Writing Portfolio

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, May 2010

—

In an industry of luxurious denims and monkey fur coats. Shahrezzan Ezani tries to see the green in fashion; and it isn’t envy.  

The fashion industry is decadent. And for good reason too: style. And when the thought of environmental awareness enters the realm of fashion, it becomes an empty void; as if the green culture was never meant to befit “New York, London, Milan and Paris”.

The business of fashion is an imperative subtext to each country’s economy, especially those with major fashion houses (e.g. Dior in Paris and Dolce and Gabanna in Milan) that lead trends. In the terms of high-end fashion, a unique quality is valuable – the thing that makes a pair of RM16000 Balmain jeans more sought after than a pair of RM30 pair from Tesco. So, even if the sales volume for a pair of jeans from Tesco is higher than a pair with a 5-figure pricetag, it is important to understand what the source of the trend is – the Balmain jeans.

But that isn’t to say that there has never been an approach to coalesce two mismatching spectrums that seem to have no such confluence.

Although in the proper sense of fashion design when the likes of Karl Lagerfeld or Roberto Cavalli come to mind, the use of eco-friendly products (like organic cotton, hemp and bamboo) or the radical and highly creative use of “junk” is primarily something that doesn’t come down a runway for the front row editors and celebrities to ponder on and study. Things like eco-fashion play up in less pretentious parts of fashion city – LA is known to have a collection of C-grade fashion designers: failed actor turned fashion designer, porn star turned fashion designer, dog groomer turned fashion designer… you get it. Someone like Janice Dickinson scouts models for an eco-fashion show. But why?

Does Karl Lagerfeld design Chanel jackets from tweed? Or weed?

To find a confluence between fashion and being “green” can be found in a hyper-artistic perspective as opposed to the real business of fashion. For example: the newspaper dress. As silly as the idea is to wear a newspaper dress in an insane industry made up of Philip Treacy hats and Nicholas Kirkwood shoes (note: Kirkwood’s glow-in-the-dark ‘melted candle’ heels for Rodarte’s fall 2010 collection is brilliant), the outcomes are awe-inspiring. But using sustainable, recycled and/or recyclable materials for ready-to-wear might not be the brightest idea.

Haute couture is an art where designers display their brilliance in exclusive designs, which are custom-fitted; meaning there is only one of each creation. It is in couture where the environmental cause can create awareness – as art and not something anyone purchases off the rack to wear to dinner. Back in 2007, London designer Gary Harvey created nine creations of “ethical couture”, many of which were made of sustainable material like jeans, military clothing, wedding dresses, baseball jackets and Hawaiian shirts. His opening dress was made out of newspaper – 30 copies of the Financial Times to be exact. These pieces not only showcased a strong representation of “eco” and “green“ on the fashion runway, but it, most importantly, sashayed an aesthetic quality unexpected from “junk”. Each piece was draped, cut, folded and sewn together; immaculately accentuating well-tailored couture that even John Galliano could be jealous of, but let’s not contest to that.

But therein lies the major problem: trends. This is an industry that feeds on innovation, novel ideas and approaches, and occasional revisits – trends. What Miuccia Prada did with excessive lace for Prada’s fall 2008 collection was the most prodigious stroke in fashion trends; and she constantly surprises and sets the Prada and Miu Miu fashion houses amongst the handful of trend leaders. But with the par excellence follows a short staying power when the next collection arrives; another trend is set and the former is left forgotten, physically. If Miuccia’s lace can be put aside so easily, what more Gary Harvey’s creations, which, since 2007, has been a one-off collection.

Other alternatives for a more environmentally aware fashion industry include the use of organic cloth – apart from hemp – but the price of good organic cloth is just as expensive as any other high quality material used in fashion design. Imagine an Armani Prive couture show and the inimitable choice of materials, prints, embellishments and seaming that set Giorgio Armani’s creations at an alpine level of fashion and celeb-dom. Why would Armani compromise?

There are gateways for environmental awareness into the fashion world and many fashion followers are more alert of earth’s current deteriorating situation. Even if the cause might not be highly successful in fashion, there are other outlets to raise sensitivity on the subject of the environment. But every once in a while, the environmental approach works – Naomi Campbell was the one who donned Gary Harvey’s newspaper dress down the runway at London Fashion Week.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, May 2010

—

With mass production as the evil scheme in a global society where individuality is very important to oneself, how will riding solo and standing out from the rest be possible? Shahrezzan Ezani mounts the high horse in a world of the Topshop uniform and silly-girl singer/songwriters on iPods, and finds a little bit more than an adverse reaction to mass production – the power of the consumer.

