prominent garments, ads and personality flaws he is not only known for but have made him a household name in fashion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wB0LK8ro0c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZxbHkt4mog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyAMJ-QvuUU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK2VZgJ4AoM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_1QLYxiDj4&feature=related

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Defining style: Sophisticated

 
Vintage Chanel (Left); Chanel 100 years later (Right)


Chanel No. I
Just her name was enough to define a pair of shoes, a hat, a pocketbook, a suit, perfume, jewelry-an entire look. It conveyed prestige, quality, impeccable taste and unmistakable style. It was a sign of excellence. Coco Chanel had no patience and too much talent, for anything less. By her death last week at 87, the French couturiere had long since established herself as the 20th century's single most important arbiter of fashion.
Her innovations were basic to the wardrobes of generations of women: jersey suits and dresses, the draped turban, the chemise, pleated skirts, the jumper, turtleneck sweaters, the cardigan suit, the blazer, the little black dress, the sling pump, strapless dresses, the trench coat. Sometimes, the determining factor was practicality: Chanel wore bell-bottom trousers in Venice, the better to climb in and out of gondolas and started the pants revolution. Sometimes, it was purely accidental: after singeing her hair, she cut it off completely, made an appearance at the Paris Opéra, and started the craze for bobbed hair. But always, a Chanel idea commanded respect.
Ostrich-Boa Hats. Born outside Paris in 1883, Gabrielle Bonheur Chanel (never called anything but Coco for "Little Pet") was orphaned at six and raised in the desolate province of Auvergne by two aunts. From them, she learned that little girls should sew, sit up straight and speak politely; for sewing, a skill that forever eluded her, Coco substituted horseback riding. From Etienne Balsan, a millionaire cavalry officer who brought her to Paris at 16, Coco acquired the habits and tastes of the wealthy. She liked them--all but the ladies' predilection for ostrich -boa-draped hats. To provide an alternative, she opened a millinery boutique in Deauville,won enough acclaim to set up shop in Paris in 1914.
She started with several hats and "one dress, but a tasteful dress," added sweaters, and within five years had made Maison Chanel a fashion house to reckon with. Coco introduced the tricot sailor frock and the pullover sweater, unearthed wool jersey from its longtime service as underwear fabric and put it to use in soft, clinging dresses. She ushered in gypsy skirts, embroidered silk blouses and accompanying shawls. Even then, Chanel clothes were as high-priced as any Paris couturier's: but only Chanel delighted in having her styles copied--and made accessible at low cost to millions.

"There is time for work. And time for love." said Coco Chanel. "That leaves no other time." In the '20s, Chanel filled her off-hours with Arthur ("Boy") Capel, a wealthy English polo player whose lavish gifts of jewels served as the keystones of Coco's astonishing collection, and whose blazer--lent to the designer on a chilly day at the polo grounds--became the source of her famous box jacket. From the Duke of Westminster, Chanel's most renowned amour, came more jewels: these she had copied, setting off the costume-jewelry vogue. With a personal fortune rumored by then to be close to $15 million--most of it the result of the pungent success of Chanel No. 5 --the designer calculated that she had little to gain, and quite a name to lose, from marriage to the Duke. So she finally turned him down, explaining with characteristic bluntness. "There are a lot of duchesses, but only One Coco Chanel."

Cool Reception. In 1938, with the war coming on and the Italian designer Schiaparelli moving in on the fashion front, Chanel retired. For the next 15 years, she shuttled between Vichy and Switzerland returning to reopen her Paris salon in 1954 only to boost lagging perfume sales. Her jersey-and-tweed suits won a cool reception from the press, but soon nearly every knockoff house was competing to turn out the closest replica. Chanel had long since refused to join the cabal designers who tried to prevent style piracy. "I am not an artist," she insisted. "I want my dresses to go out on the street." Out they went by the thousands, easy to copy, because of the straightforward design, and cheap to produce because the fabric was standard. Even a copy of a Chanel could claim its cachet. Private customers paid $700 for the original: buyers. Buyers intent on knockoffs paid close to $1.500.

