LET’S GET A COFFEE AND TALK…

Welcome to my humble blog! My name is Naomi Carter. I am a communications specialist and a freelance fashion writer.

Lover of art and literature. Self-proclaimed fashionista. Shopoholic and coffee-addict. Part-time fashion blogger, Full-time busy bee. Optimist at heart, realist in mind. Risk is my med.

So here I am, blogging about my daily life from the nation's capital, cosmopolitan Washington DC.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Rags To Riches


A little background history: In the 18th century, ‘over the top’ themes started to hit the fashion world, France being the battleground for fashion wars and Marie Antoinette the symbol of glamour and riches. The most genius clothing designers were from that era. Why? Because they created the ‘unthinkable’. They are the ones who made sure that people knelt before beautiful clothes and pray to have it.
Both men and women of those days struggled to find themselves in a situation where they didn’t know exactly what fashion was. For women, it was said that the bigger and more colorful the dress is, the more extravagant she was. But the effect was different for men. They became more like women with each passing day, wearing silk garments, long stockings, high heels, and, last but not least, make-up. Garments with beautiful textures were a status symbol, a way to demonstrate one’s standing in society.
The 19th century designers were looking for something new and relaxed. Therefore, gothic and empire style came into this world. But the 20th century was the most crucial, and yet promising time of the fashion industry. Sufferings caused by World War I and II made people miserable everywhere. The last thing they had to think about was what they’re wearing. But fashion didn’t die, it came back with Christian Dior and Coco Chanel.
Little further, the ‘60s was the colorful and bubbly years of fashion. The ‘70s was the days of hippy and urban fashion. Then, a little later, ripped, and torn clothes came into fashion in the 1980s. Raggedy became iconic and a social statement of its own. Goth, rock, punk, and grunge—all movements incorporated it into their looks.
Simplicity is now the next best thing in fashion. People need comfortable clothes. You don’t want to wear heels while jogging or sweat while strolling. They say discomfort is a thing of the past. The new feel is simple, seamless and lithe. Many designers have taken to make as-simple-looking-as-possible clothes. One of the first was Calvin Klein. His designs showed people walking down the runway and onto a grimy street in New York, purifying the environment as they walked because of sheer simplicity. It was plain and fiercely chic. Sometimes, a t-shirt is all you need, really.
You see a paparazzi snapshot of a Hollywood star wearing shabby clothes walking down Santa Monica Boulevard, and then you see a college student wearing almost the same outfit in Santa Barbara. Even rich people can be lured to simple rags; as long as they’re simple…the Olsen twins are the best example for this category. They tend to wear the most ragged, torn, too large and too long clothes out there. All the crazy clothes they chose to wear are designer brand and cost a fortune. Even though it is a fashion statement, it is hard to call a true fashion.
So here’s the critical thinking…Fashion of course changed astonishingly over the years. As far as we know, the olden days’ clothes were extremely well-designed and beautifully executed, but hard to wear. You can see how this world is improving itself with the technological development. But are we really developing much in the fashion sense? Of course, we never left the fashion, because clothes are the daily need in human life. The designers are still copying from the past. And fashion is repeating itself over and over. Since the development of the zipper, what was the most important thing that was made specifically for the clothing industry? Hard to recall, isn’t it? It seems to be the common fairy-tale idea “Rags to Riches” lost its translation in the fashion sense. It comes out more likely from riches to rags, rather than the rags to riches.

No comments: