maire'n'me

Right. Explanation may be needed. And indeed I could just email Marie all about this but since we started blogging about it, we might as well carry on.

I last blogged about the amazing Christian Dior designs that was I was directed to by a link on Autumn Zebra. I mentioned that I disagreed with some of her verdict but, as she pointed out in her latest post, I didn't say how I disagreed which was very unfair of me and quite a tease and mainly due to the fact that I was blogging at home and didn't want my dinner to overcook. So let me break it down- but before I do, I must say that I didn't think she was wrong just that I disagreed. And people may disagree with me and say she's right and maybe I'm just being pedantic about her wording... who knows. At any rate, here goes-

Thing 1- Yes, she did state that it was "...I think it classifies more as a gimmick, or as wearable art, than clothing..." so sorry about that but the word "gimmick" just made me twitch. My bad.

"It is pretty awesome, and crazy, and pretty awesome. The "runway review" that you can also get to from that page is idiotic, for instance, saying the designs are "delicate". Umm, no. No way are they delicate. About as delicate as an elephant I say. They are large, heavy, heavily constructed items in bright colours that try and smack you in the head with a mallet. I think they are too stiff and out-there to be called "delicate"."This is basically what I disagree with.
Thing 2- Some of these designs, in fact most of them are large but I don't think they convey weight and heaviness. I think the word 'delicate' may have been misused by the reviewer but maybe 'intricate' is better. Because they are. Incredibly. And as such a lot of delicacy would be needed in the making of them. I don't think 'delicate' in art and design necessarily has to mean something light and fragile. And so I explain with pictures:

This one is, I think 'light'. The material is flowing and there isn't a lot of it. It doesn't look like it would be terribly heavy to wear although I know all those layers of chiffon etc layered up can get quite heavy. But it flows.


This is, I think, the most real-life-wearable of the lot. I'd wear it. It's fairly minimal and 'light'. In fact this one is one of my favs. I like it A LOT. If I ever get to the stage of making my own dresses, I will try to make something like this.


This one is also fairly realistic I think and also light and flowing.


Maybe a bit much on the front but this too seems fairly normal and business-suity.


Just so it doesn't seem like I've totally biased my selection to prove my point, here is an example of something I do consider heavy and definitely 'art'.


Not something I'd wear and I'm hoping it's just netting and bunching giving this it's shape but this doesn't strike me as heavy either.


This is definitely along the lines of the stiff cardboard construction lines. And I will admit that there are quite a few designs like this where there is a flowing part and then another, usually the jacket or top half, that has large, stiff shapes which probably wouldn't be the easiest to move in.


Out of the grander designs, this one of my fav. It's beautiful and amazing. I'll admit, it'd probably be a bitch to move in and must weigh a ton with all those pleats (? are they pleats? That's what I'm calling them anyway. I mean the ruffly/pleaty/thingies) but this is I think, for me at least, the bit which explains the delicate/intricate thing. I just don't think it's fair to say that this is "as delicate as an elephant" is all...


Finally, I just want to say that I'm not being bitchy and out-to-prove-Marie-wrong. Or even that I think she's wrong as such. There's totally validity in her comments and who knows who's right? Because when it comes down to it, we both think these designs are absolutely awesome.