In the '60s, Coco sprang no surprises, only refinements on what was her classic look: the short, straight, collarless jacket, the slightly flaring skirt and hems that never budged from knee length. Wearing the broad-brimmed Breton hat that was her hallmark, her scissors hanging from a ribbon around her neck, and her four fingers held firmly together in spite of severe arthritis, she would feel for defects. Working directly on the model, she often picked a apart with the point of her scissors, complaining that it was unwearable.

Her fashion empire at her death brought in over $160 million a year. Here clients constituted a litany of the best-dressed women, not of the year but of the century: Princess Grace, Queen Fabiola, Marlene Dietrich, Ingrid Bergman, all the Rothschilds and most of the Rockefellers. A musical version of her life, enhanced by Katharine Hepburn but stripped of most of the real drama, put Coco on Broadway. She was on a first-name basis with people too famous to need first names: Cocteau, Colette, Diaghilev, Dali, Picasso. Yet at the time of her death, the woman Picasso termed "the most sensible in the world" had a Paris wardrobe consisting of only three outfits.

"If Mademoiselle Chanel has reigned over fashion," mused Jean Cocteau some time ago, "it is not because she cut women's hair married silk and wool, put pearls on sweaters, avoided poetic labels on her perfumes, lowered the waistline or raised the waistline and obliged women to follow her directives; it is because--outside of this gracious and robust dictatorship--there is nothing in her era that she has missed."

In addition, please read "Chanel" the article at Style.com (click on Chanel). After reading the articles. Please watch the shows on the links below. There are about five shows from different seasons of Chanel. It will give you an idea of how the present design director Karl Lagerfeld designs Chanel today, but has maintained the signature characteristis of Chanel.

Question: Please identify five signature pieces, styles, fashion trends Coco Chanel made famous. Identify the times she was coming up in -- the events of the time and how they inspired her looks and some of her signature components in her garments. Why do you think some of her styles are still so prominent in most of todays wardrobes?

http://www.style.com/fashionshows/designerdirectory/CHANEL/video/.

