written March 9th, 2009 · 0 comments

An article I read by Cathy Horyn on NYTimes.com made me put the fashion shows of Fall 2009 in perspective. Instead of just saying, ah yes, I like this outfit or not, I needed to look at the fashion collections as art and put them into the  context of the world’s economic situation. This was an interesting experiment. I found that I was more attracted to certain pieces once I realized that the designers were responding to a larger inspiration than beauty and trends (such as the Prada collection). Of course fashion designers are connected to current events and can be real artists at times and not just trendsetters, but this can be easily forgotten.

Some interesting quotes from the article:

“The collections, which ended Monday night … seemed on the whole dismissive of the economic crisis.”

“Such collections suggest that human beings’ relation to luxury won’t change.”

“… in only a few collections did you sense designers responding creatively to the recession, or at least thinking how differently the world might be shaped in the coming years.”

“What Ms. Prada’s remarkable collection offered was something that has been lost to other values — and that is intimacy, real contact with people’s lives. Like other companies here, Prada put on a scaled-down show, but Ms. Prada made the most of it. … Ms. Prada gave equal weight to the practical and the luxurious, though not in that arbitrary high-low, rich-poor way of other designers. The fur dresses looked as plain — well, not as mud — but they certainly weren’t treated in a grand way. And the little half belt was an irrelevant touch that seemed funny. Afterward, Ms. Prada referred to city-girl glamour, but said that “it’s no way to feel alive.” Some women who like their wellies and old tweeds will no doubt agree with her, but it’s more important that the luxury-smothered fashion world sees how a leader breaks away without losing her constituents.”

So I went back and looked at Prada’s collection.

 These are some nice outfits, although they have a depressive wartime (1940’s??) and utilitarian look about them. I guess depressive is fitting for these times. The overall look of the Prada collection is most definitely reduced, creatively addressing the need for the reduction of superfluous luxury.

 Some of these forms are so simple and classic, but still beautiful, like the v-cut dresses and the leather suit.

The furry dress is an odd one, but if I read into it, I could guess that the designer was playing with the idea of reducing luxury so much that she threw in an element of the stone age for emphasis. We don’t need fancy fabrics! Good old fur will do. It can be seen as fashionable and is definitely warm! The shoes are definitely utilitarian, still high and stylish,

but with a work boot roughness.

These are two looks that I don’t like…and don’t really get. Any thoughts?

Image sources: NYTimes.com and Style.com.