More than any other art form, fashion is an immediate expression of our zeitgeist. While painting and sculpture can seem removed from our understanding, fashion is so familiar, so ubiquitous to our experience, that it is tangible, accessible, and open to a wide range of interpretations. Individuals who might avoid publicly commenting on a canvas by Picasso or a bronze by Brancusi readily disclose their thoughts about a gown by Galliano or a mule by Blahnik. Unlike its haughty siblings, fashion—even in its most extreme and avant-garde expression—does not estrange us from the belief in the essential aptness of our judgment.
Inspired by both the immediacy and the democracy of the blog format, this exhibition is intended to provide a platform for the opinions of our visitors—both in the galleries and online. Although a number of the pieces, selected from examples acquired since 2000, have been exhibited before, many are displayed for the first time. The selection is a sampling of the range of forms and periods covered by the Museum’s encyclopedic collection, but it is weighted more heavily in twentieth-century and contemporary works.
Fashion’s power lies in its complete integration in our lives. Imbued with meaning, it speaks of dreams, desires, memories, and experiences. As Virginia Woolf wrote in her poetic masterpiece Orlando (1928), “Vain trifles as they seem, clothes . . . change our view of the world and the world’s view of us.” By opening a dialogue with visitors to the exhibition and to the blog, the curators hope to expand their own views and further the practice of fashion interpretation and connoisseurship.
To promote considered assessment of the works, the material on exhibit will be posted on the blog in random sequence. Since one of the chief aims of “blog.mode: addressing fashion” is to encourage subjective readings of fashion, we invite the more reticent visitor to take some confidence from Oscar Wilde’s observation, “The highest Criticism, being the purest form of personal impression, is in its way more creative than creation.”
December 17, 2007 at 11:01 am
Hello! I love the collection, and love the idea of being able to blog about it on site. I wonder if this is the beginning of museum visitors having input on exhibitions…
December 17, 2007 at 11:03 am
The historical aspect of fashion obviously reflects the social lifestyles of the times. Only wealthy or noble women could afford to own such extravagant garments. However, one wonders how did some of these fashions, from as early as the l700s, survive in such good condition? The fabrics are in remarkable condition as are the vibrant colors. Since these women did not regularly bath of use deodorant how is it that these garments do not show any signs of wear?
Question: Why are the descriptive signs so low/hard to read? Signage needs more light focused on the descriptive postings. Polly Guerin/Pollytalk
December 17, 2007 at 11:31 am
Beautiful show. Pieces look gorgeous on invisible mounts. Clothing as art. Bravo on the front of the Worth court gown. Loved the various spiralings of Gernreich, Beene, Dior. And fascinating re: Chanel embroidery. An example of let the objects speak to us. The 30’s underdress is lovely - and don’t you think rare in cotton?
Best and Happy Holidays to you all.
Jan
December 17, 2007 at 11:47 am
It is wonderful to see such a cultural institution embrace an interactive exhibition format. I am curious (and will have to check archived exhibition catalogs) to know if this is also one of the first times that journalists’ prose has been included in the item descriptions. Surely there is much fashion fodder to choose from. I appreciate your selections and would have loved to see more sturdy words from Horyn, Menkes, and Givan placed in these hallowed halls. Also, three well-deserved cheers for the inclusion of Rodarte.
December 17, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Very interesting, thoughtful, and truly fabulous! There is an abundance of riches and lots of inspiration from the designs to the construction.
I particularly like the juxtaposition of old and new, Chanel and Schiap, luxurious materials and paper. I can’t imagine wearing either the Chinese head-dress or the heel-less shows, but I loved both, but my favorites were–alas, there are too many to list.
The invisible mannequins and revolving stands are especially nice.
Claire
December 17, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Yes, the passion is everywhere but I did touch one very close and this happened when he was looking at one of his own designs and I am talking about Manolo Blanhnik.
Thankyou Manolo for this wonderful gift for all of us, your f ans. Tatiana Briones
December 17, 2007 at 12:20 pm
A
Ah! After such promise and such a good start in representing men’s fashions along side and even in and of themselves, we now are back to 99% women’s representations. This is bad for many more reasons than I can list here, but especially since it only reinforces the current banality of men’s fashion understanding and the pathetic fear of making any effort to express themselves beyond the most understated. Every beautiful (or not so) women’s dress should be accompanied by the proper men’s outfit for the occasion. THEN, men would get the hint that they too have a sartorial responsibility. Currently, you are just reinforcing the idea that women are the peacocks and men should be looking on or not seen at all. The current supremacy of comfort and casualness primarily for men far from freeing their minds for bigger issues has actually just led to a disintergration of most other standards. Just as it has been proven that school children actually learn and act better when they must abide by clothing (uniform) regulations, so too, I believe are the minds of mankind in general. This is not so farfetched. Just think if when a man got up in the morning he had to consider in far greater detail what he would be doing, who he would be seeing and the real image that he would be projecting all during his day entailing a selection of fabrics, colors, styles and the proper positioning of these things on his body, already his mind would be more selective, refined and decerning. I would inherently trust such a man to make other decisions with a better sense of discrimination than some slob who pulls on his sweats, doesn’t comb his hair and thinks nothing matters. I’m not saying that we must judge the book entirely by its cover, but we do judge and for good reason. Perhaps the fact that at boarding school we had to change clothing up to five times a day for the various functions of our day, that there was a large span of economic backrounds that all learned to play by the same rules and that like in the military, one was severely judged by how one presented one’s self taught me a special sensitivity to my immediate impression upon seeing a man. But this is not so very different from our general society, and I would very much like the educational side of the Met’s Costume Institue to help our society regain this very important sensitivity. In the past, the upper classes set a standard which was to some degree echoed by all those below who sought to impove themselves. Today we do not have an upper class that has to distinguish itself by anything more than money, which is a very low common demoninator indeed. Infact, they are able to hide behind the carnards of simplicity, democracy and practicality, when really they are just shirking their responsibility to get out there and set a standard and expose themselves for better or worse. People these days actually don’t know what is right and are told anything goes. I would have liked this exhibit to minimally demonstrate to men, the public and Hollywood that the wingtips of a wingtip shirt should project out over the bowtie as they developed from former more elaborate collar treatments rather than the Hollywood habit of shoving them behind the tie so you don’t have to worry about one more detail of how you are looking. Consciousness of self and others is the highest form of communication that we have, and it occurs visually in as strong a manner as any other form of communication that we have.
December 17, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Beyond the simply stunning display, I am thrilled at this unique interface–it’s entirely validating to see a world that has long been accused of elitism and antiquity wholeheartedly embrace the democracy of the blog. Fashion is in fact a truly subjective art, and regardless of a designer’s intended message, each wearer (or in this case, viewer) forms their own intimate connection with a garment. What a brilliant way to open a discourse and allow the public’s opinion to be heard…
December 17, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Intelligent, beautiful and aesthetically functional!!!!
