Meh, I thought you were going to talk about designer fashion. I study fashion for my A-Levels. I find fashion is what you make of it. Nothing is original; just reinvented. People usually tend to wear the things attributed to their social circles.

Emo
Goth
Punk
Metal head
Skank
Prep
Jock
Drama Geeks
Chav
Gangsta
Classy
Geek Chic
Indie
Label whores

The list goes on.

I think that this current generation of youth has no major punch when it comes to street fashion...the now middle aged and their parents as a majority group had an impact on fashion...people seem to want to reject a "this is fashion and this isnt" attitude, but I can't see it lasting...it bever does...the anti-fashion of the punk movement died quite quickly I think this will to, I can see a kind of backlash against anti-fashion appearing at some point, a return to new romantic flamboyance maybe...Vivienne Westwood-esque.

I personally think that what people wear should be a representation on who they are and how they feel...and to a degree some people do. You know what im talking about on those days when everything sucks, and you just wanna climb into your pjs, hide in bed and never come out. I personally enjoy dark clothing. I dont think there are any "gothic" clothes, you can be goth with your blue jeans, concert tee shirt, pale skin, and some dark eyeliner n funky hair. We dont wall wear corsets, trentch coats or boots that make us 10ft. tall. Yea its nice to go over the tops sometimes but only a daily its not nessicary, and its a pain.. but damn do we look good. And before anyone says "well your weird" ahaha yea your right, i am , but so are you to a degree. Im gothic becasue i like it, i am open minded and accepting, yes the music and people are awsome, but were the way we are because we want to and we fit it being the people we are in our own sub culture. chew on that for a mnute.

They think that Juicy Couture is high-end [I hate the fact they call themselves couture]
They care more about labels than looks
They think that denim with rhinestones or embroidery is "casual chic"
They think that monograms (ex: the LV of Louis Vuitton or the GG of Gucci) are chic
They don't understand their body (ex: showing their midriff if they have a stomach or wearing high boots if they're short)
They don't understand their personality (ex: dressing in Abercrombie because everyone does or dressing punk/emo/whatever because that's how their friends dress)
They have no taste level (ex: wearing a micro mini skirt with a cropped camisole; showing too much skin)
They don't follow the Mini Skirt Rule: Short enough to show you're a woman, long enough to show you're a lady.

dr_blah wrote:

QUOTE:
They think that Juicy Couture is high-end [I hate the fact they call themselves couture]
They care more about labels than looks
They think that denim with rhinestones or embroidery is "casual chic"
They think that monograms (ex: the LV of Louis Vuitton or the GG of Gucci) are chic
They don't understand their body (ex: showing their midriff if they have a stomach or wearing high boots if they're short)
They don't understand their personality (ex: dressing in Abercrombie because everyone does or dressing punk/emo/whatever because that's how their friends dress)
They have no taste level (ex: wearing a micro mini skirt with a cropped camisole; showing too much skin)
They don't follow the Mini Skirt Rule: Short enough to show you're a woman, long enough to show you're a lady.

lol

Sxcriley wrote:

QUOTE:
dr_blah wrote:

QUOTE:
They think that Juicy Couture is high-end [I hate the fact they call themselves couture]
They care more about labels than looks
They think that denim with rhinestones or embroidery is "casual chic"
They think that monograms (ex: the LV of Louis Vuitton or the GG of Gucci) are chic
They don't understand their body (ex: showing their midriff if they have a stomach or wearing high boots if they're short)
They don't understand their personality (ex: dressing in Abercrombie because everyone does or dressing punk/emo/whatever because that's how their friends dress)
They have no taste level (ex: wearing a micro mini skirt with a cropped camisole; showing too much skin)
They don't follow the Mini Skirt Rule: Short enough to show you're a woman, long enough to show you're a lady.

lol

Is that all we have to say for ourselves?

Gwiffy wrote:

QUOTE:
I think that this current generation of youth has no major punch when it comes to street fashion...the now middle aged and their parents as a majority group had an impact on fashion...people seem to want to reject a "this is fashion and this isnt" attitude, but I can't see it lasting...it bever does...the anti-fashion of the punk movement died quite quickly I think this will to, I can see a kind of backlash against anti-fashion appearing at some point, a return to new romantic flamboyance maybe...Vivienne Westwood-esque.

It would be interesting if that happened: if I could get away with dressing as Adam Ant's Prince Charming, I may very well do it.