Thursday, February 7, 2013

New York Times
STYLE

STYLE; The Calvinist Ethic

Last October, Frances Stein ran into her old friend and boss Calvin Klein in Paris. It had been years since she had seen the designer, who was in the process of selling his company to Phillips-Van Heusen. The next day, they went to see the ''Matisse Picasso'' exhibit at the Grand Palais and afterward went to lunch at a cafe that Stein knew on the Rue de Verneuil. A woman of mercurial chic, who has spent the last 22 years designing accessories for Chanel, Stein first met Klein in the early 1970's when she was an editor at Vogue under Diana Vreeland. Almost a decade earlier, Vreeland, with her usual farsightedness, pushed Stein toward Halston, then a milliner at Bergdorf Goodman. ''Get to know him,'' she said. And Stein did, becoming part of one of fashion's most glamorous circles. Surrounded by his court of Halstonettes, and catering to a new breed of socialite who hung out with rock stars and Pop artists, Halston cultivated an air of superiority that set him apart from the rag-trade ethos of Seventh Avenue, where Klein started out in 1968 as a coat designer. Though friendly with Klein, Halston was privately dismissive of the younger man's talent, once saying, ''I wouldn't know a Calvin Klein from a load of coal.''
In 1976, though, Stein left Vogue to work for Klein. Even then the boyish Klein was a man for the masses. Here was a designer who, when he got on TV to talk about his clothes, didn't try to sound posh or even articulate. He sounded like a guy from the Bronx cruising a girl. ''I like when some girl comes out on the runway,'' he said on a 1979 tape, ''and she looks really sensational, and guys just sit there and die ovvuh huh. Because of the way she looks, because her body, and the way she looks in the clothes. I mean, that really gets me crazy.'' Klein was ''Saturday Night Fever'' without the polyester and the shaking ilium.
Though he may have lacked Halston's fierce talent, and his chops for decadence, Klein had no trouble getting what he wanted from people. ''There's nobody in the whole world more seductive than Calvin when he wants to be seductive,'' Stein says. She spent three years in Klein's studio, with two other design assistants, Zack Carr and John Calcagno, a period both Stein and Calcagno describe as remarkably free and open, when the sensuality that would define Klein's style fully emerged. In fact, it never hit me until now just how good his clothes were in the 70's -- how very nearly a linen skirt or a blouse left casually untied at the neck not only evoked the era's sexual freedom but also transcended the limitations of design.
Given this rich legacy, and the $438 million payoff he was about to receive from Phillips-Van Heusen, Klein must have felt shortchanged by the reaction he got when he and Stein arrived at the cafe and Stein introduced him to the wife of the proprietor as ''my friend Calvin Klein.''
The woman beamed with recognition. ''I wear your underwear, and my son wears your jeans!'' she exclaimed. ''Oh, I know you.''
Stein says: ''Calvin just went green. You know, he is very reserved, but I think he would have preferred that she had said, 'I wear your evening gowns.'''
Klein's fame and his influence on the popular imagination -- from, yes, his underwear and jeans to his Modernist designs and groundbreaking advertisements -- loom large this week as one of the great names in fashion formally steps off the runway. This Tuesday, when the Calvin Klein company presents its spring 2004 collection, Klein will be there, along with Bruce Klatsky, the chief executive of Phillips-Van Heusen, who has already had to live through one embarrassment -- Klein's interruption of a Knicks game in March and his subsequent admission of substance-abuse problems. Though Klein will continue to be involved in the company, Tuesday's kisses and kudos will be showered on the new women's designer at Calvin Klein, 32-year-old Francisco Costa.
In the same way that great ballplayers are remembered hardest for their last trip to bat, the history of fashion is written on the exits. Saint Laurent, whose retirement two years ago provoked front-page tributes and a rush of orders from desolate clients eager to snag a smoking before his couture house closed for good, is said to still go regularly to his office, as if summoned by ghosts. Balenciaga simply closed his doors one day and returned home to Spain, saying nothing. Dior, at least, as the writer Holly Brubach has pointed out, had the good fortune to die while still in his prime, thus sparing himself the fuss but also the prospect of living beyond his time. Klein's exit feels bigger somehow: more reconfiguring, more uncomfortably borne.