In Malaysia, before the arrival of high street labels like Topshop – the sole label that largely contributed to KL’s “hip” uniformity since 2000 – there was no worrying about bumping into another person wearing the same thing. But with the arrival of the hipster subculture in the past decade, individuality plays an important part as this collective of men and women in their 20s and 30s value independent thinking and counter-culture. For high-income earners with enough disposable income to fill a mattress each month for safekeeping, an exciting wardrobe would go without saying. So how does the average white-collar hipster stand out if the most he can afford is the homogeneous high street brand?

It’s the common viewpoint that consumerism, in a way, reflects a communist style (in the fashion sense) of setting the masses to a “fixated” choice of products. Take for example, the food and beverage industry. Soft drinks magnate corporation, the Coca-Cola Company, and the famous fast-food chain, McDonald’s, need no introduction, and at the rate and amount produced and served, they could well be monopolies in their own industries. But then there are Pepsi and Burger King; the alternative choice put second to their rivals.

In today’s mass-marketed fashion industry the imperative take for fashion variation is individuality, and though the common viewpoint is that everyone is made to look the same, it is that communist-like concept that instills and builds individuality from plain white T-shirts. Add to that the influence of the ‘hipsters’ and the result is a simple market that does not need a wide choice of products because “individualism is in”.

At Topman, the best-selling and most produced article of clothing is the plain T-shirt, which is available in an array of colours, necklines, fittings and necklines. This homogeneous and mass-produced piece of clothing is the scheme that the high street brand has introduced to encourage creativity and individuality in a society that thrives on self-expression. Plus, it’s cheaper to produce, which is the primary point of mass production.

International brands that sell the basics like T-shirts, leggings, sweaters, jeans, underwear et al. are, currently, the go-to for fashion. American Apparel, Uniqlo and Cotton On are just a few other brands that cater to this market, which brings the bottomline – the market’s demand; the power of the consumer.

So, although the larger fashion industry appears to be of a “stylish” communist regime of uniformity, the choice still belongs to the consumer and the consumer is filled with fashion ingenuity. These mass-produced ‘basics’ are the base for the individual’s fashion experimentation. The plain white v-neck T-shirt can be dressed up or dressed down; add a jacket; pull on a pair of dress pants; stack on necklaces – the possibilities are endless, and the different looks and combinations are infinite.

Although it might seem as if the majority cookie-cutter generation lacks a sense of individuality in a vast space of a mass market and mass production, the one thing that is always present in every generation is a sense to be different and stand out from everyone else – the hipster subculture that was so exclusive in the 40s, 50s and 90s, everyone wanted to be a part of it. And what brands like American Apparel and Topshop do for the consumer is encourage that sense of individuality. Just like how in the music industry, Lady Gaga has proven to be against the mainstream, but still breaking into world music charts.

However, with that said, just about everyone is a hipster now so there are two types of hipsters: the ones who are “cool way before cool was even cool” and the ones who follow the “cool”. Take, for example, the wave of teenage singer/songwriters who seem to be overtaking other established artists in the music industry. A very relevant instance would be the vivacious artiste, Beyonce, losing out to the guitar-strumming Taylor Swift for the much coveted Album of the Year Grammy Award. What happened right there is what the power of the consumer is all about; it’s about trends. And Taylor Swift just happened to be the lucky talented one out of the lot of pre-teen hummers.

With so much movement between the decades, and fashion and music eras, one can only wait to see how individuality (or uniformity) will be in the future. And how, in a creative culture filled with influences from every angle, a blur illusion between sparking and following trends can be clearer to individuals – hipster or otherwise – who are, most of the time, oblivious to the fact that they are the powers that control the market.

At (the now-defunct) KL Fashion Week in 2006, an extremely attractive young designer compiled a collection called ‘Shipwrecked’, which was a mix of rich and soft earth colours on satin, chiffon, linen, jersey and faux snakeskin. Each piece was put together in an imaginative and beautifully haphazard manner to form short dresses, blouses, short waistcoats, skirts and evening dresses. The final piece was a full, floor-length skirt made of layers and layers of rough strips of chiffon; a finishing that is rarely seen on local runways. 

But that was in 2006. “I’ve come to simplify my designs somewhat, because even if some of my clients like fresh ideas, others are still hesitant,” says Nurita Harith, the aforementioned designer who has now expanded her line to Singapore and Melbourne.

The truth is Malaysian fashion and style is one that is none too adventurous. And when it does approach the fashionably venturous note, what comes down the runway ends up being highly audacious in the non-creative sense.