Bravo! Brava!
December 17, 2007 at 7:04 pm
brilliant and exciting! Now the Met and you offer fashionable feedback at your fingertips!
December 18, 2007 at 2:56 am
Looking forward to seeing the exhibit in person.
And, of course, blogging about it.
Blather From Brooklyn
December 18, 2007 at 10:55 am
It’s extraordinary the idea of this new exhibition plus blog, that makes it able for everyone to come closer to historic and current garment. lok forward to see at the Met
December 18, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I like the Pretty in Pink by Vivienne Westwood!
December 18, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Beautiful, glamorous, educational! Some of those dresses are to dream about!
December 18, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Gorgeous exhibit, the Dior from 1948 is absolutely stunning, shows that the true masters of the art of fashion know what will survive and live beyond its time! I would wear that in a second, it’s ageless and unique
December 18, 2007 at 1:52 pm
love the gypsy shirt by Yves, i also love the blue evening dress, i liked the green french suit. i also loved the thy hi red boots, and polka-dotted high heels.
December 18, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Awesome exhibit. I wish I could try them on!
December 18, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Reading your comments make me want to go to the exhibit. I often go to the shows at FIT.
I got kicked out of a fashion exhibit at the MET for sketching. The funny thing is the clothing was not terribly fashionable, it was an exhibition of Russian peasant clothing, and I was in the habit of sketching.
I like the design of this blog. The small text does not bother me, but I would try and change my browser preferences if it became a problem, or try looking on another browser. I use Firefox.
December 19, 2007 at 12:52 pm
This is a fantastic exhibition! Not even exhibtion because Met’s Costume Institute allow us to post our opinion, comment and what’s in our brain about the exhibition or the items. It is a great idea having multi-channel comunication about fashion especially fashion history.
Hope Met’s Costume Institue will have another futuristic program or virtual exhibition. That would be awesome!!!
Pump up the work!
December 19, 2007 at 3:38 pm
I absolutely agree with Mr. Maloney!
December 20, 2007 at 10:01 am
The notion of the exhibit seems to remind me of W.B. Yeats’s poem entitled “Before the World was Made”
It talks about the what if’s…
And it occurred to me that in this postmodern age, we seem to have a bigger consciousness of fashion- a hyperconsciousness of fashion. At one point we may wear this Balenciaga dress mixed with a pair of Terry de Havilland platforms. The dress all at once may recur sentiments on the 18th century costume and somewhat reminiscent of the voluminous silhouettes of the 50’s. Fashion is such an amazing medium because it furthers this so called hyperconsciousness regarding this social function of clothing.
December 20, 2007 at 11:01 am
A magical assemblage of work. Particular favorites include the Galliano “crocodile” dress (a great juxtaposition of delicacy and toughness), the Westwood “Propaganda” dress (so much grace and gorgeous detailing), and the Costin necklaces (fantastic provocation).
Wonderful work with the enphasis on the wonder.
December 20, 2007 at 1:18 pm
This exhibit is wonderful when it has pre-1950’s clothing in representing what people actually wore and what that says about their societies, The more modern the clothes, the less they represent anything but an unwearable (and never worn) artistic vision by a designer who has no interest in making something that modern people would ever want to wear. Fashion of modern times is art, but it does not represent what people actually wear. In future times, the modern collection will tell a viewer very little about the real people of our age. Thus this whole alleged user interface with the blog, allegedly to “democratize” fashion, is a sham.
December 20, 2007 at 1:59 pm
i am so inspired!
if only i had seen this exhibition 3 years earlier when i was doing costume design in high school i would have received much better grades!
dare to be different
December 20, 2007 at 3:07 pm
I love this website’s design. Clean, elegant, easy to use. I’ll be checking in often. Congratulations on executing a good idea with such style.
December 20, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I enjoyed seeing the fashions as a mix of art and architecture. However, the laguage of the descriptions was pompous and pedantic. For whom were they written?
December 21, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Quite lovely. I encourage anyone who has not seen the exhibit to make the trek.
December 21, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Wonderfully displayed with fabulous exhibits! Such nice enjoyment! Wish I could try on the Viviene Westwood pink dress!
December 21, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Are these all here just so I can drool and blog about it? Thanks for the intricate, historical pieces, but I’d like so demand more retrospectives and shows a bit more focused. Appreciated the raven mask up close; the bubblegum Vivienne Westwood gown; the rare Chanel that obviously we decided we loved once we knew the label; and, of course, the resurrection of the Poiret we all gushed over a year ago.
December 21, 2007 at 5:25 pm
And, Rodarte! Rodarte!
December 21, 2007 at 7:03 pm
A very interesting exhibit - though I wished there had been more items to see, especially the older ones going back to the 18th century…
December 23, 2007 at 1:41 pm
very intresting, very phenomenal, AWSOME!
December 23, 2007 at 3:50 pm
It is a phenomenal exhibit of epic proportions. I am loving indeed!
December 24, 2007 at 12:28 pm
nice stop after the egyptians. funs stuff . thanks
December 24, 2007 at 12:35 pm
I find it fascinating that fashion has changed from an expression of wealth, privilege and station to one of an expression of materials and technology. However, fashion seems always to convey popular culture, whether it is worn by the few (socialites or movie stars) or the many. Also, we see that fashion, be it for the few or the many, is always aspirational. Fashion seems to point to what we want to be as well as what we are.
December 24, 2007 at 5:12 pm
Since fashion is my passion, I found the exhibit fascinating. Although many of the dresses were too weird for my taste, and many looked like costumes that I would not wear on Halloween, some of them were acutally gorgeous.\
Please tell me where I can get COLD SHOULDER, the red gown, in a size 10????
December 24, 2007 at 5:15 pm
I did not like most of the garments that are in this show. Most seem to be a joke on either the viewer or the proposed purchaser, who desires a brand name rather than a well made, useful piece of clothing. The one exception to this notion is the historical garments (Worth and Poiret) which are lovely to look at and evoke a time that is long gone.
December 24, 2007 at 5:16 pm
This exhibit is advertising for contemporary designers. Like the Louis Vuitton show in LA currently on display, the lines of commerce, art, advertising and marketing have been blurred. Maybe if I walk twenty-five blocks south and go shopping, I too can own a piece of the exhibit.
December 25, 2007 at 3:51 pm
The unmentioned obvious in the general notes to this wonderful exhibit is that fashion is the only art that’s not complete without a body to wear it. We look at it not just as zeitgeist, or as something commercial we have an inarguable right to comment on, but as something we might wear, fantasize wearing, hate wearing, be embarrassed wearing, love to be able to get away wearing, etc. It’s our minds bringing our bodies to bear on art.
