![]() ![]() ![]() So how can someone who is given a voice in the pages of the most powerful fashion magazine in the world claim that fashion is being censored? And can social media backlash against creative directors at the helm of powerful global brands like Lagerfeld or, more recently, Miuccia Prada and Alessandro Michele, ever be considered an example of censorship? ![]() The word censorship describes ‘the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good’ 7 and is usually applied by governments or by those in power positions through laws and regulations. ![]() More to the point, any claims to censorship in this case sound preposterous given the meaning of the term and its relation to power. The article was written as a reaction against what Flaccavento sees as the ‘intransigent moralists who raise their shields at the slightest hint of appropriation, whether real or presumed’ and the ‘guard dogs who, in the name of a foolish notion of inclusiveness, impose ridiculous parameters that are merely exercises in censorship.’ 6īut if fashion designers can and should shock and provoke, isn’t the social media outrage not only to be expected, but also an intrinsic part of increasingly performative fashion conversations as well? And why would fashion designers specifically enjoy unlimited freedom of expression? Who would claim this right next? Artists? TV presenters? Politicians? Do fashion designers really want to be the creative equivalent of Piers Morgan? In the March issue of Vogue Italia, writer Angelo Flaccavento penned a self-professed ‘rant’ against political correctness in fashion, which he sees as ‘a conformist trap, set in the name of a false respect that is perhaps even more divisive and discriminatory.’ 4 ‘Awareness,’ he continues, ‘cannot be cultivated by force’ because the creative act is by definition ‘anarchic, boundless, bulimic and incorrect’ 5 and should therefore elicit outrage. Sometimes, however, journalists set their usual professional caution aside. This overall feeling is amplified by the pervasive omertà of the fashion media at large which, as some commentators have noticed, are happy to publish these stories for clicks yet keep tacitly condoning this kind of behaviour by invoking creative genius or eccentricity to shift focus from the structural issues of the system. These apologies often sound like crocodile tears, in part because they tend to employ PR speak, in part because culprits like Lagerfeld often quickly move on just to stumble upon another cycle of controversy-apology a couple of years later. This is not by any means an isolated case from Yves Saint Laurent to Rei Kawakubo and Marc Jacobs, examples of cultural unawareness are historically accompanied by reluctant apologies. You want to create boredom? Be politically correct in your conversation.’ 2ĭespite this statement, the designer has usually apologised to those who felt disrespected by his work. In doing so, the fashion press was amplifying Lagerfeld’s own thoughts on the matter, which were summed up in 2010 by one of his famous aphorisms: ‘Be politically correct, but please don’t bother other people with conversation about being politically correct, because that’s the end of everything. In considering examples of his most innovative work-think the sportswear and hip-hop-inspired maximalism of Chanel’s 1991 Autumn/Winter collection, which masterfully subverted the founder’s sartorial vocabulary whilst simultaneously paying homage to it-alongside eyebrow-raising instances of cultural appropriation like the dresses from Chanel’s Spring/Summer 1994 with printed quotes from the Koran, these articles made a tacit statement: that these examples should be considered as equally creative and even, perhaps, as the two sides of the same coin. When Karl Lagerfeld passed away, the fashion press celebrated his ‘controversial genius’ 1 with a plethora of articles which listed his most contentious designs and statements. Scott King, How I’d Sink American Vogue, 2006. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |