It is currently 22 Aug 2017, 14:55

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 16:45 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
We are still missing a thread in which we discuss topics that are in this or that way related to fashion design and the aesthetic of clothing, but which more regard the broader cultural, socio-political, economic, etc. contexts. I couldn't come up with any suitable name for such a thread so I gave it this temporary name. If anyone has an alternative solution, please suggest.

I've just come across this article in Guardian: Mangled mannequins – what happened to shop-window dummies?
Shopfront mannequins are falling to pieces – decapitated, dissected, headless and unsettlingly expressionless
http://www.theguardian.com/fashion/fashion-blog/2013/aug/16/mannequins-shop-window-dummies. I think this is an interesting topic, since it indicates changes in various aspects of the nowadays society:

Quote:
There was a time when a mannequin was the sculptural equivalent of fashion model. Like a fashion model, the mannequin was intended to reflect our social, professional and aesthetic aspirations.
[...]
Some of these mannequins have been reduced to resemble dressmaker's forms. This reverts to the style of some of the earliest shop mannequins of the 1850s, which were headless dress forms made from wicker or cane[1].
[...]
In the 1870s, heads and limbs were introduced to make the mannequins more representative of the customer. For the next 60 or 70 years, manufacturers went to great lengths to achieve realism, even using real hair and live models [2]. 1920s mannequins began to be seen as expressive rather than simply functional. The addition of interchangeable arms and moving parts in the 1930s allowed them to express with their entire bodies, and they could be seen to be engaged in activities which were a reflection of a lifestyle[3].
[...]
What we see in the high street today seems to contradict the established purpose of a mannequin, as well as the rules of marketing. The removal of the head imposes anonymity. These bodies could belong to anyone and everyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 17:32 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
By the way, Barbara Brownie, the author of this article has a blog with some other interesting posts and topics worth discussing: http://barbarabrownie.wordpress.com/
Maybe we should invite her to join us here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 17:39 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2013, 18:33
Posts: 336
isn't anonymity the whole point, though? not too much of a surprise formless mannequins being the storefront's equivalent of

Image(one of the first results when googling "stock photo party")

where there's just enough diversity to not raise eyebrows, but everything is still sufficiently normalized to have the broadest possible appeal? seems like leaving a mannequin headless does something of the same thing. it allows the customer to easier project their own identity on the mannequin, instead of having to overcome images of class or subculture that may be apparent if the mannequin were more specifically posed or made-up.

edit: relates specifically to the segmentation of consumer society. gotta run now, will come back to this.

good idea for a thread!

_________________
the eye of the beholder is in the eye of the beholder


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 17:47 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
^ yes, good point!
The funny thing though is that I can't imagine non-mainstream designers using overly decorated mannequins either. I suppose this comes together with the minimalist tendencies though, or the idea of anonymity coming from a different background (the article mentions Margiela in this context, so this overlap (of consumerism with the non-mainstream designers) is an interesting question for exploration).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 20:53 
Offline

Joined: 02 Jun 2013, 08:54
Posts: 12
on the narrow question of why mannequins don't have heads or faces any more, it may be down to this..

with the rapid acceleration of image bombardment, and the consequent development of our ability to project and visualize*, people no longer need any help imagining themselves in the clothes.

print fashion advertising works differently. here it is the girl or the boy building the aspiration. with an oblique reference to the product.

when actually showing the product on a dummy, the mundane reality of the product undermines the whole aspiration thing, and the best way to limit the damage is create as much blank space for people to create their own mental image.



*i've no proof for this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 21:25 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2013, 18:33
Posts: 336
rilu: but when do non-mainstream designers ever use mannequins? margiela's an exception, not a rule. it's the stores use the mannequins, not the designers, they use models. actually it would be interesting to contextualize this angle of debate in relation to models, too. bjorn is right, an ad celebrates an ideal, a lifestyle, but a mannequin is (these days) a blank slate that an ideal or lifestyle can be imposed upon. a model is at the intersection of these two forms, models represent a certain ideal of beauty, yes, but at the same time usually maintain a lifeless stare, and move in an almost robotically perfect but inhuman way, they interact with the consumer just as little as a mannequin. this perhaps reached its apotheosis in one of my favourite collections, vandervorst's fw '12:

