Fashion

Posted on 2003/05/31 11:10:14 (May 2003) by john.

Aaaaaaaagggg - ggghhhhhhhh!!!!

This was prompted by an article on Tom's site about combat trousers.

I find fashion very irritating. As a case in point, look at the example shown by Tom's article. The fact that for a time combats were out and now they're in again. Those two stuck up self important cows on the telly (is it Trinnie and Susanna or something?) would have no doubt torn someone to shreds for choosing to wear combats 12 months ago, but this month they'd be criticised heavily for not having any, as though it was just so obvious.

Flares (or is it flairs?) were the same. For years it seems the bulk of the population were actually waiting for flares to come back into fashion. It became a bit of a joke at the time, I remember, with people going to ask clairvoyants when they'd be able to take that old pair of flares back out of the cupboard and so on. Then eventually they did come back into fashion, in the nineties at some point, as part of the whole retro thing. The rediculous part was, though, that for over a decade most people actually still thought flares were cool, and wanted to wear them. So who decided it wasn't ok to do so?

This is probably the source of my irritation. Somebody must be deciding what is in and what isn't. Who is that?

Is it the designers? Perhaps, but then at the same time they are subject to fashion, many of them just seem to react to changes in fashion rather than actually setting it. Also, a lot of designers seem to come in and out of fashion themselves. So it seems hard to believe people so much at the mercy of the system can somehow be controlling it.

Is it critics then? Is it the Trinnie and Susannas of this world who decide? Again, it seems unlikely, because most of the time they are just observing what is happening "on the streets". Annoyingly.

Is it celebrities? Maybe, but then it seems a lot of the time their clothes are given to them by designers to show them off, so they're really just walking adverts. Doesn't sound very fashionable to me.

Is it the bulk of the population then? Well, if that was the case, when flares and combats were apparently out, why did most people want to continue to wear them? Is it down to some kind of fashion elite, people who aren't celebrities, but regular people who are "adventurous" with their clothing tastes, and gradually push everyone else onwards...?

In reality, it is more likely an extremely complex system with many interwoven behaviours affecting and being affected by each other. No doubt all of the above groups have an effect. In fact, in some small way every individual plays a part - every time you get dressed in the morning, you are (perhaps unknowingly) both being influenced by, and influencing, the world of fashion.

Whatever the case is, we seem to end up with fashion that is largely very uninspiring, to me at least. Take the whole retro setup. Why do clothes have to come "back in" like that? Why did they ever have to "go out" in the first place? Are things just forcibly made to go out of fashion, so the same boring ideas can be resold to everyone a few years later as a wonderful new invention in the hope they've all forgotten? Imagine if people had the same ideas in technology? Would we all be forced to go out and buy Commodore 64s some time next year? I think not.

The irony is, that most people would agree being too much in fashion is actually unfashionable - follow what other people are doing too much and you'll look like a sheep. However, stray too far away from other people and you're a weirdo.

Why can't everyone just wear whatever they feel like at the time they get dressed in the morning? Is that so difficult?

Today, I'm wearing a diamante tiara, with a gold lycra jumpsuit. Offsetting this perfectly, is a pair of frilly french knickers (black) worn on the outside, superman-style. Today, high heels are out, so I'm sporting a pair of wooden-soled sandals (with a white toe-stap, secured at hole 3 of 6).

Posted by Jimmy at 2003/06/02 08:54:08.

I'm a little scared.

Posted by John at 2003/06/02 09:29:26.

One is responsible for the setting of the fashion in one's Empire. Usually, one uses a Corgi to decided. Whatever such clothing item as one's Corgi pees on is likely to be 'out'.

I hereby decree that wooden sandals must be worn secured at hole 4 of 7 from this moment forthwith.

Thank you.

Posted by The Queen at 2003/06/02 24:55:43.

Cheers, Liz, I'll bear that in mind.

Posted by John at 2003/06/02 13:25:47.

But my sandals only have 6 holes! If I can't wear them and still be fashionable, then it's back to the bright red stilletoes for me! (plus ankle bracelet, of course)

Posted by Jimmy at 2003/06/02 13:43:34.

The fashion police can kiss my ass.

Posted by Omar at 2003/06/03 09:04:11.

Are you THAT fashionable, Omar the Omarian?

Posted by Rob Lang at 2003/06/03 10:11:57.

Dude, I'm so fashionable it hurts.

Posted by Omar at 2003/06/04 09:48:37.

I wore combats when I was in the army and you are right..one parade they were in fashion and the next they made us wear something else.
That upset me as I liked my combat trousers.
Why couldn't we wear what we wanted when we wanted..you serve your country and they repay you by making you wear a prickly shirt..there's grattitude..:(

Posted by totally bored at 2003/06/13 15:05:12.

i would like to know what are the current influences and fut ure trends in fashion

Posted by jenny at 2003/08/31 16:24:04.

look at the state of your wee website !

Posted by big insulter to stupid poeple at 2004/03/25 19:22:55.

Dear "sexy lady" and "big insulter to stupid poeple",

I'd like to thank you in a sincere and heartfelt way for your highly intelligent and valuable feedback. Not only was it insightful and well structured, it was also quite beautifully worded. You clearly have a command of the English language which a humble novice such as myself can only envy.

Referring to one of your specific points, I am particularly keen, if you'll permit me, to address the following:

+ whats the point in this website its crap

Oh bravo. Well you're right you know. All this website contains is a few thousand photographs taken around the world, and a couple of hundred articles about issues that we have found motivated to write about.

Oh, hold on a minute, that is actual original content isn't it? In fact, that's actually quite a lot of original content. Could this be what you mean by pointless and crap. ..? If so I'm a little confused.

Perhaps in future we ought to aim towards having a website which is just full of links to other websites. Or maybe we ought to try and sell you some shit you don't need. Or would you prefer some dancing fucking hamsters?

Thanks and best regards,

John

Posted by John at 2004/12/02 14:33:50.

Post a comment