December 26, 2007 at 12:35 pm
I read about this blog on the fashion page of the Milwaukee Journal. What a great idea for a person like me to be able to take a virtual trip to New York and see this exciting exhibit. I hope there is more to come. All the designs are just fantastic!
December 26, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Quel Zeitgeist! My sister is awed by the collection. Keep up the good work!!!
December 26, 2007 at 2:15 pm
I was completely awed by this collection. Keep up the good work!!! I especially enjoyed the bird mask. I would like to borrow it sometime.
December 26, 2007 at 7:51 pm
I’m not a celebrity or a big name in the fashion world, so I don’t get much opportunity to comment publicly on clothes. This blog looks great, and I can’t wait to explore further and learn more about the designs and designers.
December 27, 2007 at 11:26 am
I’m very interested in this idea, and I wonder if publishing the exhibition online is the first of its kind for a major museum, though the Met is well known as a forerunner of innovated thinking. What I wonder is the level of importance the internet will play in the art world from now on. I know the Costume Institute scrutinizes these comments, but for what purpose and if this blog will affect different exhibitions later? Also, currently I am in Virginia however I now have instant access to an exhibit six hours away via web. I do make several trips to NYC specifically to see exhibits (especially at the Met), and I can say that having the exhibit “online” and having my voice be a factor is interesting, but I understand how important it is to see objects in person rather than in two-dimensional mediums. I can view the articles, but I can’t tell you the fine details or how remarkable the pattern is because I just can’t see it that well. Maybe this blog is both positive and negative. People who are regionally closer can choose not to make an exhibit because of online, instant, and free access or whatever factors may be considered. On the other hand, people who are far away DO have access to these special exhibits. I must admit I’m not in favor of two-dimensional mediums (especially books who opt for black and white renditions!) and I completely understand how vital it is to see objects with your own eyes, so hopefully these “blog glimpses” will never overrule the desire to view in person.
I’m still very interested in this blog. Thank you for creating it. It looks like tons of fun.
December 27, 2007 at 11:29 am
I love this exhibit because it accually shows you real outfits. I wonder if, 5000 years from now, people will look at our clothes and say, “That is, like, soooo out of style.” If all museums had this kind of exhibits, it would be totally cool! Bye, bookworm
December 27, 2007 at 12:38 pm
What a terrific idea to have an interactive fashion show/blog. Being able to comment
on designers and the history of design really brings to mind how we have been “slaves” to fashion designers versus designers serving us. We see how we have been constricted thru the ages with moments of true beauty to moments of true fashion bondage and ugliness. Which is which? In the eye of the beholder of course!
December 27, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I dont like it
December 27, 2007 at 1:42 pm
looks like penne.nathan
December 27, 2007 at 2:59 pm
As a visitor from the UK for the Christmas holiday, it was a wonderful and delightful surprise to stumble across the exhibition and the accessible way in which it was presented. My only regret is that my daughers are not with me to sharwe this experience.
December 28, 2007 at 12:04 pm
I really enjoyed being able to look back at the history of this art form and understand how contemporary fashion has come to where it is now.
December 28, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Love the choices, but feel a little bit like a sucker to the Met’s need to boost its coffers. Let’s put a random selection of fashion on display! And let people blog! And then lots of people will come to the museum! We’ll be fashion forward, technologically forward, and successful consumer capitalists, all at once!
December 28, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Comments on Edward Maloney’s post:
“Currently, you are just reinforcing the idea that women are the peacocks and men should be looking on or not seen at all.”
- Yes, but what about how all the designers are men? Is that not an economic discomfort beyond the physical discomfort of the clothing women are forced to wear?
“I would inherently trust such a man to make other decisions with a better sense of discrimination than some slob who pulls on his sweats, doesn’t comb his hair and thinks nothing matters.”
-I would certainly judge him for being vain and likely selfish.
December 28, 2007 at 3:06 pm
This exhibition is a sign of the laziness of curators that they cannot write their own comments to the show. I think the met is trying a little hard to be “cool”
December 28, 2007 at 3:57 pm
There were some very nice pieces, but I felt the show was disjointed.
Just as a side note, I would be interested in seeing an acessories exhibit at the Costume Institute.
December 28, 2007 at 4:01 pm
such fun to see what men wore in the 1700-1800’s as well as women and children? that blue dress is pretty tiny! wonderful exhibit that certainly historically takes through a vast time period. well done and totally pleasing to the eye! thank you.
December 28, 2007 at 6:35 pm
We understand the desire to make this exhibit seem somewhat edgy, but it’s a bit TOO dark and the signs are too low and too poorly lit to read.
Do like the blog concept, though.
December 29, 2007 at 2:00 pm
All of these clothes are amazing and beautiful!!!!!!:)
December 29, 2007 at 3:33 pm
cool job
December 29, 2007 at 3:36 pm
cutting edge — back to the future, too.
December 29, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Outrageous but sophisticated. Detailed but flowing. This dress is drop-dead gorgeous.
December 29, 2007 at 4:44 pm
I love fancy fashoins. These styles blew me away.
December 29, 2007 at 6:55 pm
yohji yammamoto rulzzzz!!!11 I luvv alexander mcqueen 2! for my evil goddess with the talon necklace.
December 29, 2007 at 6:58 pm
This exhibit objectifies women and is a disgrace.
December 30, 2007 at 10:43 am
Excessive access? A level playing field? The internet allows the idiot savant and the idiot alike to speak. Apparel allows a level of freedom for the viewer of these exhibitions to speak their mind. Everyone cannot own a Hockney, or a Hirst, and few can talk clearly about those artists pieces and the motivation that inspired them. Oh but clothes, clothes, clothes, clothes - everyone has opinion on that, don’t they? The floodgates are open, and there’s no turning back. Cheers to a mysterious future in a further democratized art universe.
December 30, 2007 at 11:34 am
It was different from the themed exibitions in the past. The idea of having a blog so anyone could add their comments is awesome.
December 30, 2007 at 11:38 am
The blogging aspect of the exhibit was pretty cool. The exhibit confused me. There was no common denominator. some were pretty and others were not. Avoid the bird mask. And the sperm necklace. And the incroyable. It was not incroyable.
December 30, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Hello,
Two things are wonderful for me during this exhibit:
1/ I have realized from some pieces that clothes can be art by themselves, without having the necessity of having a boutique, a defile or whatever. An artist can truly express things like a painter or a writer can do with other means
2/ The possibility of posting comments is wonderful and much better than the usual book that can be usually found at the exit of an exhibit because it is more in the “air du temps”, people are more willing to write, and also because it allows greater possibilities
Keep on like this fellows !