Image

there's something of a heightened sense of mystery in the collection because of the tension between a mannequin-like concealment of the face. poell also played with the model, using tape:

Image

a fairly straightforward manipulation, intentionally making a mockery of traditional beauty in kinda the same way the gap kids' models the article mentions accidentally contrast the playfulness children with the non-identity of headlessness. anyway, the reason models are more interesting than mannequins to me is that the latter are increasingly marginalized, at least for the non-mainstream brands this forum's interested in, as webstores rise to greater prominence. and those webstores tend to truncate their models at the neck to render them more mannequin-like, presumably under the very same aegis of widened appeal. the problem is make appeal too wide and it eventually becomes meaningless white noise...

_________________
the eye of the beholder is in the eye of the beholder


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 22:54 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
bjorn wrote:
when actually showing the product on a dummy, the mundane reality of the product undermines the whole aspiration thing, and the best way to limit the damage is create as much blank space for people to create their own mental image.

yes, this is a good point too. the visual has obtained a different status nowadays, so the dummies are supposed to be just that - dummies.
and MJRH, i actually thought of models and the examples like those from above when i mentioned anonymity :) i took models to be similar to artificial mannequins, but probably them being human and sufficiently artificial in the way you describe (being something in between), is what makes them so appealing. And it really seems that some of the most striking runway shows had exactly the styling in which the models resembled artificial mannequins. Recall also Undercover "Guru Guru" as an example
Image
Image

(more pictures at http://supertalk.superfuture.com/index. ... guru-guru/)

So in this shift from dummy-mannequins to models resembling dummy-mannequins as close as possible, I wonder whether there'll be a place for some virtual mannequins as well. Wouldn't they be another version of this "in between" type? An augmented-reality mannequin, projected onto a dummy in a window. That way we'd go back to the mannequins with an identity, and I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be a special app which allows you to project your own face onto the perfect augmented body!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 23:04 
Offline

Joined: 29 May 2013, 19:16
Posts: 42
i feel like im back in an art theory lecture and there is this really obvious thing that no one is saying so then i start thinking im wrong in thinking it so i dont say it either

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2013, 23:15 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
Yes, Aitor Throup! And your feeling was completely right :D
The dummies in movement, where the movement replaces the identity, so to say. Has anyone else explored this direction or it's only been him?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 18 Aug 2013, 00:24 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2013, 18:33
Posts: 336
i just knew there was something on the tip of my tongue, and you helped me remember it, rilu this coilhouse article, which has been brought up in the past, addresses virtual mannequins and their potential. imagine the possibilities when paired with 3d printing:

Imagine an online shop where your preferred weight/height/measurements are used to generate 3D models of the bodies that you want to see. Imagine if there was an API for this that could be used across all online clothing stores you visit, so that no matter what site you were looking at, the models appeared the way that you wanted them to. Standardized beauty ideals would become less relevant, because people would have greater control over their exposure to them. [...] In the short term, it may seem like computer-generated models reinforce a homogenous beauty standard. In the long term, this technology may pave the way towards greater body diversity and inclusiveness. [...] Advertising makes people feel insecure, like they’re lacking something, with the implicit message that buying this brand will make them somehow more attractive or fulfilled. But that’s not the goal of a product shot. The goal of the product shot is to make the average consumer feel like the item is right for them.

guru guru is another great example. i'm not much familiar with undercover so thanks for that. heh, but it really makes me think more of mummies than mannequins what with the wrapping! also if anyone wants to explain aitor throup to me i'm all ears. it's been how long since the very first (amazing) sketches came out and i still can't make up my mind on that man. what do yall mean about movement? just because his poses are mid-action, what does that say? are his clothes somehow representative of that too and you need to see them in person to get it, or is that just his use of mannequins?

Image

chalayan fw 1998. people in transition between cultures portrayed by models in transition between life and representation?

