Oooooo, I had a juicy conversation with a colleague of mine today. We were on our way up to Los Angeles from San Diego to take measurements for a production she's designing--J and Z & the Zigzag Sea. I've been hired to do the construction on some of the costumes, and this was my opportunity to meet the actors.
Our conversation on the way up was great! I was finally able to articulate something that I hadn't been able to before...
Why don't we view our designer garments like we do a painting? How is it that wearable art is not art until it is relatively impractical and unwearable? Can we have an intelligent debate about the statement a garment makes regarding our culture and humanity?
I was sharing with her a forum I found: The Fashion Spot. There was an old thread on the forums asking everyone if they would purchase designer clothes even if it would never see the light of day, simply for the sake of owning the piece of the collection?
But I've never heard of a person displaying their prize garment on a dress form and showing it off like a sculpture, or a wall painting. I have never heard of anyone debating the design of clothing like they would a Van Gogh or a Monet--"Oh, that was Dior's Blue Period..." I don't hear people talking about clothing's social impact like they do the work of Picasso's Guernica or Jacque Louis-David's Oath of the Horatii.
And why is that?
Why can't clothing make a profound social statement happen in the form of clothing that a person wears down the street? We do it with t-shirt sayings (albeit they're rather flippant most of the time)... Why can't we elevate it to something more significant or relevant? What is it that we can say with our paintings and sculpture that we can't seem to say when clothing is the medium?
Live Life with Relish!