So clients are cautious, and tend to demand the same thing, leading to fashion inspiration remaining low. This is still apparent even today – at a recent fashion week in KL, some designers stuck to the same old ‘evening gown formula’. What could have been an otherwise brilliant show was left unfilled with a blatant hollow lacking originality and imagination; two very, very important aspects to being a designer.

But of course Harith cannot afford to lose these, what with recent expansions to overseas boutiques; this is one of the reasons she goes to London ever so often for inspiration and a breather.

“Every year, I look forward to going back to the UK. My mum is there, but also because I need to find refreshing inspiration. I go to places like galleries for inspiration. I find inspiration in London designers like Bora Aksu, Christopher Kane and so on,” she reveals.

And she is always inspired when she returns as well. As a fashion graduate from Surrey Institute of Art and Design, Harith has a quintessentially very British train of thought when it comes to fashion and style – and when it comes to British fashion and style, we know it is in a league of its own where experimentation plays an integral part in the innovation of fashion design.

“I tend to think more about the market now, but I try not to lose myself in the process,” Harith adds, further explaining the difference between being a fashion designer in Malaysia and the UK. “Even if I might lose sight sometimes, I always, always have some of ‘me’ in my designs.”

The same cannot be said for her line overseas; in places like Melbourne and London, it is a very different clientele the likes of Harith cater to, and their willingness to experiment is often met with enthusiasm and support.

Yet, being part of a very small group of designers in Malaysia that know what they are doing without being blinded by personal preference or the buyers’ demands, Harith does try to introduce brave concepts to change the local facade whenever she can.

At present, annual fashion weeks in Malaysia are an amazing and fantastical circus show of avant-garde costumes, ravishing models and superstar guests, and that should not be the priority – instead, the priority should be in a showcase of creative brilliance and novel refinement in fashion design. 

She agrees. “Sometimes, it seems that the initiative is in the wrong place; it should be in creating mind-blowing, inspirational and influential fashion and not wholly adhering to customer demands. Balance, if you must,” she observes.

So, although she would rather re-tailor to shape it into something more relevant to the fashion world, here is one of KL’s better designers who seems to find a way to fit into the consumerism of the industry without losing an original vision.

But how would she and her friends do it? How would a handful of designers readjust an industry that is already fixed on the ‘evening gown formula’? Do they defeat the other designers? Or do they go against the consumerist influence?

Nurita Harith doesn’t answer – she has her plans kept well under wraps. But it is comforting to know that there are designers in the local scene who comprehend fashion’s main approach; that it is a creative expression. And although Harith finds herself serving gratification to clients, an indispensible knowledge in fashion, fashion design and style is forever instilled and acts as an armour to the adverse effect of the local fashion industry and the age of consumerism.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, May 2010

—

Without a doubt, Vogue is the most read fashion magazine in the world. And with international editions in 18 different countries, it is the most globally influential fashion publication. But with international recognition, there is the fact that different countries approach fashion from varying aspects. Shahrezzan Ezani looks at the case in point: Anna Wintour’s US Vogue and Carine Roitfeld’s French Vogue, and the opposing fashion horizons on which they set.

The influence Vogue has on the world of fashion and the fashion-curious is of leviathan proportions due to the authoritative name Vogue has built for itself since its late-19^th century inception. And as The New York Times book critic, Caroline Weber, so eloquently put it: “Vogue is to our era what the idea of God was, in Voltaire’s famous parlance, to his: if it didn’t exist, we would have to invent it. Revered for its editorial excellence and its visual panache, the magazine has long functioned as a bible for anyone worshiping at the altar of luxury, celebrity and style. And while we perhaps take for granted the extent to which this trinity dominates consumer culture today, Vogue’s role in catalyzing its rise to pre-eminence cannot be underestimated.”

During Vogue’s foetal beginning, where it was founded in the US, the only other country where Vogue found success was France, thus leading to the two famous international editions of Vogue: Vogue and Vogue Paris. Anna Wintour has been the fashion prophet since her inception as editor to Vogue US in 1988, and Carine Roitfeld, the ultra hip counter-culture Vogue Paris editor since 2001. Standing on the pedestals of fashion knowledge, Wintour and Roitfeld are like yin and yang at two very opposing angles.

The United States of America, the world’s unofficial superpower, with a population above 300 million, is a much havocked mix of tasteful and tasteless when it comes to fashion. And that’s a fact. Imagine the difference between the fashionable New York, the ‘country’ of Middle America and the mainstream glitter of California. Then there’s Paris, France – fashion capital of the world – with a population of just over 62 million in Metropolitan France. As the provenance of haute couture and pret-a-porter, the focus on fashion in France is stronger; what with Paris Fashion Week as the world’s main fashion event. So the reason to the dissimilarity between the two editions of Vogue lies in their respective audience, which also spreads globally. Everyone in the world reads Vogue, but Vogue Paris draws in a select crowd; a “secret society” of sorts.

