Huh.
Well…at least my wife will be able to find them.
And how awkward - I wore this to work today.
That’s nothing. I’m working on a line of ermine lined scrotum bags.
Thank heavens we don’t work together! That would have been gauche!
They’re not all bad. I thought this was actually quite nice for a fancy dress.
Of course, to me, “dressing up” means “put on a clean T-shirt and swap jeans for the pajama bottoms you’re wearing” so it’s not like it matters.
I would like to know, though, when high fashion went from being clothes that some rich person might really wear to clown clothes. Or were they never actually meant to be worn?
That’s a good question, Athena. I look at some of those pictures (especially the shoe hat) and wonder if there’s anywhere in the world you could wear those clothes without being laughed at.
I looked at several of them, and I got two general impressions.
First, the models’ facial expressions all seemed to be thinking, “I’m beautiful, and I hate all of you.”
Second, this is a winter fashion show. A woman would suffer hypothermia in some of those creations in temperatures under sixty degrees F.
And that other, longer, red and white one.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/g/a/2009/07/06/french_fashion.DTL&o=49
I think I like that Lebanese designer. Elements from a bunch of these outfits (metallics, satin accents) could show up in more conservative versions and would look pretty nice.
I know it’s fun to point and laugh at the silly fancy clothes designers, but. . .
These are art, they aren’t meant for actual consumer wear. The designers will take these items and interpret them into ready-to-wear stuff that is vastly more practical, though certainly influenced by what you see in those pictures.
So, you wont see those feathered things for sale somewhere, but you will see those designers using animal prints, feather designs, etc, in much more simple ways.
What’s put in major runway shoes like this one is intended to show off the designer’s highest potential as artist and innovator. It’s not meant to be worn, you’re right.
How come nobody told me that 30 years ago? All this time I’ve been thinking they were trying to actually sell these outfits to rich people.
Actually, I’ll still point and laugh at some of these. Especially the one linked in the OP.
Oh, it’s certainly alright to point and laugh. Lord knows I see plenty of modern art and shake my head in confusion.
Don’t get me wrong- people do buy the stuff you’re looking at, but it’s as art collector’s pieces, not to be worn. Well, I’m sure someone wears them sometimes, but that’s usually not the case.
I guess I’m not getting the “art” behind putting a shoe on your head.
I also don’t really get the art in a giant soup can either, but hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that shit.
What’s wrong with that one? I see a purple dress, multilayer, with an unconventional neckline. Compared to the other items, that’s nearly plain and dull.
When I was in Paris recently, I saw more than a few women in pants that look exactly like this. They’re coming(back)- mark my word!
Holy shit, is Josep Font channeling whoever designed the munchkin costumes for Wizard of Oz?
Yeah, I thought the understated black dress nearly took your eyes from the tears and…WHAT?
Little-Dutch-girl-meets-Christmas-tree-ornaments and breast twigs aside, I liked most of it. But This lady needs a head-to-toe bikini wax
Please tell me This is a joke the title says this is a photo of the Editor of Italian Vogue. Say it ain’t so! ! !