Feathers

What did you think of the motorized dress with the Swarovski crystals? I'm not sure how to feel about a dress that truly couldn't be worn beyond the runway. 

Tuesday someone asked a great question about Hussein Chalayan's "Kaikoku Floating Dress" that is part of the exhibition. The dress itself is motorized and is not something that one could wear off of the runway. The comment was about how I feel about a dress that can't be worn off the runway. 

Seeing this dress in person, I didn't like it. It's not my style and I just wasn't a fan. But no one is going to like everything in an exhibition. 

Personally, with this dress, I have two somewhat conflicting opinions. First off, I don't exactly love it aesthetically. However, my dislike of the dress has nothing to do with its functionality. This whole exhibition and the idea of displaying clothing in an art museum brings up the question of whether fashion can be art. In the case of this exhibition, many of the pieces are considered art because of how they are made and the extreme craftsmanship involved, but they are still functional pieces of clothing. However, art does not have to be functional. So an art object, in this case the motorized dress, can be modeled after something functional and not itself be functional. So, I think this dress is the perfect example of how fashion can be art and how a lack of functionality can be ok. http://www.designcatwalk.com/floating-dress/

I bought this top as a statement piece early this year and it has become a staple in my wardrobe. I thought it would be difficult to wear because of the feathers, but to be honest, I normally forget they are even there until I get dressed. My take-away from this? Even if a piece has very unique and interesting aspects, it doesn't have to be difficult to wear. The key I think is if there is an interesting aspect, having the piece be a more neutral color makes it much easier to incorporate into your regular wardrobe. XO