Carine Roitfeld is a brilliant enigma in fashion and she always keeps in mind a hip ingenuity, which is incomparable. Not only does Roitfeld’s vision translate through the whole tone of each month’s issue of Vogue Paris, it also echoes wildly in her fashion styling for the publication’s main fashion editorials.

In a generation polluted by mass consumerism, it is difficult to be distinct and prominent amongst the bound ocean of fashion uniformity. Carine Roitfeld emerged in the fashion/fashion publishing scene with befitting panache as a stylist at French ELLE and then working alongside photographer friend, Mario Testino for US Vogue and Vogue Paris fashion shoots. And with that strong forte in fashion styling, Roitfeld displayed an unorthodox method that was imperative in fashion – an industry that, sometimes, swerves dangerously close to the edge of homogeneity. And just FYI, Roitfeld was there when Tom Ford re-imagined Gucci in the mid-90s; sparking its epic shift back into fashion.

In the February 2010 issue of Vogue Paris, Roitfeld envisaged a 60s French Algeria for the main fashion spread that featured key pieces from all the spring 2010 collections and the primary style note was headwraps. Arabian scarves were wrapped tightly over high buns, belly dancer scarves covered the face and black lace became veils; each look had been completely refashioned in a way least expected. It’s all in the element of surprise because in fashion, it’s not about giving them what they want; it’s about giving them what they don’t yet know they want. For the August 2007 issue of Vogue Paris, Roitfeld found literal inspiration from Anna Wintour and styled model Snejana Onopka in a short bob, sunglasses, short dresses, coats over the shoulders and even a cup of takeaway coffee. For the issue that tied in with contemporary art (November 2009), Roitfeld had Keith Haring strokes painted onto a naked Isabeli Fontana and wrapped a Louis Vuitton towel into a toga. And that is the hip ingenuity that separates the mass vision of Vogue US to the contradistinction of Vogue Paris.

Anna Wintour, on the other hand, might be thought of as the tight-laced, stick-up-the-butt fashion vanguard – a vanguard deservingly so, too – but it is that which is what forms the complete perception of Wintour. As opposed to the very Parisian Roitfeld, Wintour is a born and bred Brit and she had always known from the start that she was made to edit Vogue. But she was never always a tightwad; in the 70s, after she was introduced to Bob Marley, she went missing with him for a week.

Wintour has had more years in the industry than Roitfeld, which concords to more experience in the publishing, fashion and fashion publishing industries (and more fashion eras). When she had finally gotten her eyed post as editor at Vogue, the magazine was focused more on lifestyle than fashion to capture the masses, as fashion was thought of as something intimidating. On her first issue as editor, Wintour directed a completely different look – the cover model wore a pair of faded jeans that cost USD50 and a Christian Lacroix sweater that cost USD10,000. The concept that she introduced was to make fashion more appealing to the masses and that fashion can be and is a part of every common day. And when Wintour successfully draws in the majority, it projects higher revenue from sales and advertising.

Patrick McCarthy, publisher of Women’s Wear Daily (the Reuters of the fashion industry), points out: “I don’t think [Diana] Vreeland (Vogue’s previous Editor) had that kind of concentration.” Wintour’s view on fashion and the fashion industry is magnified; she looks in at the most minute crevices where fashion and business are complementary and highly bankable and she creates a magnitude of influence that reaches the retail industry.

Carine Roitfeld and Anna Wintour, two commanding supremacies in their own right, know what they do – and they sure as hell know what they wear. On one runway is Roitfeld, walking the highly creative wave; attracting the ones who understand that the essence of fashion is innovation. And on another runway is Wintour, who rides on tradition and a steadfast, bankable train of thought; always keeping a keen eye on fashion and its trends without letting the business aspect pixelate her sight.

To pick between the two is a task even a master thesis writer in fashion might not be able to conclude with a singular choice. And with all choices in life, there are always two sides to weigh – and for the fashionable, those two sides are the incomparable Anna Wintour and Carine Roitfeld.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, April 2010

—

Over the decades, shows at fashion weeks around the world have evolved into more than a slew of models walking before seated fashion buyers, moguls, magazine editors and celebrities. Sometimes stealing the limelight from the clothes coming down the long walk, the fashion show has become a theatre of sort, where the models are the thespians, the clothes are the costumes and the runway is the stage. Shahrezzan Ezani understands the theatrical architecture of a show in its most obvious epitome – the genius that was the late Lee Alexander McQueen and the pure breed he recreated in fashion design.