December 31, 2007 at 1:04 pm
i love the costumes but i was just wondering how someone would where some of those dresses with such big hips. they wouildn’t fit through the doors so where would they go? maybe it is just for design but it would be much more intersting if you have it modeled by people in a fashion show where we could see how they walk with those clothes and what sort of clothing it is by the way they walk and hold the dress.
thanx for listening to my comment and i hope u agree.
yours trul y,
azriel
January 1, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Lovely to have online content, but the size/quality of the images makes it difficult to appreciate. Please post larger photos or use a javascript viewer so we can zoom in on details. Thank you.
January 2, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Probably one of the most fascinating and beautiful collections you’ve done. A great sampling of designers and their clothes, my dream closet, everything from McQueen’s oyster dress to Androver’s mattress coat. Well done!
January 2, 2008 at 4:44 pm
cool,
January 2, 2008 at 7:22 pm
I absolutley LOVE the costumes. I loved all the different styles and the ways they differed as I walked through the exibit. The difference between the years was absolutley stunning. Although the different ensembles were beautiful in a wide variety of ways, I could never actually imagine seeing some person walking around in certain outfits. They were great anyway though! Great work!
January 2, 2008 at 11:05 pm
In some force of thought we could have made another intuitive remark about how “glamorous” or how “expensive” one type of design would be if it were a typical view, or “just for show”. But to both agree and disagree on Ian Brown’s remark about the idiot savant of commentary- as well as many others who have decided to be a part of it all- eventually each and every one of us is a combination of lawyer/judge/village town idiot/savant/critic and last but not least, child at heart when we oooh and aaah about the colors used in this interesting display… to say the least.
I remember having several girls watching this exhibit during my visit at the museum, and they visually decided to watch the more sunny colors rather than the colors that were darker for some odd or apparent reason. Their “opinion” are not close to argumental; rather simple-minded and dull to the point that you could tell they didn’t even cared about what they learned years ago. But, to the point, it gets to tell you what they obviously liked all in all. Who knows where they came from or who taught them to be that way? As long as they participated in watching the actual designs made by both legendary and contemporary, it caught their eye. This
is just an example as to what could happen if people were to only see things as what they are, not as to what they should be viewing all in all. Imagine how other people would react if they were to enter a room of Tiepolos, El Grecos, and Rembrandts, supposedly judging them the same way as simply mindful as they were in watching these illustrious wardrobes.
Sure, it’s not the most fascinating exhibit thus far, but seeing something different is much better that critiquing without learning a thing or two about art for art’s sake. Then again that should be the primary function when people see art: view it as part of the art itself, not just an interpretation where we assume that we’re right regardless of the opinion.
Commenting on what Stephanie said before: if women were forced to wear something economically discomforting, how would you think models would feel if they had to wear something of Luis Vuitton and they realized it wasn’t for the comfort, but for their career, regardless of who made it? Case in point, if it were any different from a male/female point of making something out of nothing, we’d be killing more animals and selling them to poachers in Africa instead of making fabric out of materials we wouldn’t dream of creating otherwise…
Second comment on Stephanie’s remarks: would you still judge a man for creating a wonderfully influential and precise piece of clothing for ladies who are in the mood of wearing them, not just to feel good, but to sent a punctuation to the already-dog-eat-dog fashion industry? Not as much as pretentiously judging any person who’d have a Fubu sweater on in Harlem and asking you in ebonic slang for change for the M2 bus downtown, but then again judge not let you judge yourself first.
Should this museum, or any other museum try to act as if were working too hard on trying to be “cool” one way or another, I wouldn’t be here at all. Instead, I am here to educate myself and learn something DIFFERENT. Why not let the judges and lawyers judge because that’s what they do best? After all, we’re just here to appreciate a higher learning- especially in the field of fashion and design.
In the end I leave you all with two quotes I learned in my days of youth:
“Beauty is skin deep, but ugliness is to the bone”
“Don’t judge me, nor judge others, because it is the judgement that splits all of us apart” (loosely interpretated version from the movie, Fight Club)
January 3, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I love this exhibit and I think that it is a great idea to connect it with blogging, something that is so current with fashion from the present and the past.
January 3, 2008 at 3:14 pm
A very interesting exibit =)
January 3, 2008 at 3:19 pm
INCREDIBLE!!!!
January 3, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Wow!! The installation is great….. I LOVE THE REVOLVING BASES.I do not , have to crane my neck or contort my body, for the first time in 25 years, to see the back or sides of garment.
As a professional designer, with a fashion history background, I wish you explain more to the common viewer. .. ex- what is a farthingale and how/what is it made of.
Keep it going.
January 3, 2008 at 4:25 pm
we love that something we can relate to today, having a great gown or dress or shoes can now be seen in a museum, where we are more used to seeing centuries old artwork and sculptures
thanks to exhibits such as this I can trick my girlfriend into an afternoon at the museum.
lol
thanks..
January 4, 2008 at 9:29 am
I appreciate Franklin P. Juwarstky’s effort to truly blog, instead of treating this digital opportunity like a big visitor’s book. However, from what I can untangle from the points made, I disagree.
Let’s just take the ‘girls” and colors and art for art’s sake, concepts that are leapt from with the ease of a small frog taking on lily pads. How old were these girls? By me, a girl is about 6, maybe up to 12. She can be forgiven for preferring bright colors. As for young women, which is what I suspect these girls really were, all the art training in the world isn’t going to make the eye gravitate to the inherently more “artistically worthwhile” dark thing when there’s a flashing red thing to grab it, not that dark is inherently better than colorful, if that is what is being implied.
Take it from a former retailer. Merchandise the red upfront to get them to your department. But make sure you’ve got a lot of stock in black.
January 4, 2008 at 6:08 pm
WHAT A FABULOUS SHOW–MY ONLY COMPLAINT IS THE ‘OYSTER DRESS’ IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE–i DO HAVE THE RIGHT SHOES TO GO WITH IT-SO LET ME KNOW WHEN IT BECOMES AVAILABLE–
THANK YOU FOR A GREAT SHOW !!!!!!!!
January 5, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Excessive but fun. The words of the little girl besides me best describes the show: Wow. I think she really, really liked the big high-heeled pink shoes. Who wouldn’t
January 5, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Beautiful exhibit demonstrating the historical range of fashion. It was interesting to observe the return to movement restricting garments for women in the contemporary designs. My personal preference is for design that remembers that a human body has to go under the garment. Thanks to Levi Strauss, Geoffrey Beene and Donna Karan!
