Lately I’ve been doing a lot of thinking. The overexposure to purely scientific knowledge has rapidly grown a need inside me for purely philosophical questions - from myself, answered by myself. You see, there’s an exquisite confusion in trying to find answers in a non-practical way, that I can’t help but allow myself to give into.
The first stimulus for this brainstorm was Eau de Style’s new look & more precise perspective. The affair of fashion & art has always been triggering me, but things have got to start from somewhere to get in line. And I just didn’t know where the hell this starting point was.
The answer came the oher night while I was scrolling down the I Love You magazine site & Ride of the Valkyries was on. Literally, it was a Holy-Dove-shits-on-my-head kinda moment when I finished an interview of the magazine with artist Ayse Erkmen, titled:
“How deep should the artist penetrate the work with their identity — How important is the artist?”
Ayse Erkmen talked about the many egos that are required for an art piece to be perfect, about the importance of curators, about the art-fashion interweaving & of course her own works.
It was a real surprise to know that she, as a creator, is always open to suggestions & instructions from others in order for her work to be a perfect one, and therefore pleasing to the eyes of its viewers. Then creative directors popped in my mind. Artists, apparently are not afraid of losing their identity to the ego of a technician or the curator,and the final result ending as a hodgepodge of numerous contributions. But in fashion things work a little bit differently.
You see, designers have to have a signature to put out there for all the world to see. And preserve this signature that made them stand out in this ocean of designers we seem to be floating , for two or three collections per year, every year. That’s a pretty damn hard task you know. But as the restless human beings that we are, we tend to answer this calling of re-defining ourselves every now & then, and if we’re privilleged enough, we can have the luxury of doing so through our work. That’s the point where, I conjecture, there is a notable turn in designers’ signature and when the fashion world is torn. There have been reviews that even question the designer’s right to do so, therefore creating this dillema in my -and your- mind if it’s a matter of a good thing or a bad thing to shake things up when it comes to branding oneself through their collections. The flexibility of re-building the image might actually be one of the dividing lines between designers & artists.
One thought that crossed my mind at this point was the lack of a collection’s curator. The designer has a dual nature of both the creator and the curator at the same time. No outter egos are welcomed, the spotlight is always on one & only person. The dominant ego here covers all the others & the final result is affected by no one else. So Erkmen’s point that “the curator is someone that can make the work perfect" is invalid in this world. Now if it would be a better outcome with a curator’s help, is a question that, at least for now, will remain unanswered.
However the depth if identity penetration can be bargained? In the art world, there is time for this debate, since the frequency requirements for a project delivery might not be as demanding as those for collections’ delivery. Thing that makes sense since the "Who you’re wearing” became more important than “What are you wearing”.
Classic case of collection, interrupted.
Full article: http://eaudestyle.tumblr.com/post/43364681938/fashion-interrupted-a-signature-thing-you
