/fa/ - Fashion

>>12795595
SS18 do you mean?

Historically people have criticised Rick Owens for doing the same thing over and over again.
I don't think SS18 has been an exception.
I recognise the same kind of sandals he attempted from Island, the same short dress shapes from Scorpio, a familiar, the same kind of draping he's pioneered since Suckerball.

What's different, and what's also kind of new to the Rick Owens runway strategy is the extreme eccentric flourish which kind of started to drain out towards the end of the presentation.
That's name to me, but I think that's the kind of new I was talking about, like CDG.

CDG mainline pushes a novel redirect with successive seasons, it doesn't reproduce old design staples.

Rick does both during his presentation- develops his older core ideas while also imbuing the CDG approach.

I think it's become progressively more crazy.
The CDG crazy we saw in the 90s doesn't compare to the Gareth Pugh or the Craig Green crazy we see today.
But also i'm sure crazy was evaluated differently in those two times, so keeping the context of the period in mind, maybe equal craziness.
Hard to say

But what is interesting to say there is what is driving this kind of new way of presentation (extremely abstracted clothing spectacle, akin to what see Craig Green among others I'm brain farting of)

the abstraction of the wearer and the spectacle of the object.
What's driving that into the clothing commerce sphere?
Why buy clothing if it can't be worn?
Designers compete on the free market, they have a commercial imperative driving them, these endeavors need to justify themselves in terms of capital return, usually.

Well maybe the social context is instagram.
And there I would argue there is.
To cultivate someones brand identity by wearing jarring and shocking objects.
A new breed of market, social capital.
Cryptocurrency is old news.

If it perturbs your environment maybe dismiss it, or attempt ambivalence.