January 5, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I always enjoy the Fashion Institute exhibits, and loved individual pieces in the show, but was unclear about how they were all related. Were these pieces all brought together just so we could blog about them? It seems that this could be accomplished with just about any show. The wall text seems overbearing and excessively long. I liked reading the quotes from the designers, but curators — please put away your thesaurus. Throughout the exhibit I was overly conscious of your interpretations, and the reading distracted from the clothes. Let the audience enjoy the aesthetics of the clothes, rather than marvel at your research abilities.
January 5, 2008 at 5:18 pm
I do love a good Costume Institute show, a chance for the hidden gems of this fantastic collection to come out on display. So I show up for all of the exhibitions. And every single time I’m disappointed, not by the clothing or the display or the themes, but by the incredibly pretentious wall text. And this one is no exception. From the opening paragraph of the introduction (”Unlike its haughty siblings, fashion… does not estrange us from the belief in the essnetial aptness of our judgment.”) straight through the entire show, the curators have provided text that is clearly meant to showcase their own education rather than directly and simply educate the viewer. Retardataire? Epater le bourgeois? Dandiacal? The synonymous “poetic morbidity” and “necromantic glamor”? These words and phrases are so incredibly far outside any vocabulary that most museum-goers (even multilingual ones with training in art or fashion) use that they don’t, in the end, tell us anything. All they do is make the curators feel better about their so-called superior intellects and self-professed expertise. And rather than educating people about the objects on display, they make viewers feel they’re being condescended to, like they’re not smart enough to understand what this show is about.
I am someone who works in the art world in New York, who has worked with costumes and art both. I have done enough museum going in my lifetime to know when I am being welcomed into a show to learn and when I am seen as merely another feather in the cap of a pretentious curator with an unfounded need to prove the superiority of his/her position.
January 5, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Beautiful works and beautifully displayed, but this is a pretty weak concept for a show. And from the self-conciously humongous and overly intellectual words used in texts throughout the show justifying the works on display, it seems like the curators might agree. So this is a focused sampling of the collection and….and people can blog about it? It’s gimmicky. One of the great sadnesses of the internet age is that it’s become fashionable to believe in a democracy of communication, that any fool with fingers to type has a valid, valuable opinion about anything and everything, and that others desire to read it. Call me elitist, but I care what fashion curators say about fashion. I don’t really care what people like me have to say about it–sure, our opinions and reactions mean something, but they’re just opinions and reactions. Implying that these comments are an important enough contribution to a dialogue about fashion to justify this blog strikes me as silly and symptomatic of some of the worst elements of the age of blogs and YouTube. And a casual perusal of this blog project has proven me correct. More focused exhibitions and retrospectives in the future, please!
January 8, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Fashion is a timely art. It is always fasionable to be in fasion.
January 10, 2008 at 11:55 am
I totally loved the collection, the mix of colonial and french dresses with the modern pop contemporary styles. Those Manolos boots with the polka dots were the coolest and the top hat made out of hair was very interesting. And the Met always provides lookers the best of the best in different ideas and pieces.
January 11, 2008 at 11:31 am
In my head, this show is an invitation to blog about historic dress, because it’s accessible in a way that other art forms in this museum might not be. I applaud that aim, but I’m also put off by the excessive curatorial interpretation. The words of the designers are key, because they provide a background for any personal interpretation I might develop, but the other label text intimidates the visitor into silence. If you truly wish to invite any and all opinions on the pieces in this show, let them speak for themselves. Don’t bias the visitor with curatorial interpretation, especially when there is no opportunity to truly dialogue with the curator.
January 11, 2008 at 11:54 am
Speaking of zeitgeist, Mr. Koda has his fingure on the pulse of our times with a show that is very now. Like a great playlist in one’s itunes the works on exhibit are a terrific mix of hits, alternative favorites and classics abuting with great success. Very satisfying show emphasizing the way cultural subconcious influenced the designers on exhibit. I found myself surprised, informed and amused at this quiet show that lets the public view a terrific collection of recent aquisitions. Great work, CI!!
January 13, 2008 at 11:49 am
i came to the met with a school drama group and eventually got stuck down into a group of-you geussed it-all girls-NATURALLY we came screaming down to the clothing area-two words for this exhibit crossed my mind-oooookkkkkkk then……. but it wasnt too bad-i might just pick up a pair to $20/piece 1/6 scale shoes!!!!
January 13, 2008 at 10:04 pm
I love this idea… you should keep this going as a permanent “exhibit” of the Costume Institute!
January 15, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Lovely.
January 17, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Please have Donna Karon mail me one of her “jumpsuits”. It’s gorgeous!
January 18, 2008 at 11:54 am
wunderbar, eine tolle idee, bin selbst designerin und kenne viele tolle designer die mode und kunst zusammenbringen u.a. gehört dazu das russische label “artpoint” mit lena kvadrat. kann ich einen katalog erstehen und wie teuer ist er?
hätte sehr gern an solcher ausstellung beratend und helfend mitgearbeitet.
toll.
lieben gruss
birgit dziudzek von einladen
January 19, 2008 at 3:45 pm
To start with I need to say: I LOVE FASHION. And then again…. look what has become of the skin of eaten animals, once necessary to protect the cavemen from harsh weather? Cavewomen became bored sitting by the fire sorting around the nuts and berries. So they started decorating their fur coverings with nutshells or tassels. If people have to much time on hand they get creative … and look where this playing around out of boredome of long-past times has come today. Wonderous and wonderful creations of not in the least bored Schneiderleins leave us longing with eyes staring greedily….
January 19, 2008 at 4:43 pm
I wonder if any of the dresses featured in this exhibit are available at TJ Maxx? Designer clothes, not designer prices.
January 20, 2008 at 1:39 pm
it is so cool. even though some of the dresses are old they look like it is from today. even the old dresses are very colorful. i think some of it is bad taste because they are too colorful or look too old and ripped up.
January 20, 2008 at 3:36 pm
I found the exhibit quite an experiance. I found each piece to be a beautiful piece of fashion and of art. I enjoyed each one. I love that the MET put this on.
While I looked at each piece I was taken back and fasinated, (I dont know if it was in a good way or not) by what other people had to say.
The majority found the pieces to be “ugly”, “questioning What makes this Fashion” and very few just stopped to enjoy what they were viewing.
The Majority mis-understood what they were looking at. Maybe that is good for the few of us who are designser or artists.
I also found that all the children that came down the stairs whent right to the computers fasinated by the screen, not relizing that the Dress on the Computer was standing right next to them.
January 20, 2008 at 5:36 pm
This fashion exhibit really helped me with my history of fashion project. The outfits were beautiful and it was obviously very hard to make such detailed outfits. I am glad you had this exhibit and thank you for helping me with my project!