L’enfant terrible was a tiring nickname the fashion world thrust onto him, following his purely bold moves in the fashion industry. The blueprint of his plan of actions, decisions and designs projected into controversy; and scandalous fashion is always the flavour du jour. After all, with the perverse ingenuity presented down the mutilated runways that always left his audience in awe, there was never a complaint or dull moment when faced with Alexander McQueen’s twisted brilliance.

Any dress can come down a runway and every designer, in their own right, can feed the fashion hungry with eye-candy creations; innovative and forward, or classic and timeless. But with McQueen comes another realm of how the beauty of a woman is exhibited. More oft than seldom, McQueen is misunderstood and portrayed in criticisms et al. to be a certain misogynist; as if he were mocking women through his designs. The overstated hour glass figure of a woman, the unimaginative blatancy of a naked woman, the pompous actions of a woman; it was misreading like these that infamously dubbed him l’enfant terrible. But for his true love in fashion and fashion design, McQueen always kept in mind the perfect and natural beauty of the woman and the woman’s figure.

He had always held onto a certain fabulous extravagance in his designs; that a real woman is never ‘just another girl’. In all his collections, that extravagance was never once toned down because he cleverly cloaked each with a sheer layer of theatrics and storyline. Sometimes, his show incorporated a disturbing basis, like a mental hospital, garbage, the deathly cold… and death; such were the things that intentionally diverted the audience from what was the true design in McQueen.

Now, I should make the assumption that not everyone knows about a McQueen show and why it was something of fantastical proportions. His wasn’t the usual walk-pose-pose-walk spectacles that zoom in and focus on the clothes; McQueen’s show was a musical, an art installation, a debutante ball, Atlantis, and his audience always found themselves constantly (pleasantly) distracted. It is said that even the most important people in fashion become eager teenagers whenever waiting for a McQueen show to start. For his spring 2005 ‘Picnic at Hanging Rock’ collection, his models played chess pieces on the square ‘chessboard’ stage. All in soft candy colours, the collection had everything from dreamy ‘tea party’ dresses to American football shoulder guards. Lily Cole entered in a white catsuit and took her place as the castle. When all the ‘pieces’ were placed, the lights dimmed and the robotic voice of a woman on the PA system directs each ‘piece’ to trump each other towards a final “checkmate”. Moments like that recapture the attention towards the clothes and then the audience refocuses on every other outfit. They become constantly excited to find out what happens next in the show and how the next outfit would be more spectacular than the one before. After all, having a music video producer (Sam Gainsbury), as opposed to the fixture of a fashion show director, would lead to a novel synergy of highly imaginative and creatively brilliant minds.

For his spring 2001 collection, his audience were faced with their reflections on a glass box for an uncomfortable hour before the lights from inside the box came on to reveal what seemed like a padded cell of a mental institution. And in the middle, a smaller box made of dirty frosted glass. The collection was aptly titled ‘Asylum’. At the end of the show – after the models walked out in tailored suits, showstopping dresses of feathers, slashed down the side of the torso and a headpiece of stuffed birds – the sides of the inner glass case fall open and moths fly out; revealing a naked, full-bodied woman reclining on a chaise lounge, breathing through a tube and head mask. McQueen somehow found a beauty in the most unknown crevices of the opposite of beautiful. And his search worked, as it resulted in his majority audience understanding the very blatant attraction his designs have. The audience saw it in his flowing dresses; in the wings of the underrated moths; in the naked woman who seemed to mimic a Renaissance painting; in the intricate architecture of the show.

If McQueen started his career by creating things he wanted, he successfully matured by being influenced by the market. Fortunately, by doing so, his creativity never altered because the market and his designs were complementing, unlike many avant-garde designers whose designs need to be followed by deep thought, which then provoked confusion.