Klein's celebrity these last 30 years has not been that of a folk hero, and it's certainly not that of a designer, although he is one. Klein is a pop star. And here is how you can tell. Take that scene in the Paris cafe and transfer it to a mall in Iowa or a hipster pod in the Shibuya district of Tokyo, and the reaction will always be the same: Oh, I know you. By putting his name on two formerly mundane products, underwear and jeans, and surrounding them with an iconography of sex and sensation, Klein blasted out of the small-frame category of fashion. Picking up on the way rappers dressed, he made it cool for white kids to drop their pants. He made it cool for guys to pump up and wax (and long before ''Queer Eye''). And by concentrating all his visual powers on youth, in whatever fix or state of undress it was in, he made America seem cool to the rest of the world.
Paradoxically, Klein -- so good at foreshadowing the power of image and marketing in our time -- did not create an indelible fashion mark, in the way that Giorgio Armani and Saint Laurent did, or even a host of lesser-known talents like Norman Norell and Bonnie Cashin did. To call his clothes ''elegantly modern'' is to describe the style of at least a dozen other designers. But in a way, it wasn't about the clothes. You may not remember the cut of a Calvin Klein jacket, but you will remember Brooke Shields rolling up on her back to talk about her ''Calvins,'' or Kate Moss reclining naked on a sofa in the Obsession ads, or Marky Mark in a crotch grab. In the simplest terms, Klein's genius was to shift the conversation from being one purely about fashion (what I wear) to attitude (how I look). And in doing that, he changed the whole game.
Klein will be 61 in November, and the effects of aging have begun to show. Shortly after the Knicks incident, when a disheveled Klein tried to engage Latrell Sprewell in conversation as Sprewell inbounded the ball, a securities analyst, assessing the damage, told me almost jauntily that a little scandal might be good for Klein's image -- after all, hasn't he been selling controversy in his ads for years? It's true that Klein's ads have sometimes appeared to mock middle-class tastes by presenting images of wasted youth -- none more so than his 1995 ads showing models in compromising positions, which led to accusations of teenage pornography. And it's true that in the 70's Klein built a reputation for sexual adventure that served, if not surpassed, his reputation as a designer. Klein's public record on this subject is not vast, but what he did say, in a 1984 interview in Playboy, is revealing of a young man who sought to test the era's sexual boundaries. ''I stopped at nothing,'' he said. ''I would do anything. I stayed up all night, carried on, lived out fantasies, anything. . . . Anyone I've wanted to be with, I've had.''
But in reality, there is a difference between the liberal, hypercool attitudes expressed in Klein's ads and his own fairly middle-class beliefs. Because Klein is inevitably linked with Halston and Saint Laurent in the social history of the 70's, I asked the writer Bob Colacello, who knew all three, what he remembered about Klein in that period. He says: ''I first met Calvin in the early 70's, when he was married to his first wife, Jayne. They were this cute young couple from Forest Hills. I don't think his personality has changed. Because he hasn't changed, because he's kept up this kind of middle-class core, Calvin has a greater sense of self-survival than either Halston or Yves did. Yves and Halston saw decadence as a good thing. Yves sits and reads Proust all day. And that's not Calvin. Calvin still has those bourgeois values, and they have saved him.''
I would venture that for many people, Klein will also be remembered longer than Saint Laurent or Halston, simply because he is the first designer who entered into their lives in a real way. He was the first American designer to become household-name famous. I don't mean the kind of fame that the older generation of designers, Bill Blass and Oscar de la Renta, found in the 60's by putting their names on sheets and turning up the baronial charm at the auto show. I mean the kind of name-fame, just three syllables, that rolls around in the brain like a marble in the overhead and instantly clicks with millions of people: CAL-vin KLEIN. He was to experience a celebrity not previously enjoyed by designers -- when your name becomes a verb (''Calvinize'') and a cultural tag line (the joke stitched into Michael J. Fox's underwear in the 1985 movie ''Back to the Future''). Abroad, only Giorgio Armani has achieved that kind of status. In this country, there is also Ralph Lauren. But I would argue that Lauren, while building a bigger business than Klein's (twice the size, in fact), does not have Klein's popular reach, because his style is based on a nostalgic ideal of the Establishment -- Newport, the Adirondack camp, the little polo player -- rather than on democratic tastes. Klein's great strength (and also his weakness) is that for the last 35 years, through every social change and gyration, he has been focused on What's New. It has kept him on the edge and on the mental screens of millions of people.