January 20, 2008 at 5:40 pm
This exhibit was fantastic! The time and detail put into the french 1700’s dresses was beautiful. I got great pictures at the entrance to the exhibit and took some fantastic notes. I also picked up a couple books at the end and some of the website cards for my friends. This was great idea to bring this exhibit to the Met and I am glad I took the time to see it and use the information I learned for my work! Thank you very much.
January 21, 2008 at 10:40 am
This selection is absolutely wonderful!
I love how each dress has a different feeling to it.
What i like about them is that they each come from a different time period which gives a different sence of style for each dress.
This was my favorite exebtion, because i just love fashion but mostly becuase it lures teenages such as myself to come to museums and really go home and call their friends and talk about it.
Keep doing this! Its an amazing selection!!
January 21, 2008 at 10:43 am
it was very cool and colorful
January 22, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Preface
Fashion: The crowd’s statement of art
Fashion is, certainly, work of art. Fashion addicts, however, are not naturally lovers of art or what they see as ‘art’. Today art involves various forms of expression including consumer-friendly ones that allow the masses to participate in artistic developments by choosing their style of clothes. Shopping maniacs in the current winter sales would hardly declare themselves extraordinarily interested in art. (Or maybe they would, just to be in-with-the-crowd.) Yet their behaviour speaks another language: Fashion as a form of art reaches many more people than culturally and socially accepted ‘high art’. Even though it’s most of the time only the ‘wearables’ of the wide, sometimes nearly architectural range of clothes people know – or are able to afford. So it perfectly makes sense to organize an exhibition of fabulous pieces of fashion-art. They nurture the wish for luxury, perfection, style and contemporary expression, as other arts do, too, and perfectly combine with people’s wish to join creation of any kind. Fashion can and should be used to interest the masses for other art forms, and this exhibition is showing one way how to do it.
January 23, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I love this exhibition’s emphasis on fashion in the twentieth century. As a design student at the Fashion Institute here in New York, I am overwhelmingly grateful to have access to such an inspiring collection of artistic expression. The intricately executed gown by the contemporary Rodarte line was my most memorable moment in this exhibit. It gives young designers like myself hope that one day my own designs could be displayed here. Thank you for this wonderous experience!
January 23, 2008 at 7:41 pm
A very interesting show with examples of many years and ideas. From the Japanese, the French and many others, I find many wearable ideas for both now and then. It is a very eclectic show, worh studying and thinking about.
January 24, 2008 at 10:19 am
I love the use of color and shape in this garment. This look is very avant-garde, but elegant. The design is appealing but the colors are very subdue.
January 24, 2008 at 11:34 am
I want to thank the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the curator/s of this blog.mode exhibition. I am Professor of Fashion Design at two New York colleges and this exhibit was enjoyed by my students on their fieldtrip today. The ability to interface through the computer terminals is the very thing the museum needs in order to help educators keep students interested in art history and culture. Students really absorb information when they can actively experiment or participate. This is great for all ages. Words cannot express my sincere gratitude. I hope to see more meshing of history and technology at the MET.
January 24, 2008 at 11:50 am
i love the fall/winter light green rayon dress designed by Azzedine Alaia, the dress was cut to wear short, the dress had a lot of draping on the neck area, due a hood that goes over the persons head. Even though this garment was produced in the year 1940, it is most defitnetly wearable today. As seen on celeberties such as Mary J. Blige and J.lo. This garmet is very form fitting, and it wraps around the womens curves. Madame Gres gown can compare to Azzedine Alaia dress because they are both very simple in color and in the design consept.i enjoyed coming to the metmuseum because it allowed me to a good look on the different centuries.
January 25, 2008 at 3:55 pm
the exhibit was fantasic and all the dress was so cool!!
i love it!~
January 25, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Balenciaga additions would be absolutley amazing…But i loved the lady in waiting dress of marie antoinette
January 25, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Amazing, completely Amazing! the most captivating to me was the Mc Queen: “Oyster Dress”. i am waiting for the costume institute to showcase a complete Ralph Lauren: American Style. please take this into consideration…
January 26, 2008 at 3:46 pm
This exhibit was exquisite, the transformation of fashion the exhibit showed was truly original. Instead of showing the glamour and overdone side of fashion, this exhibit has shown the conceptual aspects of fashion as well. Great job!
January 26, 2008 at 5:29 pm
cool
January 27, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Virginia Woolf’s quotation in the exhibit’s introduction “vain trifles as they seem, clothes…change our view of the world and the world’s view of us” reminded me of the scene in the movie The Devil Wears Prada when the ill-tempered Andy is reprimanded by Runway’s fashion director for not seeing the value of her job when he tells her that fashion is a form of art that you live your life in. THis defined the continous theme in this exhibit, as we are able to witness designers’ interpretation of the present moment and repeated transformation and expression of the female form through these gowns. I enjoyed the repeated themes of nature such as the Oyster dress and allusions to historical fashion and trends, expressing the continued redefinition of the female form as one intertwined with history, nature and the viewer’s gaze, explaining the idea of how it defines “our view of the world, and the world’s view of us”
January 28, 2008 at 1:48 am
beautiful!!!and beautiful…
January 29, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I adored the lavender satin dress. It reminds me so much of the gown that Deborah Kerr wore in “The King and I” which is one of my favorite childhood memories. I think I always wanted to be Deborah Kerr and dress elegantly but alas, I seem to be more into wearing jeans and something comfy…
January 29, 2008 at 2:49 pm
we like the dresses n’ that but we would like to take photos man. the snakes are wicked cool. wouldn’t mind some of that bling round me neck like. love ya pet x
January 31, 2008 at 4:05 pm
The exhibition could benefit from period portraits, or contemporary images of people wearing the costumes on the didactics. Blogging and fashion are both about people and interaction…interacting with people…the exhibition seems to miss that link. Perhaps this was the objective. I do like the centrality of the blog kiosks and the URL cards however. I’m sure the combination is to some degree radical for the Met.
February 5, 2008 at 11:33 am
is the first time that i came to Metropolitan Museum; and, I loved it; it is simply fantastic. It give us the opportunity to think more about that all the countries should be in pace; and in my point of view the USA has a fundamental paper to do it; and, it should, be done as early as possible in order to bring to all the countries tranquility and development for all and mainly to USA…
I admire the USA for all the initiatives, for all the investment is done in arts, for all the researches in all areas. But one should be looked with more care: should be showed to the world that the american people are friendship…..
February 6, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Don’t dumb down fashion. Get rid of this blog thing. How Oprah.
Fashion and Harold Koda don’t mix with this tacky venue.
I have high regard for this institution. This is sooo mindless and everything that fashion is not.
February 7, 2008 at 12:24 pm
the art was AMAZING! the texture was wonderful and the frames were fascinating! great work everyone!
