« Art & mode » Valérie de Givry
L’art doit être beau et agréable pour être regardé ? La mode existe simplement pour être portée ? Peut-on s’en servir de la mode pour s’exprimer ou montrer les angoisses de notre époque ?
PS : Quand j’ai commencé mon blog, j’ai voulu faire une réflexion sur les rapports « Mode et Art ». A l’époque je ne maîtrisais pas bien Internet et je n’ai pas réussi à insérer toutes les images. Comme le sujet est toujours d’actualité, je remets la note comme j’aurais voulu faire à l’époque.
Photo de gauche: Alexander Mc Queen hiver
1996/1997
Photo de droite: Dinos et Jake Chapman
"To be Titled" 1997
English Version
Is Art meant to be looked at ?
Is Fashion meant to be worn ? Both questions closely inter-related and central to our thoughts on the matter are no doubt those of this century.
As has Art, Fashion has been shaken up and turned upside down by the questioning of some of its fundamental aesthetic principles, thus taking on subterfuges such as originality, rebellion, seduction and even aggressivity, which are so much more significant than its initial purpose, basically that of dressing. From this standpoint, both the Chapman brothers' and Alexander Mac Queen's work strike a contemporary note which uses provocation in both instances. This transpires as a pornographic violence fascinating and seducing the fantasies of an avant-garde public, which,as such, seems to recognize the expression of both pains and aberrations of our century.
''Art and fashion'' Valérie de Givry
Should Art be beautiful and pleasant to be looked at ? Should Fashion's prime and only purpose be to be worn ? Can Fashion be used to express or to show the anxieties of our time ?
PS : When I started my blog, I intended to insert a piece on the relationship between Fashion and Art. At the time unfortunately, I was not familiar with Internet and its ways and was therefore unable to insert all the pictures. As the subject is still very much front page, I am posting it as I would have like to see it at the time.