Just as his name was starting to sink in, Klein blitzed the world with his advertising. Beginning in 1980, with his jeans ads featuring a 15-year-old Shields purring the come-on ''Do you know what comes between me and my Calvins? Nothing,'' Klein created some of the most exciting, enduring and sexually explicit ads the public has seen. At one time or another, he has managed to offend Women Against Pornography, the American Family Association, Gloria Steinem and Bill Clinton (who had some issues of his own, but never mind). He has touched on, if not promoted, promiscuity and heroin chic -- while working, as I say, in the ethos of Seventh Avenue, at 205 West 39th Street, where the only concern is making sure that Bloomingdale's gets its stink water and underpants on time. And by hiring and giving creative freedom to photographers like Richard Avedon, Irving Penn, Bruce Weber, Guy Bourdin, Herb Ritts and Steven Meisel, Klein has done more than any other fashion designer, living or dead, to contribute to the canon of photography.
''He just had a hunger, and I always thought that hunger was his great talent,'' Weber says. Weber, whose image of the Olympic pole vaulter Tom Hintnaus in a pair of Y-front Calvin briefs set off a wave of outrage and grins when it appeared in 1983 on a billboard above Times Square, tells a story that says a great deal about how Klein thinks. In the early 80's, Weber got a call from Klein's office asking him to come and see him. When Weber got there, Klein introduced him to a model named Romeo. ''Calvin said, 'And if you don't like him, you won't get the job,''' Weber recalls with a laugh. Fortunately this was no problem: Romeo looked like James Dean. But, as Weber says, ''it was kind of a new way of talking to people -- it was very intimate.''
Klein's ads (thanks in no small part to Avedon's images) spoke with a frankness that thrilled young people and agitated adults. (The three major network affiliates in New York banned some of the ads as sociologists and feminists picked them apart for signs of cultural rot. There was none, of course: only a bottomless pit of money.) Sam Shahid, who was Klein's advertising director in the 80's, recalls some advice the advertising legend Jay Chiat gave Klein: ''He said to Calvin, 'Ralph owns romance. You own sex. Never lose it.'''
Klein has also done a lot to further a minimalist aesthetic in America through his clothes, but even more so through his homes and his Madison Avenue store, which was designed by the British architect John Pawson. (Klein has been working for a couple of years on a new apartment in the Richard Meier building on Perry Street in Manhattan and recently bought a 60-room pile in Southampton.) But he has never approached design with much intellectual depth or gravitas. He grew up with a brother and a sister in the Mosholu Parkway section of the Bronx, a middle-class, predominantly Jewish neighborhood, where his father ran a grocery store. Klein's business partner, Barry Schwartz, was his best friend then and is still his best friend. But while Klein received plenty of encouragement from his parents, and went on frequent trips to Loehmann's, there is little evidence in the record that suggests he read books or went to museums or even, like his neighbor Ralph Lauren, cared about the movies. Early in his career, Klein sought out mentors whose taste he admired and whose approval he needed. One was Nicolas de Gunzburg, who, far more significant (to a hungry young designer) than being an editor at Vogue and the son of a Russian aristocrat, always wore the same style of dark suit, black tie, white shirt and black shoes -- a modern uniform.
In a sense, Klein has been both sponge and squeegee -- absorbing what he needs and scraping off the excess. But it's always a surface accomplishment. John Calcagno told me that for one collection in the 70's they mixed together blueberries and yogurt to get the right color. ''I always remember Calvin saying, 'We've got to have fun,''' Calcagno says, adding: ''I think he loved coming to work every day and looking at beautiful things. He'd say, 'Oh, my God, I've never seen anything so beautiful.''' And, in another story from the 80's, Weber recalled a car trip he and Klein made to visit the reclusive painter Georgia O'Keeffe at her ranch in New Mexico. Klein didn't seem especially moved, Weber says, when he pointed out the place where Ansel Adams made his famous photograph ''Moonrise Over Hernandez,'' but at the ranch Klein connected with O'Keeffe. ''Calvin said to her: 'You're no dummy. You knew it was all right to wear the same thing with the Calder pin,''' Weber says. ''She just laughed. Nobody had ever talked to her that intimately.''
