Organized by The Costume Institute and on at the Metropolitan Museum of Art through July 31. The installation of this exhibition was fantastically done (in both senses of the word). More here.
McQueen’s Savage Beauty at the Met
Tag Archives: fashion
Ravels in Review Friday
Hello bloggy reader! And welcome to another installment of Ravels in Review Friday. Although stupefied that on this Spring day snow is falling, I shall persevere. Neither rain, nor sleet, nor snow, nor internet connection problems shall keep the blogger away.
We really were well-rounded artworld citizens this week, as we jumped from an informative post on Albrecht Durer’s painting, which drew some admiring glances of the basest kind from readers, to current topics such as how fashion is (not!) art and whether public art becomes part of the landscape. (If art needs to be on a gallery or museum wall to be recognized as art, what does that say about the nature of art?) Then we had some laughs with the stellar cast of Blithe Spirit, currently playing at the Shubert Theater.
Lastly, but certainly not leastly, we have a video of Art Ravels on a trip to MoMA for the Martin Kippenberger exhibition! It’s very exciting: there’s music; there’s lights; there’s my voiceover; there’s some shaky camera work. Let me know how you think it ranks next to another Martin Kippenberger at MoMA video.
Also, I would like to do another art video adventure. Does anyone have suggestions on where I should go?
Fashion is Not Art
Fashion hangs onto art’s coattails, by association trying to sneak into the fine arts balls. But this is not a fairy tale, and fashion’s foot does not fit this slipper.
Last night I read 2 magazines, both mentioned the trend toward art prints in fashion, where designers have produced a skirt that reminds one of Rothko or Pop art. Fashion creating pieces directly inspired by art is just a most blantant example of how they try to borrow some of art’s status. They use artists to create ad campaigns, their photographers often photograph art as well as fashion. But there is a line between the two. One magazine devoted pages to Richard Avedon, who has an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The exhibition, however, singles out his portraits, rather than his fashion photographry. I enjoy his work, but that doesn’t make the clothes that he photographed art.
Much like the art world, the fashion world seems creative, navel-gazing, fun and self-aggrandizing. Yet despite the fact that designers use art as their inspiration for clothing and that people who photograph clothes may or may not be artists in their own right, and despite the cultural significance clothes might have, fashion is not art. 
Why fashion is not art:
It is utilitarian.
It is common.
It is commercial.
It is not beautiful.
It is common.
It is commercial.
It is not beautiful.
It may be a beautiful skirt, with skirt as the qualifying noun that allows the adjective beautiful to be applied, but it is not beautiful. And while art may influence fashion, when does fashion influence art?