Fashion is dictated by taste. Or about taste… Is it?
During big celebrity gatherings, defining moments for Stars usually get defined with if not by a fashion faux pas. Considering that a Star could have self-expressed gratification over her choice of dress (or gown to even wear it in the first place) only to be criticized with that of poor fashion sense, who then is more credible, the Star or the critic? Isn’t the dress designed by someone tasteful enough to be in the business? The more pushy questions could be, “Are fashion designs (even tastes) based on standards or expression of the artist behind it?” Are fashion designers (or critics) to dictate what is acceptable or not? Aren’t they being cynical about their objective as designers when similarly being disapproving of their co-fashion designers’ work?
Having witnessed a fashion show of some sort yesterday, I personally thought that the outfits were outlandish unless if it were for costume purposes. The use of indigenous materials while integrating a fitting design was expressed as an art rather than designed for its basic purpose. Who, anyone in their right minds, would even wear those? Nevertheless, the designer received a warm reception. A courteous audience; either that or they were really overwhelmed for some reasons.
It could just as well be the critical person in me. Aren’t we all? I’ve recently read about some top fashion no-nos. The poll was based from perception of regular people. As far as how I would most likely gauge it, their analyses made sense. That would apparently validate our (or the general public’s) ordinary taste to an exquisite one.
The absurdity though is when a celebrated fashion designer launches a dubious creation; his name rather carries it into some point of respectability. Regardless of the probable outrageous design, its branded status seems to bolster it still.
Dressing up or to simply clothe was initially actuated to rather serve as cover for all its worth. Designs weren’t given consideration. Could you imagine the first people to have been fussy over the kind of leaf to use in concealing their ‘privates’… Needless to say, “outfits” then were purposeful; not that using a sheep’s wool over goat’s hide would confirm who’s in vogue or outdated. If it was, that would explain the extinction of some animals… the mammoths’ fur could have been the Versaces, the Chanels or the Ralph Laurens back then (LOL!) Though give it to man’s ingenuity, clothing has leveled up (or leveled down, whichever suits you).
During big celebrity gatherings, defining moments for Stars usually get defined with if not by a fashion faux pas. Considering that a Star could have self-expressed gratification over her choice of dress (or gown to even wear it in the first place) only to be criticized with that of poor fashion sense, who then is more credible, the Star or the critic? Isn’t the dress designed by someone tasteful enough to be in the business? The more pushy questions could be, “Are fashion designs (even tastes) based on standards or expression of the artist behind it?” Are fashion designers (or critics) to dictate what is acceptable or not? Aren’t they being cynical about their objective as designers when similarly being disapproving of their co-fashion designers’ work?
Having witnessed a fashion show of some sort yesterday, I personally thought that the outfits were outlandish unless if it were for costume purposes. The use of indigenous materials while integrating a fitting design was expressed as an art rather than designed for its basic purpose. Who, anyone in their right minds, would even wear those? Nevertheless, the designer received a warm reception. A courteous audience; either that or they were really overwhelmed for some reasons.
It could just as well be the critical person in me. Aren’t we all? I’ve recently read about some top fashion no-nos. The poll was based from perception of regular people. As far as how I would most likely gauge it, their analyses made sense. That would apparently validate our (or the general public’s) ordinary taste to an exquisite one.
The absurdity though is when a celebrated fashion designer launches a dubious creation; his name rather carries it into some point of respectability. Regardless of the probable outrageous design, its branded status seems to bolster it still.
Dressing up or to simply clothe was initially actuated to rather serve as cover for all its worth. Designs weren’t given consideration. Could you imagine the first people to have been fussy over the kind of leaf to use in concealing their ‘privates’… Needless to say, “outfits” then were purposeful; not that using a sheep’s wool over goat’s hide would confirm who’s in vogue or outdated. If it was, that would explain the extinction of some animals… the mammoths’ fur could have been the Versaces, the Chanels or the Ralph Laurens back then (LOL!) Though give it to man’s ingenuity, clothing has leveled up (or leveled down, whichever suits you).
Point is that whatever we’re appropriately wearing, as long as we feel comfortable in it based on our own taste… Let us neither be offensive nor defensive from being a critic or being criticized. Being condemnatory and swollen with pride only proves our being to be even worse than those hunting for fur instead… How we look in our clothes is just skin deep. What matters is the personality behind the one wearing it… This way, fashion would be as tasteful as sincerity…