February 9, 2008 at 12:32 pm
WELL THE MEDIUM OF THE BLOG IS DEFINATELY OF THE ZEITGEIST, HOWEVER THIS MUSEUM’S CHARGE TO COLLECT THE BEST OF THE ART FORM IS HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC. APPAREL, WHEATHER IT IS PARIS COUTURE OR NOT IS FAR FROM ANY COLLECTIVE STATEMENT. RATHER HAUTE COUTURE IS A MUSING OF CRAFT AND COMMERCE, A STATEMENT OF POSSIBILITIES, CONFIRMED BY THE MEDIA WHO DO NOT AFFORD HAUTE OR PRET WITH THE DESIGN CRITIQUE SO READILY CONDUCTED IN THE DISCIPLINES OF ARCHITECTURE OR INDUSTRIAL DESIGN. SO CALL FASHION DESIGNERS SEEM TO HAVE THE WHIM OF AN IDEA THAT IS THEN COURTED BY VESTED INTEREST. THE PUBLIC DO THE WOO, AHH BIT BECAUSE FASHION(?) IS AWAY FROM THE NORM. BRIGHT COLOURS AND FANCY MATERIALS TO AMUSE THE CHILD LIKE FANTASIES OF ALL OF US. HOWEVER WHAT WE SEE IS NOT FASHION, IT IS ART, ITS PROCESS AND RECEPTION LACKS MASS APPROVAL. I CONTEND THAT WHEN WE DESIGN OURSELVES EACH DAY; EACH OF US IS MAKING FASHION, FREE OF THE DIRECT FANTASY OF IMAGES CONCIEVED BY THE MARKETING/MEDIA/DESIGN ALLIANCE.
THINK ABOUT IT, WE ARE ALL INCOMES, ALL SHAPES, ALL COLOURS, ALL AGES BUT THE FASHION(?) INDUSTRY AND ESPECIALLY HAUTE COUTURE WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE DIFFERENTLY. (vandykv@gmail.com)
February 9, 2008 at 3:06 pm
I liked the light green hooded dress by Alaia. It was a beautiful design. I would love to wear a unique dress like that to a fancy party.
February 14, 2008 at 8:48 am
I am a watercolor/collage artist and photographer and at one time owned a fashionable women’s boutique. While I owned the boutique one of my artist friends came by and asked if I had time for my art. Then wisely she paused, looked at the shop, and said, “Of course, this is your palette now.” I concur.
I think this dialogue is a good idea.
February 15, 2008 at 4:46 pm
It’s so cool how you can go to such an amazing museum and see so many cool things such as the costumes. I thought that the costumes were very elaborate. I also noticed that the French outfits usually provided more of a sexy look. This was a wonderful experience to be able to see so many dresses and outfits from so long ago. I know that back in those days the designs were for the very privelilaged but, some of the outfits in this day in age would probably be thought of as “tacky”. I LOVED the French dresses and especially the boots. I would wear some of theese dresses when i’m older (30’s). I think that this is a wonderful exhibit to take children from 8-16 years of age.
February 16, 2008 at 3:51 pm
….”STYLE is the answer to everything, a fresh way to approach a dull or dangerous thing”…… On style in general, good style doesn’t change after the fashion!
February 17, 2008 at 8:58 pm
…’And every single time I’m disappointed, not by the clothing or the display or the themes, but by the incredibly pretentious wall text…From the opening paragraph of the introduction (”Unlike its haughty siblings, fashion… does not estrange us from the belief in the essential aptness of our judgment.”) straight through the entire show, the curators have provided text that is clearly meant to showcase their own education… Retardataire? Epater le bourgeois? Dandiacal? The synonymous “poetic morbidity” and “necromantic glamor”? These words and phrases are so incredibly far outside any vocabulary that most museum-goers (even multilingual ones with training in art or fashion) use that they don’t, in the end, tell us anything.
I disagree for two reasons:
I doubt the curators want to ’showcase their own education’ ( a curious way to put it) The choice of language is a question, not so much of ‘education’, but also, in this case, of sensibility.
February 17, 2008 at 9:27 pm
‘…FASHION DESIGNERS SEEM TO HAVE THE WHIM OF AN IDEA THAT IS THEN COURTED BY VESTED INTEREST…HOWEVER WHAT WE SEE IS NOT FASHION, IT IS ART, ITS PROCESS AND RECEPTION LACKS MASS APPROVAL. I CONTEND THAT WHEN WE DESIGN OURSELVES EACH DAY; EACH OF US IS MAKING FASHION, FREE OF THE DIRECT FANTASY OF IMAGES CONCIEVED BY THE MARKETING/MEDIA/DESIGN ALLIANCE.’
Yes and no. I think it is the other way around:
Vested interests, market, marketing, media, design ‘alliance’ in the fashion world are just a reflection of the bigger picture of our Zeitgeist.
I agree, most of the items in this exhibition are not mere fashion they are art.
February 18, 2008 at 12:06 pm
‘Don’t dumb down fashion. Get rid of this blog thing. How Oprah…
… This is sooo mindless and everything that fashion is not.’
Dumb, mindless.
How patronizing, condescending and offensive towards Oprah.
Ironic, because, she will decide, who the next president of the United States of America will be.
Trust me: she is not dumb or mindless!
February 18, 2008 at 12:57 pm
‘This exhibit is advertising for contemporary designers…the lines of commerce, art, advertising and marketing have been blurred.’
Indeed!
One of the sponsors of this exhibition is one of the designers who also participates in the exhibition. The Geist of our Zeit, our Zeitgeist, accepts this new order with great enthusiasm and acquiescence.
One more example: the director of a fashion magazine, who wears Prada, is often instrumental in the financing of projects in museums, related to fashion.
The members of the board of directors of museums of contemporary art, often own art collections. When these museums exhibit the work of the artists in those collections, the price of the work of those artists rises, often in a dramatic way. Members of the board of museums profit every day from their position.
February 18, 2008 at 11:05 pm
‘wunderbar, eine tolle idee, bin selbst designerin und kenne viele tolle designer die mode und kunst zusammenbringen… kann ich einen katalog erstehen und wie teuer ist er?
hätte sehr gern an solcher ausstellung beratend und helfend mitgearbeitet.
toll.’
‘ Mode und Kunst zusammenbringen’ Sehr wichtig!
Vielleicht, konnen Sie an solcher Austellung mitarbeiten, vielleicht in Deutschland?
Der Katalog wird herausgegeben , nach die Ausstellung geschlossen wird.
February 19, 2008 at 11:17 am
You need to add a Charles James to the collection.