Klein's boyish good looks and his affecting modesty -- qualities that were not commonly associated with the arrogant world of fashion -- endeared him to the mostly female ranks of fashion journalists, who, despite his penchant for copying other designers, were to be helpful to him at the beginning of his career. ''Sometimes people look at a coat I made and scream, 'It's great!' and I wonder, What can be great about designing fashion?'' Klein said in a 1969 interview, as he played on the floor of his Queens apartment with his daughter, Marci, then 2. ''Being a doctor, now that's great.'' The illustrator Joe Eula recalls complaining to Vreeland while she was still at Vogue that Klein was just a copy artist, and why did he have to sketch his clothes for the magazine? ''You've got to go to the backbone!'' Vreeland is said to have bellowed. ''He's America!'' And in a sense, she was right. Klein gave American women what they wanted, just as Blass, who could modify a Givenchy coat with the best of them, had done.
Also in the early 70's, a lot of clothing was cheap and badly made and littered with stuff, like the beach at Coney Island rammed by a garbage scow. So a pretty cotton dress suddenly looked like the height of chic. It wasn't as if Klein was the first designer to do simple clothes in subtle colors, of course; Jacques Tiffeau, John Anthony and Claire McCardell come to mind. But Klein, I think, did something that set him apart, at least in the 70's. He focused on the attitude of the woman -- the way she wore her clothes and what little gesture might tell a man she was interested or to get lost. Today this notion has reached a kind of cynical crescendo in the age of Tom Ford and John Galliano -- everybody's got attitude! -- but at the dawn of disco and women's lib, it was a new thing, and Klein captured its first glimmer, in mist-gray pajama pants with a keyhole top winking open over a mahogany-brown bra. Then, to back everything up, he hired print models for his shows rather than the usual runway creepers -- new girls like Patti Hansen and Lisa Taylor, who were already becoming stars because of the photographers.
But if there is a ding in Klein's career, a hollowness, it is that in focusing relentlessly on the new, and often using other designers' work as a graft, he has left few distinguishing marks of his own. One quality of a great designer (and even a few mediocre designers) is that you can apprehend in a second what they stand for: Dior (belle époque romance), Saint Laurent (a sharp shoulder), Armani (the unconstructed jacket), Norell (sequined mermaids). But with Klein, you can't do that. There are only tracery adjectives: ''pure,'' ''clean,'' ''unfussy.''
Critics in the 90's often complained that Klein's clothes looked derivative, first of Armani, then Helmut Lang and Miuccia Prada. Former assistants told me of racks of clothes, by Armani and others, being brought into the studio for sampling, and a former associate, who worked with Klein on his men's wear license, described an episode in which Klein, facing a deadline and apparently at a loss for ideas, sent an assistant out to Banana Republic to buy a pair of cargo pants. Klein's need to be relevant and, at the same time, to run a business built largely on jeans and underwear, no doubt put him under extreme pressure. But it also led to almost comical situations. One day, while walking down Fifth Avenue across from Bergdorf Goodman, Armani noticed that the store had given him the windows. Surprised that he hadn't been informed of this honor, he bobbed over for a closer look. The clothes were Klein's.
A retailing chief who has followed Klein's career for 20 years told me: ''He's the guy who created something with the jeans, who exploded the business among a generation of people. But there's a sense of 'Who's Calvin?' When you boil down what he's done, it's the lowest common denominator -- jeans, fragrance and underwear. But above that, everything's boiled away.''
Really? It seems to me that if Saint Laurent is the battlefield upon which a generation of great fashion was born, Klein is the sky arching over it. It is a bigger view, modern in its expansiveness, and not as complicated or bloody. For what Klein perceived, consciously or not, was that people would be satisfied with the vapor -- a trail of sex, a bit of glamour -- while they found their own way through fashion. In that, there is permanence enough.

