it may be old news to you but since i've been mostly offline for a few days now, i feel the need to address all this recent hype on a fashion editorial shot at berlin's holocaust memorial for easyjet airlines' in-flight magazine. the few articles i read begged so many unanswered questions, and i found myself fuming....
but not for the obvious 'offenses' you'd expect either.
i dare say i remember when the memorial first opened, i felt like a naughty child as the first thought to sneak in my mind was:
if the rectangular blocks were primary colors, they'd be like real time tetris blocks!! and the second swiftly followed...how great would it be to do a fashion shoot there!
not only for aesthetic reasons but to create a fashion space existing on multiple levels of meaning and document the process....a way to go beyond the surface while tackling ideas of time, humanity and the use of space through clothing....an act always discredited, watered down as trivial and frivolous.
would any other artistic piece with the intent of "generating awareness" for this location and period of time be received with such a huff and cold shoulder?
had this piece been executed in any other medium, would it be received with more validity? would it even be a question of "taste" if it wasn't fashion?
why is 'fashion' not considered an appropriate medium to address social issues or the ghosts of them, current or past?
who says that fashion must be a trivial, vain platform incapable of addressing the darkness that is such a vital part of human nature?
isn't the concept of fashion itself a very primal conflict between fascination of the flesh and the desire to hide it, shame it, cover it away?
why is it such a horrific offense to take photographs at a location deemed by a specific group of individuals (white first world europeans) to be a physical representation of tragedy?
how does technology transcend physicality?
what about the auras and energies imprinted in a physical place, especially after destruction that linger there regardless of the uses humanity designates as "proper" for them?
why can't the fashioned self or site be a platform for exploring anger, extremity, darkness?
what is it here that confronts notions of perceived vulnerability, reality and possession?
is it this destruction of notions that makes the critics so uncomfortable to begin with? or are they made to be uncomfortable because this forces them to confront their own bourgeoisie ideas on death, beauty, morality, brutality?
who writes the rules that state things along the lines of "when has anyone in the fashion industry ever been acused of having depth, they are shallow insubstantial waves turning to the next wave contributing...nothing!" ? who is to judge a creative project's level of creative contribution and so-called good taste to begin with? why is contemporary europe still so haunted by its past?
but not for the obvious 'offenses' you'd expect either.
i dare say i remember when the memorial first opened, i felt like a naughty child as the first thought to sneak in my mind was:
if the rectangular blocks were primary colors, they'd be like real time tetris blocks!! and the second swiftly followed...how great would it be to do a fashion shoot there!
not only for aesthetic reasons but to create a fashion space existing on multiple levels of meaning and document the process....a way to go beyond the surface while tackling ideas of time, humanity and the use of space through clothing....an act always discredited, watered down as trivial and frivolous.
would any other artistic piece with the intent of "generating awareness" for this location and period of time be received with such a huff and cold shoulder?
had this piece been executed in any other medium, would it be received with more validity? would it even be a question of "taste" if it wasn't fashion?
why is 'fashion' not considered an appropriate medium to address social issues or the ghosts of them, current or past?
who says that fashion must be a trivial, vain platform incapable of addressing the darkness that is such a vital part of human nature?
isn't the concept of fashion itself a very primal conflict between fascination of the flesh and the desire to hide it, shame it, cover it away?
why is it such a horrific offense to take photographs at a location deemed by a specific group of individuals (white first world europeans) to be a physical representation of tragedy?
how does technology transcend physicality?
what about the auras and energies imprinted in a physical place, especially after destruction that linger there regardless of the uses humanity designates as "proper" for them?
why can't the fashioned self or site be a platform for exploring anger, extremity, darkness?
what is it here that confronts notions of perceived vulnerability, reality and possession?
is it this destruction of notions that makes the critics so uncomfortable to begin with? or are they made to be uncomfortable because this forces them to confront their own bourgeoisie ideas on death, beauty, morality, brutality?
who writes the rules that state things along the lines of "when has anyone in the fashion industry ever been acused of having depth, they are shallow insubstantial waves turning to the next wave contributing...nothing!" ? who is to judge a creative project's level of creative contribution and so-called good taste to begin with? why is contemporary europe still so haunted by its past?
i challenge those critics to answer these questions. will they then, with any sincerity, be able to claim that the act of dressing means and contributes nothing to society, history or creativity as a whole?
i don't buy it that anyone is really so shocked and awed by all of this...is society, especially european society that puritanical and touchy? or is this just a product of media hype, over-saturation of information and the resultant need to ooze with excessive drama for attention or other forms of gratification?
***
this year we also saw numerous articles and racism complaints over the "offensiveness" of models painted with black faces in french vogue....
how long will it be before they crucify me as a racist for the black series i've been working on? and as a war-mongering bigot for planning to use old soviet war tanks in upcoming projects or doing a line based on the ethnic/political crises of the former yugoslavia? some people just don't get it!
fear and love come from the same place. a few things to think about.
love, light and offense,
-kafkavodka