_________________
the eye of the beholder is in the eye of the beholder


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 18 Aug 2013, 10:53 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
Ah, yeah, interesting points for virtual mannequins.
As for Aitor Throup, I would be happy to hear about him from someone more familiar with his work too. Last winter I saw his showroom in Paris and these pieces were impressive: from the construction to textures. The collection was like an overlap between knight armors and futuristic sport suits. And it seemed to me that their functionality was one of their key features. But yes, it would be great to hear more about his work.
Oh and that photo from Chalayan fits the topic of mannequins vs. models so well!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 18 Aug 2013, 23:14 
Offline

Joined: 28 May 2013, 15:29
Posts: 38
when it is about selling the story and fantasy, face is needed for attitude, character, projection of ideas. That is sometimes in runway shows, but mostly through photographic campaigns. People register faces and it draws you in.

When it is about selling the product, it is about the material object, hence, strip away all unnecessary props, and focus on the thing. I know from looking at webshops with visible faces on the fit models, I get distracted easily.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2013, 06:25 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 14:21
Posts: 152
Quote:
in reality, the Young-Girl is only the model citizen such as commodity society has defined it since world war one, as an explicit response to revolutionary threats against it.

Tiqqun, Raw Materials for a Theory of the Young-Girl


interesting points about headless models/mannequins- what i've noticed about models with heads, female ones at least, is that they look as close as a woman can look to a young girl, without actually being one. I know this is nothing new, and I certainly don't mean to start some complaint about models being too young or whatever. Anyway, the text above explores this idea that young girls are what commodity society wants its consumers to aspire to, because "young" and "feminine" make the elements of a passive consumer (which is the best kind!)

This translates somewhat literally into the industry of models, we see that the trends so happen to be that models do look child-like, whether they are teenagers dressed up in women's clothes or women made up to look like teens. Having spent quite a bit of time shooting new models for model agencies, i can say its a truly absurd thing to see a model turn up in school uniform, chaperoned by parents.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2013, 07:45 
Offline

Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 18:22
Posts: 17
While certainly eye-catching, I found something viscerally disturbing about this mannequin head, which I have now seen in Bangkok, Koh Phi Phi, and Chiang Mai...

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2013, 08:40 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 14:21
Posts: 152
[image]http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/2010/04/world/gallery.yue.minjun/images/hrzgal.yue3.jpg[/image]

apparently a trend after this chinese contemporary artist (chinese contemporary art being another trend)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 20 Aug 2013, 00:19 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
i wonder whether mannequins with faces expressing all kinds of emotions (each expressing a different one) would make for a good marketing trick. it would be distracting like the one from above, but isn't that the point of advertisements after all? everyone would stop to look at the window, and after staring at the dolls, they'd move their gaze to the clothes, i suppose.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 21 Aug 2013, 16:37 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2013, 08:00
Posts: 367
de chirico 1914
ccp S/S 00 - jacket in a way for tailor's dummy


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 23 Aug 2013, 02:52 
Offline
porter
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2013, 14:02
Posts: 1167
can we reach out to laika to chime in on this as well? i feel like she might have a great deal to say on the matter, provided she is feeling like doing this forum thing again. I'll try to manage something of a response as well..

_________________
which pyre shall the moon ignite each hour
which pyre in my library crimson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 23 Aug 2013, 10:19 
Offline
engineer
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2013, 08:10
Posts: 770
Location: Germany
^ yes, i'd love to hear her input!

crouka, is there some background for that CCP jacket? was it a matter of concept that stretched over the whole collection (which I hardly know anything about)?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The context
PostPosted: 24 Aug 2013, 18:10 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2013, 08:00
Posts: 367
yes it was a matter of concept and stretched over the three seasons, F/W 99, S/S 00, and F/W 00.
in a way, the collections were about the cross-sectional form of garments sort of CT scanned not only transversely but also coronally and sagittally.
[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Mri_head_3dani_1_small_bionerd.gif[/image]
in another, they featured a plastered figure in mute condition like an isolated mannequin.

http://carolchristianpoell.mak.at/prese ... OS_eng.pdf

http://carolchristianpoell.mak.at/publi ... ations.pdf


F/W 99
F/W 00


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 248 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Forum hosting by ProphpBB | Software by phpBB | Report Abuse | Privacy