“I’m 40 now, but I want this to be a company that lives way beyond me,” said McQueen before his death on 11 February 2010. Creating a deep-etched mark in fashion history with every collection, Alexander McQueen had no match, and it is beyond thought as to who would replace the late McQueen? Here was the man who kicked Galliano out of the House of Givenchy; the man who haunted his audience with the ghostly apparition of a holographic Kate Moss; the man who created discomfort by sending wolves down the runway in La Conciergerie, where Marie Antoinette was imprisoned before the guillotine; the man who wrote “I am a c*nt” in the lining of Prince Charles’ jacket, whilst tailoring on Savile Row. The infinite horizon of his unrivalled imagination created the most original fashion pieces in the world, even if it were an elaborate demi-couture dress or the Skull Scarf. In his fall/winter 2009-2010 collection, McQueen modified the classic houndstooth print into red-and-black and the print graduated into black crows on a red background. He created the 12-inch ‘Armadillos’ for his spring 2010 collection, and not one model fell; Lady Gaga was the first to wear them in the music video to her single ‘Bad Romance’. Bjork’s Homogenic album cover was creatively directed by McQueen and she was made to represent an overt and fabulous warrior woman who fights with love, not weapons. “I had 10 kilos of hair on my head, and special contact lenses, and a manicure that prevented me from eating with my fingers, and gaffer tape around my waist and high clogs so I couldn’t walk easily.”

 “If only”, “to have been”, “was”, “had”, “saw”, “touched”, “felt” – everything is, now, in the past tense. Alexander McQueen’s unending creativity only proved that there was nowhere else for him to go but forward into the future.  His ideas, which will not be projected unto mortal life any longer, will be kept, securely, in the heaven. And we are, now, all sitting at the front row of his fashion show, guessing the next outfit that will never make an entrance and the storyline that will never be told.

Rest in peace, Lee.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, April 2010

—

The structured design in fashion was something of the late 80s and early 90s. In our time of finding inspiration from re-examination of the past, Shahrezzan Ezani compiles some of the more memorable fashion blueprints in structured design.

Thierry Mugler: The designer was at the head of trends in the 90s. In 1992, Mugler directed George Michael’s music video for Too Funky, in which Michael never appeared. Models walked out in Mugler creations instead. Beyonce brought Mugler back into our era when she re-introduced the designer’s hard structured designs in her wardrobe.

Gareth Pugh: Quite possible the Thierry Mugler of our time, this Central Saint Martin’s graduate would leave none of his audience in a dull daze. His fetishist designs of non-human imaginations have, surprisingly, been embraced by fashion’s rule makers. And, again, Beyonce.

Viktor & Rolf: This Amsterdam-based duo have always found innovative basis for their creations. They’ve sent out models to look as if they were lying down in bed, with pillows as collars and duvets as dresses. For their fall/winter 2007-2008 collection, models walked out precariously rigged with spotlights on a pole above their heads.

Christian Dior Couture: Under the symphonic direction of John Galliano, Dior’s couture collection has always been one to look forward to during couture fashion week. Galliano always found an impossible material to incorporate (and make his seamstresses suffer). In any couture piece, from a distance the look is soft, but up close one can’t begin to imagine the work put into something alike origami.

Hussein Chalayan: Most possibly knowledgeable in technology, Hussein Chalayan finds more than tailoring in his designs. He has turned chair covers into dresses and wooden tables into skirts; he has made dresses self-mutilate as if it were alive; he has made a singular hat completely undress a model. When it comes to structure, Chalayan is the architect, the mathematician and the technician.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, March 2010

—

Sports and fashion appear to be of two highly opposing spectrums; and for a member of either end, it seems highly impossible to find a synergy between the two. Au contraire, speed racer. The union between sports and fashion has complemented each other throughout an illustrious history on a striking Olympic-sized runway and Shahrezzan Ezani digs into the affair between the two.

It isn’t about the introduction of fashion to sports, but it is more about the evolution of fashion in sports because fashion has always been an integral part of, well, everything. Sportswear has been refined, bedazzled and its ‘cool’ status upped; and in this evolution, sports has also entered and found its place as a key note in fashion design. The requirement of proper attire for certain sports has revolved into something to adapt to as opposed to something to adhere to.

Cue trendsetting.

Gabrielle ‘Coco’ Chanel, infamously, went against the norm of the early 20^th century. She dropped the pompous everyday frocks of feathered hats, constricting corsets and derriere enhancements for her boyfriend’s shirts and jodhpurs – which she altered to perfection. Soon enough, horseback riding on a side saddle became a dwindling art as she opted for trousers as opposed to a floor-length skirt. John Galliano exhibited equestrian accents in Dior’s spring 2010 couture collection. Ironic to Coco Chanel’s translation of the side saddle to futility, Galliano was inspired by a picture of a woman on side saddle and the collection showcases his master drapery of poufy satin alongside dressage top hats and veils, red showjumping jackets, gloves and the classic button-down wed unto exaggerated ball gowns. In our time, the maverick of reinvention, Madonna, has fused aerobics and equestrian into her superstar image. During her ‘Confessions’ tour in 2006, costume design was headed by Jean-Paul Gaultier and one section of the performance featured the equestrian theme. Madonna made a grand entrance, emerging from a gargantuan USD2million Swarovski disco ball, clad in dressage garb rendered into a fetish and sexually powerful level of costume design – leather, lace, satin and O’Halloran horsewhip included.