QUOTE:
I personally think that what people wear should be a representation on who they are and how they feel...and to a degree some people do. You know what im talking about on those days when everything sucks, and you just wanna climb into your pjs, hide in bed and never come out. I personally enjoy dark clothing. I dont think there are any "gothic" clothes, you can be goth with your blue jeans, concert tee shirt, pale skin, and some dark eyeliner n funky hair. We dont wall wear corsets, trentch coats or boots that make us 10ft. tall. Yea its nice to go over the tops sometimes but only a daily its not nessicary, and its a pain.. but damn do we look good. And before anyone says "well your weird" ahaha yea your right, i am , but so are you to a degree. Im gothic becasue i like it, i am open minded and accepting, yes the music and people are awsome, but were the way we are because we want to and we fit it being the people we are in our own sub culture. chew on that for a mnute.

This prooves my earlier point. "...The music and people are awesome". The clothes are an expression of taste and values: people of similier social ettiquette and musical taste joining together because they can tell they will get along with each other because of their clothing, which is an advertisement of these tastes. Joff has the cultural capital, that is the norms, vlaues and musical tastes as a goth and as such dresses as a Goth to advertise to other goths that he is a goth.

This evaluation of fashion is a bit of a hash together of Marxist theory (Cutlural Capital is a Marxist idea from a man called Pierre Bourdieux) and Postmodernist theory, as well as a dash of Functionalism, as the social actions, such as the clothes wearing, musical tastes and social ettique may well count as insitutions which lead to Social Cohesion.

Sorry if that went a little over a few heads, I used too much technical terminology. I'll try to sum it up.

People dress like goths to let other goths know that they will get along, and get along becuase they are goths.<br /><br />Post edited by: Kanae, at: 2007/07/04 06:42

Fashion is for people trying to be cool. It's trendy. It changes.. because what is cool changes.

So, people like me - who are undeniably hot - stick to style rather than fashion. Because it's classy. And it's always going to look good. LBDs, A-line and shift mini-dresses, black pants and pencil skirts and crisp white shirts. These aren't 'fashionable'... they're stylish.

eversweet wrote:

QUOTE:
Fashion is for people trying to be cool. It's trendy. It changes.. because what is cool changes.

So, people like me - who are undeniably hot - stick to style rather than fashion. Because it's classy. And it's always going to look good. LBDs, A-line and shift mini-dresses, black pants and pencil skirts and crisp white shirts. These aren't 'fashionable'... they're stylish.

In the words of Chanel:

&quot;Fashion is not something that exists in dresses only. Fashion is in the sky, in the street, fashion has to do with ideas, the way we live, what is happening.

Fashion is made to become unfashionable.

Fashion fades, only style remains the same. &quot;

dr_blah wrote:

QUOTE:
eversweet wrote:

QUOTE:
Fashion is for people trying to be cool. It's trendy. It changes.. because what is cool changes.

So, people like me - who are undeniably hot - stick to style rather than fashion. Because it's classy. And it's always going to look good. LBDs, A-line and shift mini-dresses, black pants and pencil skirts and crisp white shirts. These aren't 'fashionable'... they're stylish.

In the words of Chanel:

&quot;Fashion is not something that exists in dresses only. Fashion is in the sky, in the street, fashion has to do with ideas, the way we live, what is happening.

Fashion is made to become unfashionable.

Fashion fades, only style remains the same. &quot;

&quot;And, after all, what is a fashion? From the artistic point of view, it is usually a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.&quot; -Oscar Wilde.

I would not say that style remains the same. Certainly, the basis, the golden ratio of clothing has remained the same since the Renaissance: trousers, jacket, shirt, neck decoration, omittable third garment, such as a jacket.

This follows from French fashion. They wore frockcoats, waistcoats, cravats and trousers. The French focused mostly on material: satin and silk were the alpha and omega of fashion. At the time of the French Revolution and the Napolenic Wars, where the French because very unpopular, fashion switched to British fashion, which was more about cut. Hence, tailcoats, black frockcoats, and other brazers. It was World Wars I and II that changed style, then: the material rationing meant that the material was no longer avaliable. So, they cut back to the modern business suit. Casual wear for the rising classes became dominated after the '60s by American fashion: cheap denim and converce shoes, for their duribility and cheapness.

The point is, that style will change based on popular cultures and viability over several centuries.

I'll go into Postmodern theory, shortly: I need to dash now, but I will contibute to this again later.