My bio-father always said...my greatest challenge is teaching to you to understand the value of the dollar. What is the value of money? A definition of pro-capitalism debate aside...fashion and gender expression has always been a part of my life but my continued struggle is questioning the value of not the dollar...but the value of fashion design. How do you measure creativity and/or credibility?
I came across this article by The Business Of Fashion entitled The Psychology Of The Designer Bag
I found this article so interesting because it questions why people purchase designer bags and as myself an avid collector and seller of them..makes me question how the bags such as the Chanel 2.55 and Hermes Birkin designed over a 100 years ago have created a brand new economics and social construction which continues to motivate and influence cis-woman of the fashion industry. What does this mean for gender and future genders? Binary and Non-Binary Gender? What do we value, will value, and continue to value?
As this article basically makes the case that the only real function of a designer bag..is to make you feel good, regardless of it’s utility.
Make you feel good. Makes me think whether or not my love for fashion is rooted in misery and depression but that’s another story.
When we think about designer bags, often what comes to mind is it’s value. What makes a designer bag valuable, and how did designer bags become economically valuable? A couple years ago I watched a documentary called Cutie and the Boxer which documented an older artist named Ushio Shinohara and their continued struggle to sell art, making money, and survive as an artist in the 21’st century residing in New York City. There is a scene from the movie where a curator and collector visit Shinohara’s studio looking to purchase a piece of work for the MOMA. Museum of Modern Art. I vividly remember that the rep from MOMA was requesting to see one of his earlier works that was significant to a particular time period of art in New York City. The boxer paintings. In that moment I hard realized this may be the secret to the value of art and possibly design. The value of the art would maybe be not rooted in the quality, in the context, in the function, or even the quantity...but actually rooted in it’s historical and cultural significance of the time period it was produced.
Most people wouldn’t know that the Vuitton family of Louis Vuitton invented stackable luggage in 1854, or Thomas Burberry was actually an engineer for the British government in 1856 inventing waterproof fabric for the military patenting it with the famous tartan or Coco Chanel designing the first hand bag with a chain in the 1920’s minimizing the idea of femininity at time period of plumes and feathers.
Year 2012..were monumental years for myself as a fashion designer because it was at a time in my career where I did not understand the reasoning for particular moments of media success. For the longest time I have never understood why people found value in the dresses I was making or the fashion shows I was producing. My work had not been particularly made well, or made with expensive fabrics but when Gawker and the New York Observer had written about my second show where I had used the V for Vendetta masks on the models, it all made sense to me.
The collection I had done was entitled..
“FALL/WINTER 2012 entitled Hierarchy Of Needs” Here is a statement made on the collection and my rationale for producing the show.
The collection had been planned to appear as a normal fashion show set in the south of France with balloon trees and pluming, draped frocks, but at the last second Adrienne had the models faces covered with Vendetta Masks. This was a clear reference to Occupy Wall Street that had been happening at the time where protesters were living in on the streets of Wall Street protesting the corruption of capitalism. The show garnered the most mainstream media coverage to date where the New York Observer and Gawker Media both had questioned the use of masks in the show. It is always a challenge for a fashion designer to research and design originality but our ability to recognize our privilege to design and produce commentary is much more challenging. How do we change the system in order to improve the lives of people who also have disabilities, people of colour, transgender and non binary youth? Change our priorities. This collection was a perfect example of shifting our attention using graphic and fashion design in order to beginning the process of questioning the existence of fashion and what it has become in the 2010’s. Giving the commentary to someone else instead of speaking for them. Adrienne’s over goal is still yet to be achieved which is; shifting the commentary of gender...how do we use fashion and fashion theory as a tool for producing gender equality and pronoun respect? Fashion will continue to exist but style is dead, trends are dead, our responsibly NOW as fashion designers “should be” to help the INDIVIDUAL transition and become their own trope, their own individual.
Going back to my “How-To-Invent-Value-Realization” it had also occurred to me from years of research that this has happened many times in history. Most people wouldn’t know that the engagement ring didn’t exist until the 1930’s and you can read this article by entitled “How Ad Campaign Invented the Diamond Engagement Ring” by the Atlantic to learn more about it. Spoiler alert..you probably won’t be happy to hear that it was the mining companies that started the engagement ring craze that still exist today. De Beers basically invented the value of diamonds. To take this further, it is crazy to me that Hollywood and the invention of movies and feature films have also made an impact on the value of products...cough cough..Breakfast at Tiffany’s.
Fast forward to 2017 I recently came across this article on Kendall Jenner who was ‘Fashion Icon Of The Decade’..and frankly it makes a lot of sense to me.
I think it’s difficult for others to admit when they are being influenced, and that’s including myself. What I have inherently learned from fashion is that things (products, people, campaigns) that succeed are typically tacit.
Implied without being stated. It makes a lot of sense to me why Kendall Jenner was declared style icon of the decade. If our society still defines beauty based on a colonial and roman standard..the Kardashians have undoubtably made an impact on society, THOUGH it doesn’t make it right...they do impact especially how one presents themselves today.
Looking at the cultural and future significance of Kanye West’s line is an entirely different conversation..but it is clear the infamous family has influenced each other as a whole. I find similarities in Luca Fersko and Kendall because of their {gender binary) youth appeal but also both’s effortlessness in appearance. There is a relate-ability with both of them, in a culture that now strives for simplicity, sexiness, and beauty based upon the constitution of youthfulness. Excusing the unrealistic body standards that the fashion industry continually perpetuates on to youth and society, there is to me still aesthetic value. Kendall Jenner 2010’s approach to appearance is to me not comparable to the decades of 1900’s to 2000’s as there is a removal of tropes, and a focus on function within a 21st century perspective.
Honestly I continue to marvel at how Kendall and her team of stylists, influencers, and business create value. The invention of value, and the invisible traits of the Kardashians being individual fashion designers. When the speedy has been defined as the most iconic bag designed by Louis Vuitton besides it’s creation of the LV luggage trunks..it’s fascinating to me that Kendall Jenner is modernized a top handle bag in 2017 typically considered a style of bag for the older cis-woman.
Just like how we look at an artist or designer’s life as much as their work, by making that distinction we are able to analyze how generations evolve, but also how economics evolves.
If you’re interested you should read this article called “Forget logos and bling: the new status bags are strictly below the radar” by the UK TIMES. It’s really interesting because in predicting the nature of a fashion economics or culture economics..comparing the actions of Kendall Jenner and this new mentality of the no logo bag may possibly provokes us to wonder what do we ultimately value as a society.
As for me? Designing a product isn’t enough anymore, you also have to design a culture, a lifestyle, a trope, ideas that encompass that product.
Going from inventing a new product to designing value, designing cultural and historical significance to go along with that product..is probably more work than I asked for.
Could you let me know when capitalism isn’t a thing anymore? Thanks.
Ps. How do you design or make something that is timeless? F****************CK