Below are CK comercials from the 1990s to 2011. Based on what you have read and what you are about to watch, Klein have a reputation and look he is known for. 1. It is casual, sophisticated, couture? 2. Identify the focus of Klein's campaigns? 3. Overall, summarize what has inspired Klein in his design: his background, where he grew up and some of the prominent garments, ads and personality flaws he is not only known for but have made him a household name in fashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyAMJ-QvuUU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YK2VZgJ4AoM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZxbHkt4mog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_1QLYxiDj4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wB0LK8ro0c

Friday, October 26, 2012

For Designers, Inspiration From the 80's


PARIS, March 14— It now seems clear that designers' fascination with the 1980's is likely to take fashion right up to the year 2000. Designers' other pursuit these days is artisanal work, a trend forecasters link to turn-of-the-century nostalgia.
The twin interests are producing a peculiar but interesting marriage on runways: hard-edge 80's style like perforated leather, big shoulders and stilettos with earthbound leitmotifs like hand knitting, crochet and smocking.
That Veronique Leroy, Martine Sitbon and Lamine Kouyate for Xuly-Bet all dipped into this well but came up with different ideas indicates that for better or worse, we will probably see the 1980's as a reference for many seasons to come.
Most designers have just begun exploring the previous decade, but Ms. Leroy was ahead with her Claude Montana-style suits last season and nouveaux-riches touches a year ago. Why this talented young designer is not more heralded is a mystery. Her clothes are not available in the United States but her prescience and wit mark her as a potential leader of her generation.
One wonders whether Ms. Leroy and Ms. Sitbon -- who also turns out consistently strong collections without much fanfare -- would receive more attention if they were men. Of the 96 designers on the Paris schedule, slightly more than 20 are women. On both sides of the Atlantic, female designers have complained that the industry's star-making machinery gives short shrift to women. Both Myriam Schaefer, the designer for Nina Ricci who once worked for Jean-Paul Gaultier, and the American designer Anna Sui have expressed concern about a fashion scale seemingly tipped toward men.
The curious situation has thankfully not dimmed Ms. Leroy's or Ms. Sitbon's creativity. Ms. Leroy continued her 80's odyssey with tan mini-skirted suits trimmed in white, their strong, femininely curved shoulders and nipped waists partly obscuring the sexy white shirred halters underneath.
She offered up shiny, flirty disco dresses in bright cobalt or red, and threw cardigans and V-neck sweaters over sleek jewel-colored sateen pants suits and shirtdresses.
While Ms. Leroy reveled in 80's high style, Ms. Sitbon used cutwork, devore, flocking and perforations to produce a beautiful collection that smoothly pointed the way from fashion austerity to baroque-free glamour.
Her perforated leathers, paired with black stilettos and ''Flashdance''-style leg warmers, suggested the dawn of the polite punk. Openwork on delicate chiffon was finished prettily with velvet. A weathered leather jacket went over a soft gold-flecked satin skirt; a fitted chinchilla-pattern golf jacket was worn over a white pencil skirt with black flocking and a spectacular semi-transparent evening dress had cutwork that yielded to an arranged mess of weblike beaded straps.
Ms. Sitbon's show glided from edgy fashion to a new softness. In contrast, Mr. Kouyate's show for his Xuly-Bet label was a frenetically paced romp for those who yearn for the days when fashion was served hot: scads of groupies, show time at 10 P.M., an eclectic mix of the certifiably cool -- Seal, the English designer Oswald Boatman and the photographer Juergen Teller -- some groovy design ideas and clothes that gave one the giddy feeling that they may have just been pulled from a sewing machine backstage.
Mr. Kouyate is the kind of iconoclast who can effortlessly create such a demi-happening. Pert and cheeky, the collection built from a base of Mr. Kouyate's recognizable polyester bodywear with red serge stitching. Over these he added fancifully colored fake-fur chubbies and coats.
Mr. Kouyate has made an art of recycling clothes or making them appear to be such and his knitted Afghan dresses were the height of vintage chic, some worn separately and others as a second layer over clashing brightly colored body stockings. And he paired shiny metallic mini-skirts or asymmetric sequined ones with halters and furry boleros, the kind of get-up one might expect to see on leggy kids hitting the newest rave clubs. Much of Mr. Kouyate's work seems well suited to young nightclubbers.
Ocimar Versolato, too, has an innate understanding of what women want for their nightlife but his evening dresses are of an entirely different sort. They're for grown-ups who pose, not dance.
Newest among Mr. Versolato's plainly sumptuous creations were his smocked gowns and smocked mini-dress. A short black viscose super-mini -- it might have doubled as a tunic -- was given a band of smocking around the hem. A plum chiffon gown done entirely in smocking brought to mind the Grecian columns of Mme. Gres, with its lyrical cut, asymmetric neckline and slim bell sleeves.
What Mr. Versolato accomplished with his smocked dresses was an important softening of his hard-edged, sexy evening clothes. The femme fatale remains but he has proven that he can also expand his range to serve women who desire a less aggressive approach to feminine eveningwear.
Below are three videos by designers and their inspirations. Please take note to their mood boards, fabrics, drawings and how they all come together. After you watch the video answer the question below and complete the task for the deadline of November 13th - - our first class after our two day break. Please be prepared to discuss the blog and your task.




1. Question: Please answer on the blog and post:
A. What styles which are trendy right now do you think were inspired by the 80s (Name specific garments in our wardrobes today)?  B. Decribe where each designer in each of the fashion videos got their personal inspiration, they all reference how they begin, what they narrow in on. . .include it in your answer.

2. Task
A. Fill one page of your idea book with pictures of those garments from today, which show inspiration of the 80's based on what was referenced in the article.
B. Find 1 object in your house (ex: tooth brush, boby pin, kitchen utensil. . .) which could be used as inspiration for a design. Do not bring in something that does not already show promise - - that does not immediately get the juices flowing in your creativity! Please bring to class on November 13th.