A man's world

Here is some off my current uni coursework project for one of my modules, digital design. As I have chosen to specialise in menswear, I have created an outerwear collection for Autumn/Winter 2010/11, researching trends for this season before creating my own theme and trend; 'Dusky Street.' We then had to use Lectra Style and Print to create patterns to incorporate in our design collection.

'Fashion Marriage'

So the new Jimmy Choo collection for H&M has been named the new ' fabulous Fashion Marriage.' However I can not help but feel that a small part of the appeal of the infamous Jimmy Choo shoe has somewhat died.

I guess you are either a bag or shoe girl. I am definitely a shoe girl, with a wardrobe full of neatly boxed shoes for every occasion. However I have not caught the hysteria for the new Jimmy Choo and H&M collaboration.

Why?

Why buy H&M shoes, just because it has the 'Jimmy Choo' label on it? Is the whole appeal of designer shoes, such as Jimmy Choo, that unattainable allusion for the average women? The dream that one day, just like Carrie Bradshaw, you too will have a whole wardrobe full of Jimmy Choos, Louboutin's, Manolo Blahnik... The excitement for me will be the day that I have my own, 'real' pair, not a pair from H&M, that anyone could have. It would be like buying a fake. For example, the Fake designer bags you can buy from the market, may look OK, but the feel would not be the same. Why settle for the fake OK, when the real could one day be obtained? Could this be the end of the top designers? Are we looking to only a high street future? With almost the abolishment of couture, could high end designers be going the same way?

I appreciate the design and for some the elegance, of the Jimmy Choos H&M collection, yet I just feel that he is only making his shoes more accessible, which almost now makes the originals less appealing. Anyone can now own there own pair of Jimmy Choos. Is the unobtainable to the masses, not one of the attractions for the customer of a high end designers?

This just feels like another example in which fashion is become more commercial and less artist. Surely Jimmy Choo has enough of a reputation and publicity without needing to branch into the High Street? Is Mr Choo feeling the pinch of the credit crunch? Or am I just stuck in the past and not looking into future success? Purhaps an even great influence of the High Street?

Blast from the past

For one of my A Level Art projects, I looked at the contrast of youth versus old age. Here is a large two piece chalk, monochrome drawing I did as the final piece for the project; my Grandmother kissing my younger cousin on the cheek. As you can tell from the grimace on my cousins face she was very reluctant to being kissed! It shows the contrast in skin and hair texture of a 6 year old girl compared with the withered skin of an 80year old lady. I decided to do it in black and white so that the focus would be on the contrast in textures, rather than the use of colour.

As preparation for this project I looked especially at the age defining wrinkles of old age, whilst experimenting with different medias and the use of colour. Here is an acrylic painting I did of my Grandmother.

I also really enjoyed doing life drawings as part of my A Level art work. For the second of my art projects I looked at the naked body, looking at different angles, textures, shapes and shading. Here are some examples. These are a few rough, quick experimental pieces I have done.

In conclusion for this project, I did a large etching of a girl sitting down, curled up.

Coco Avant Chanel

Gabrielle Bonheur 'Coco' Chanel. The True face behind the name Coco Chanel.

'Coco before Chanel.' What a beautiful film. However throughout it did make me question the key to success. Is it an innate quality? Or does success come at the jeopardy of foregoing other aspects of your own life? One thing Coco Chanel can not be disputed for is her success; she was able to turn a small hat shop, into a fashion empire and label which is still going strong today.
As with most historical films, in some places, the films accuracy is questionable, particularly in relation to Chanel's love life. In the film we see he falling in love with a man, who tragically dies at an early age. Yet Chanel's sexuality is often disputed, which is not touched upon in the film. Would it have been a different story if Chanel had got married? She would not have needed to work; yet would she still have had the drive and desire to create a fashion label, which radically changed women's outlook in fashion? Perhaps her success was down to her attitude; her cold characteristic not affraid to stand up to what she believed in. The film does show her as a cold young lady, however I feel it could have made her even colder and more defiant against societies views. The film does portray her fight to change women's attitudes of the French Elite. Coco Chanel most certainly was not a sheep; preferring to wear men's clothes, disregarding her contemporaries, wearing flamboyant, feminine dresses. She was very much ahead of her time in her radical thinking, which has gone on to inspire some of the greatest Fashion Designers in the 20th Century, such as Calvin Klein and Giorgio Armani, who both originally took the idea of a men's suit and giving it a feminine edge to create womenswear.
In terms of the film, it cannot be faulted for its costume design, as you would expect with a film about Chanel. It clearly represents Chanel's elegant yet androgynous style throughout, whilst contrasting with the lavish, rich dresses worn by the French Elite women.
I feel that Audrey Tautou made a beautiful young Chanel, and I love the fact she is now the new face of the Chanel No. 5 Perfume.

Coco avant Chanel

'Fashion is made to become unfashionable'