For the current spring 2010 collections, some designers use the influence to create highlights as opposed to blatant sportswear design. Frida Giannini, Creative Director of Gucci, has finally decided to go forward in fashion and not stick to her trusty formula of redesigning vintage – the spring 2010 collection sees a woman not afraid of heights and the sexually faithful Gucci essence is emblazoned with sport mesh on leggings worn with bandage high heels and elastic dynamic rope in plastic tubes held together by shiny metal carabineers on backless jackets, cut-out minidresses and metal-plated handbags. Nicolas Ghesquière, the next best thing to Balenciaga after, well, Cristobal Balenciaga, has always incorporated a very futuristic sense of the active lifestyle into his designs and brought the Balenciaga brand back into people’s minds. Aerodynamic cuts to jackets that look almost holographic and high heels that look like they can be worn for jungle trekking; it’s something effortless to Ghesquière when it comes to equating a synergy for sports and fashion.

While designers like Alexander Wang, Karl Lagerfeld, Derek Lam and Jeremy Scott are understating fashion by dressing it down with hoodies, sweat pants and American football jerseys, the welcoming of sports stars into the fashion spectrum might not have always had a visually pleasant reception. David Beckham transformed from floppy-haired boy to male fashion icon after his marriage to out-of-sync Spice, Victoria Adams, and the fashionable duo hasn’t been out of the scrutinising flashbulbs of the paparazzo from England to LA to Spain. The influence of fashion is evident in this pairing, and, in turn, David Beckham has also been a source of inspiration to fashion designers. Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana were thoroughly inspired by David for their men’s collections (circa 2004) for both labels Dolce & Gabbana and D&G. Models came out dressed in David’s then trademark style – Henley tops, distressed low-rise jeans, rosaries, newsboy caps and aviators. We’ve seen David in a nonchalantly tucked blue shirt and jeans; stacked Asian beaded bracelets; fitted leather jackets; the infamous sarong; and suits fitted to perfection. In a fashionable sense, David doesn’t sound like your textbook sportsman.

And then there’s Cristiano Ronaldo. Long pause. Very long pause. Possibly mirroring Beckham’s brilliant ray of fashion in a completely mutilated approach, Cristiano leaves one pondering his sexuality – although, it is subject to stereotyping, discriminating and segmenting. What was running through his head when he decided to step out carrying a Gucci clutch with a matching Gucci belt? Or when he donned hot pants and a fitted baby pink tee an inch away from being a midriff? It’s baffling for one to decide whether his confidence is admirable or pushing it way off. If not a confusion of sexuality (or just the comfort of “I’m being myself”), Cristiano’s sense of style would be the result of the Eurotrash equation. He could well be the male version of Donatella Versace, what with his extreme tan and tactless approach to being ‘trendy’.

Or maybe Cristiano should be taking pointers from the Williams sisters, Serena and Venus. The plain fact that you see these two Herculean ladies take the effort to appear fashionable on court deserves applauds. Finally, after a long history of tennis, spectators are dazzled by the bold colours and variations of tennis outfits… then there are the critics and self-proclaimed critics who diminish the sisters’ fashion statements into an emergency call to the fashion police. But the sisters are just two from a line of fashionable women in the sports arena. In the mid-19^th century, Julia Holmes climbed one of the Colorado peaks in a pair of bloomers. In the 80s, track and field Olympian, the late Flo Jo (as Florence Griffith-Joyner was more affectionately known) was famous for her long nails and full running suit that flashed only one bare leg all the way up to her hip. It’s moments like these when the fashion aspect of sports is celebrated and etched in our memory – Maria Sharapova is a noted athlete welcomed into the fashion scene with open arms, which is probably due to her lack of manly shoulders. A regular on the red carpet and in front of the clamouring photographers, Sharapova has been spotted in Lanvin, Vuitton and Thakoon; appearing alike a Russian runway model. With Sharapova’s rise in the broader world, which finds the unexpectedly sterling union between sports and fashion, who is Anna Kournikova?

The late Alexander McQueen has designed for Puma, Stella McCartney with Adidas, Commes des Garcons with Speedo and Terence Koh for Converse – these memorable collaborations only further exhibit a fashionable movement forward when it comes to the inclusion and innovation of sports in fashion design (and vice versa). Fashion critics, athletes, Carine Roitfeld and Anna Wintour only need brace themselves for a quick volley.

