/fa/ - Fashion

when Og draped his wolfskin over the *other* shoulder, that was fashion.

Fashion is at once a necessity and a cultural expression.

fore raels guyzz

>>6209197
Fashion is an emergent behavior in all cultures.

Follow that thought to the end of the line, I don't have the energy to explain it.

>>6209207
no it's a luxury

I see plenty of people, if not the majority of most countries, wear very bland and cheap clothing their entire lives that is not very fashionable because it's less expensive

>>6209450
>being poor


hahahahah

>>6209458
by saying you have to not be poor you're only furthering the argument that it's a luxury retard

>>6209450
People everywhere aspire to adorn themselves. That doesn't mean they all get a chance to. The only true necessities are food, water and shelter. But what about love, stories, excitement, satisfaction, sex, dreams music and looking at the stars? I think most of us need those things on some level, too. Is it the same need as water, food and shelter? No, but we wilt without them all the same.

>>6209472
but is it worth living only on necesities? not having to experience what life can offer.

>>6209450
what is [literally anything except the conditions that sustain life]? is it really necessary? why do we need it? is it a luxury?.

>>6209482
its a luxury for the poor aint it m8.

>>6209472
>love, stories, excitement, satisfaction, sex, dreams music

Most of those things are freely accessible to people for not too much money compared to high fashion items. Most of those depend on inter-personal relationships.

Again fashion is a luxury. The "excitement" you get in a runner's high from a public park, vs the "excitement you get from a 5k dress shirt", the latter is a luxury excitement.

>>6209450
We define it as cheap and bland due to fashion. We give value to your clothing.

It's essential due to how we function; what you're saying is aesthetics shouldn't be a thing cause then everyone can be simple looking. That's like saying judging people/clarifying who they are by aesthetics shouldn't be a thing cause then everyone would be happy with themselves and bunnies would frolick without a care.

>>6209492
shut up yuke. but you're probably right

>>6209485
is what a luxury for the poor?

if you're referring to the conditions that sustain life, no.

those are the opposite of luxuries. they're necessities.

i take offense to the possible ideological underpinnings of your argument.

sure fashion is shallow and unnecessary and if people used their $500 suit dollars to feed the poor the world might be a better place.

but you could say the same about apple products, social science degrees, or fancy cars.

i feel fashion has a more real utilitarian purpose that allows people to associate themselves with one of a few archetypes that allow for easier more selective socialization. more-so than a brand of car sports team association

>>6209492
No that's not at all what I meant, I recognize the difference of value and quality, don't know why you took that to mean some bohemian everyone should be equal nonsense. I'm just saying it's not necessary for most people who can't afford it, so it's a luxury.

>>6209492
Also you definite it as cheap and bland because the material is usually of a lesser quality, just like shitty cars versus new ones, it's not that subjective.

>what is fashion?
Putting on clothes for purposes other than keeping yoruself warm/covering up your genitals
>is it really necessary?
Not necessarily, but it helps us be social. Being social is a key component of human behavior.
>why do we need it?
We don't NEED it.
>is it a luxury?
Yeah. Do you see any Liberians wearing Rick Owens?

>>6209511
Well then I'd have to ask why you think fashion is simply a luxury?

I'd also say it's essential in the day to day; to meet the standards of everyday living. A nice formal suit could mean the difference between a job/career, to be up at the latest trends could make you more interesting which results in other opportunities and essentially not an outcast from the current "norm". And in that sense, fashion isn't a luxury it's simply being knowledgeable of trend and living within your means of those trends; it's certainly not out of reach for really anyone.

>>6209503
and nigga neva tell me to shut up forst i'll hit on yo sista dawg

>>6209508
necessities is a luxury if you literally dont have any cash. and is living off benefits or given things. im just sayin fashion should have less impact on people so these said people would not go out and waste their money on clothes just to be told the theyre a fuccboi.
>mfw

>>6209535
say dat to my face and nat of the interwebz and see wat happens. ill rek you m8. fukin cunt.
>pic related, my face

bump for justice

>>6209530
And within those trends there's the everyday person who wears imitations of it or lower quality versions, and the one who can afford the luxury of actually having the top echelon version of that trend. Yes, you need a formal suit to be a bank teller but it's a luxury for it to be Armani. Is the dress shirt, slacks, and blazer Bill got at Ross fashion in the same breathe as what's in Barneys? That's the distinction I use when saying it's a luxury, but who knows maybe I'm going full retard and don't realize it yet.

>>6209568
are you going full retard and dont realize it yet?

you are confusing fashion with style, style is inevitable, fashion is useless.

>>6209587
I don't know yet, it's possible

>>6209582
but theyre different and you're 2 edgy 4 me :(

>>6209568
Well sure, I can agree with having top end stuff being luxury and it is for the most part. A lot of the price tag is simply branding (however it is true that quality and fit is there), but that's not simply fashion. You can get imitations or lower quality (or rather do research on material and pick and choose what's cost effective for your wallet and the price tag) and still be fashionable though. You'll still have the "goofninja" or "dadcore" or whatever aesthetic without the high stuff nor for the most part be scrutinized for it (unless you're around those that know what they're talking about, but you'd have to be really snobby to quible over branding in my eyes).

You can have luxurious pieces and still not be fashionable by composition and be fashionable by having imitations with good fit and overall composition.

Think like J.Biebs and throwing on all his hype shit as the former and say Gosling in general as the latter.

>>6209589
i just believe that dressing with what you think is nice is already a luxury, youre happy with, the others might have another way of expressing what kind of luxurious fashion style or clothes he wears, but no two people has the same opinion i guess. but who knows maybe I'm going full retard and don't realize it yet.

>>6209595
so then maybe like another anon says style should be conflated with fashion, it sounds more like the fashion end of it is about luxury from how I've described it, as an omnipresent force with all the various trends in the pyramid going from shit tier to top quality, and style is something else entirely..

>>6209619
shouldnt* be I mean

>>6209595
limited edtion fashion designers clothes, they dont look as good, they dont feel good, they dont have good quality. but the price is high that it catches the rich peoples attention that they think
>wow now this, i quite like it
>also
>yuke
>fuccboi

>>6209619
I think Alexander McQueen said it best,

-"It's a new era in fashion - there are no rules. It's all about the individual and personal style, wearing high-end, low-end, classic labels, and up-and-coming designers all together."

Fashion is as variable as it's ever been; i see style as your own perception of what is fashionable

>>6209628
its

>>6209628
yuke wisdon, a-a-are you a 100 year old fat fa-fashion demi-god??

>>6209645
>>6209645
just a /fa/ggot

>>6209658
my nigga. i like that sheet. keep it up

>>6209668
do you think a balding guy could ever get with ASR?

>>6209696
hahahaha fuckin bald guy, she could see terabithia through your balding head
>tfw you will never get with ASR

>>6209725
she's a super hardcore christian and probably is saving herself for marriage

>>6209645
post more laura b

it is a way to express who you are and who you want to be. also fashion is one of the biggest international economic drivers.
so yes we do need it.
as far as luxury? doesnt necesarily mean LV and Dior. esp bc nowadays fash moves up the classes from streets to couture. back in the day only rich people could truly enjoy and afford what was deemed "fashionable"
but really in a nutshell all "fashion" is - 4ever changing trends reflecting on sociology/people/current times/etc...

>>6209737
thats the only laura b i got. cause i dont wanna share the sexy ones, it belongs to me only. but on the other hand

>>6209488
I don't dispute that fashion is a luxury - but what drives fashion is innate to the human condition and that really isn't up for debate.

whose laura b??

>>6209761
>>6209765
post a fit fuccboi. lel

>>6209519
>do you see librerians wearing rick owens
>implying being into fashion means dick riding dick ovens
>implying fashion means high fashion

>>6209780
a child of a poor man who is payed by a photographer to take pics of her child (no porn) just bikinis and shit.

>>6209488
but it doesnt need to be high fashion to have that feeling happen. It can simply be altering a piece to your own satisfaction.

>>6209801
top lel, cause true.

>>6209801
cutie art history librarian at my schools rock helmut lang <3

>>6209197
i think it's really interesting because well it's clearly an art

but its much more utilitarian than many other artforms, as well as more "present" - you need clothes, basically. If you're cold you have to wear a coat. Additionally, it is a huge part of how you're viewed. So it's also cultural capital, and that often times can clash with its essence as expression.

is dressing well a luxury? I don't think so, though following prevailing trends might be.

basically i don't fucking know but i think its cool

bumpan