February 19, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Where is Ralph Lauren? Such an AMerican icon should surely be shown here. Perhaps some of the many Gallianos could be exchanged for someone more relevant to both high fashion and everyday wearers…
February 20, 2008 at 12:55 pm
blogmode is a fantastic way to get people sharing and talking about their perceptions of the exhibition and experience. It’s a great way to enable viewers to interact, read others comments, and make their own opinions heard. Let’s hope that other galleries follow your lead.
The garments are stunning, particularly the Dior Eventail Dinner Dress
February 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Being surrounded by these beautiful pieces of art makes one feel as if he or she has travelled through time and country.
February 22, 2008 at 7:02 pm
“estrange us from the belief in the essential aptness of our judgment.”
Why can’t curators write in English and always strive to sound so stuck up??
Womdreful exhibit
February 23, 2008 at 2:14 pm
…”estrange us from the belief in the essential aptness of our judgment.’
Why can’t curators write in English and always strive to sound so stuck up?”
This is perfect English, of course, if you take it out of context, does not make sense.
The complete sentence:
‘fashion—even in its most extreme and avant-garde expression—does not estrange us from the belief in the essential aptness of our judgment.’
This idea was expressed, in other words, in the same text:
‘Individuals who might avoid publicly commenting on a canvas by Picasso or a bronze by Brancusi, readily disclose their thoughts about a gown by Galliano or a mule by Blahnik.’
‘the curators have provided text that is clearly meant to showcase their own education… Retardataire? Epater le bourgeois? Dandiacal? The synonymous “poetic morbidity” and “necromantic glamour”? These words and phrases are so incredibly far outside any vocabulary that most museum-goers (even multilingual ones with training in art or fashion) use that they don’t, in the end, tell us anything.
As I already said, the choice of language is a question, not so much of ‘education’, but also, in this case, of sensibility. Instead of whining about the retardataire, dandiacal, poetic morbidity and necromantic glamour that ‘obfuscate’ the issues, let’s look at two words, one German, Zeitgeist and one French, retardataire in order to illustrate my point, that a word, or concept in a foreign language, sometimes has no equivalent in ours. German has wonderful opportunities to almost ‘make up’ words: with the word Geist, spirit and the word Zeit, time, epoch, a new concise word is created, that means the spirit of a time. In the French word retardataire, there is the implication that there is a conscious, active will to go back, I emphasize conscious, to be conservative et cetera. The same word exists for instance in Italian, but it means something different: to be late arriving, to be late paying a bill, both done not on purpose, but due more to circumstance. There is a subtlety in the French concept: there is a conscious, active, aggressive effort to go back.
Enough already!
February 26, 2008 at 1:32 pm
AWSOME idea! Fashion is defnetlly becoming to get the so special and deserved place in the arts world.The dresses are to dye for. I just loved it!
March 1, 2008 at 4:32 pm
A beautiful collection ranging throughout history, but why must you print the information in white on black? It is difficult to read and vibrates off the wall/signs….
Also, the language! There is no need to describe these beatuiful garments and accessories in such a way as to alienate your audience. I honestly doubt that 1/3rd of the people here know what “zeitgeist” means. Why not use lanugage that is accessable to the masses? Yes, your curators are educated, and yes they have extensive vocabularies…. but why must you make your audience feel like they are being spoken down to? Please take who your viewers are into accordance when putting together your commentary.
March 1, 2008 at 8:37 pm
‘Why not use lanugage that is accessable to the masses?’
Very difficult task:
First, it would have to be established, what that ‘accessible’ language is.
Second, who are these ‘masses’?
To refer to people as ‘masses’ is in itself condescending, patronizing and ’speaks down’, as you put it, to them.
Stop the whining and get a very good dictionary.
I am sure the curators take the viewers into account and mean well.
If you feel ’spoken down to’ it is your problem.
March 6, 2008 at 8:31 am
Sres. del Costume Institute
no puedo dejar de felicitarlos por este emprendimiento que deja traslucir la sensibilidad del museo hacia el mundo de la moda y el valor artístico de cada objeto de la colección.
Como profesional de la moda y conocedora de vuestra imparable actividad en el conservar y preservar cada pieza del Costume Institute como una delicada joya irremplazable, quiero agradecerles esta idea genial….de comunicación y expresión.
Admiramos vuestro trabajo, ya que el mismo nos ha permitido alentar a nuestros estudiantes, motivar el valor de la costura y detectar vocaciones hacia este inagotable y enriquecedor hacer del diseño.
March 6, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Wonderful! A great display of fashion thru the times. I would love to see more men’s pieces, but the women’s selection was great.
March 6, 2008 at 4:03 pm
great exhibtion. love the range of garments, how far back they date, designers, textiles, etc.
will certainly take back memories of this home to England.
hope there are more things like this, more easily accesible everywhere else!!
Charis
March 13, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Very nice exhibition. I agree that everyone can have an opinion of fashion. It’s too bad that, “painting and sculpture can seem removed from our understanding.” It’s about time that people realize today’s art can seem incomprehensible only because it has been hijacked by hacks. Oh well, off to the Guggenheim to have my brain melted like grilled cheese.
March 21, 2008 at 7:36 am
The whole exhibition is very nice. The only question is: “where is the italian fashion?”
March 21, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I absolutly LOVE unzipped. It’s so cool and unique. I also adore Tucked in red. The top of it is fabolous!! My other favorite is seam simple. If you cut off the bottom, it could easily be for a figure scater. I love the costumes soo much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
March 22, 2008 at 4:40 pm
there are brilliant dresses and I never knew about the history of the company Chanel I give this exibit Two thumbs up!
March 22, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I absoluly love this exhibit and I think that it should be permanite!!!! My faves are the Marie Antinette dresses and the 18th century dresses. I also love the thigh hih boots and the remote control dress was totally weird! I also love the Paul Pouiret gown. It is so elegant and sophisticated! Finally, I love the pink pumps! That was a flashback to the 70s! I love this exhibit and I will return with friends!!!!!!!!!
March 22, 2008 at 4:51 pm
This exhibit is pure genius! I love all the displays and all of the time eras! I love, love, love it! This should be a permenate exhibit! =)
April 3, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Some of these fashions are beautiful, some artistic fantasies - yet few are wearable . Houte Couture seems less an expresionof the zietgiest than a expression of the fantasy of the designer. I want fashion to be comfortable, beautiful, enhance the body, movement and the mood as well as enable freedom and joy.
April 3, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Small exhibit but worth every penny
April 3, 2008 at 3:20 pm
The Costume Institute does it again! The Rodarte: fabulous; the simple early 18th century dresses and underdresses says beautiful, like almost nothing else quite does. The Geoffrey Beene has more glamour than anything you’d ever want to see. for someone like me,85 years old,i remember and wore,adrian,rudi gernreich , beene, karen, and knock offs of some of the others. the show is major nostalgia, (nostalgia: geriatric sex!!)