Published in Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication, February 2010

—

While most of the world is hung-over by the launch of another polished new decade, the supreme beings of fashion have already left their marks and are racing the industry in their furry Vuitton clogs. Too late, layman, but they’ve written out what brings in this next decade of fashion. Frida Giannini, Gucci’s creative director, and Jay-Z could be seen as key notes to the new decade – they epitomise what the 10s will bring us and what to await for the 20s. Or should the new Fashion Editor of Aesthetics Creative Culture Publication not be thinking too far ahead in fashion?

In 2003, Gucci was the third most mentioned brand in Billboard top 20 singles – the prominent brand name appeared in 47 different songs to be exact. Jay-Z has about three singles in which his rapping included ‘Gucci’. In 2004, Frida Giannini became creative director for Gucci and revived a Gucci epoch, moving away from Tom Ford’s erotically scandalous Gucci towards a more low profile Gucci. The change was new to 90s Gucci, but it never lost its “I’m rich, sexy and young, and I always party” magnetism. In 2008, Jay-Z married Beyoncé Knowles who, in her most underrated appearance before the paparazzo, wore a velvet Gucci bomber jacket in dark brown (from the Spring 2007 collection) along with a check shirt, jeans, suspenders and a pair of black heels. That’s a bit of trivia for you.

2010 onwards is like a second chance at the third millennium in terms of fashion. It’s as if, in the years spanning 2000 to 2009, the fashion world was a little awkward. Testing, making mistakes, learning from mistakes – we all know the process of ‘if at first you don’t succeed…’ – and finally, bringing in a finely tuned new fashionable decade. The 10s will see an upgraded and innovated past, which will be laced with very forward acuity. If you think, “sure, we’ve seen it all before”, think again because this is a reinvention grilled well done. Frida Giannini resurrected the 60s Flora print from a scarf made for Grace Kelly. Frida is the 10s and we find her breathing creativity and imagination into Gucci, and her key to all this is to not lose sight of the brand’s maternity. For spring 2010, Frida incorporates an Asian element: the ikat pattern (so has Dries Van Noten, who also uses block batik print). But her collection is very futuristic when all her previous collections largely took notes from the vintage of disco, boho and the hippies; there were ultramodern accents derived from sportwear, like mesh, harnesses, lacings of rubber piping and silver hardware. It’s all very slick and sexy, but without a pair of boobs in your face like what Tom Ford would have done.

On January 1^st 2010, Jay-Z released his fifth single off his eleventh studio album, The Blueprint 3. It’s called On To the Next One and it’s an ill track designed with a frenzy of tribal Africa with electronic thumps and zips topped off with Jay’s flowing rhymes. Apart from the opus that is On To the Next One, what makes it so 2010 is Jay himself. He’s been around for a very long time (1996); since Tupac released his album All Eyez on Me and the Spice Girls debuted with Wannabe – and now, Jay’s back in the scene for a new batch of attention-deficit-disordered MTV youth. At the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards, he and Alicia Keys closed the show with Empire State of Mind, which is now everyone’s anthem, rap/hip-hop haters included. Fashionably, Jay has stuck close to his roots in the projects of Brooklyn – he’s had a bandana flop on the side of his forehead, gargantuan bling necklaces and ol’ skool kicks – but Jay has always been one to keep it on the low with nothing too extensive like grilled teeth; he’s like hip-hop’s answer to a member of the Rat Pack, Kanye included. But Kanye has become very 2009 – he came, he ruled, he innovated, and he also became 2009’s FAIL much thanks to his jest at the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. Beyoncé Knowles also definitely ups Jay’s 2010 cool factor. Approaching the 90s love for Thierry Mugler, Beyoncé is one to set trends as opposed to following them and this is also evident in her music; she steers away from what’s happening around her and in the industry and sneakily searches outwards for novel finds. By marrying a woman who is 2000 and beyond, Jay-Z brings a new dawn of hip-hop royalty.

While Frida and Hova are cited (by myself) as the epitome of the 10s, the fashion and music industry is a vast thing and the amount of current shakers – as well as potentials – is innumerable. After all, Frida is only one designer for one brand and Jay is only one musician in one genre. 2010 will see a v2.0 of everything that has happened in the past decade, as well as a very forward perspective – what we’ve imagined the future to be in the past is finally coming together. We’re finally getting a hang of what artists like Stanley Kubrick, Hanna-Barbera, Hussain Chalayan and Bjork have been picturing and making us understand.

Don’t fix your screen because it’s the future. Welcome.