Several gorgeous dresses and fabulous hats from the House of Balenciaga are in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute.  Here are a few…visit their website for more amazing garments and accessories.

I could spend hours on the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s website, looking at all of the images of objects in the Costume Institute.  Check out this gorgeous Chanel suit from 1938.

Suit, 1938

House of Chanel (French, founded 1913), Design House; Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel (French, 1883–1971), Designer
French; Made Paris, France
silk; (a) Length at CB: 22 in. (55.9 cm) (b) Length at CB: 29 in. (73.7 cm)
Gift of Diana Vreeland, 1954 (C.I.54.16.1a, b)

I decided to browse through The Costume Institute’s website and found some really awesome pieces in their permanent collection. Unfortunately I only found 2 pictures of shoes, but I also found a gorgeous dress that I just had to post. You should definitely check out the website, they have some really great pieces.

Shoes, 1690–1700
French
silk, leather; Length: 10 in. (25.4 cm)
Rogers Fund, 1906 (06.1344a, b)

Sandals, 1938
Salvatore Ferragamo (Italian, founded 1929), Design House; Salvatore Ferragamo (Italian, 1898 – 1960), Designer
Italian
leather, cork; Overall: 5 1/2 x 9in. (14 x 22.9cm)
Gift of Salvatore Ferragamo, 1973 (1973.282.2)

Maria-Luisa (dite Coré), Ensemble, spring/summer 1998
House of Dior (French, founded 1947), Design House; John Galliano (British, born Gibraltar, 1960), Designer
French
(a, e, f) silk; (b, d) synthetic; (c) wool; (g, h) metal, glass; Length (b; greatest): 50 in. (127 cm) Height (c): 13 3/8 in. (34 cm) Length (d): 14 in. (35.6 cm) Heel to Toe (e,f): 9 1/2 in. (24.1 cm) Length (g,h): 2 in. (5.1 cm)
Gift of Christian Dior Couture Paris, 1999 (1999.494a–h)

Anna Wintour’s involvement with the Metropolitan Museum is reestablished at this time every year with the Met’s renowned Costume Institute gala, and we are again bombarded with pictures of A-list celebrities, socialites and models attending the lush affair. Whether attendees are portrayed in adoring light or to ridicule their outrageous outfits, the glut of coverage across paper publications and the internet succeeds in generating widespread coverage and awareness of the event, invaluable marketing for both the Met and the gala’s loud sponsor, Vogue. These sorts of relationships are so ingrained in our capitalist system that many don’t give Anna Wintour’s involvement in this museum fundraiser a second thought but, for me, it highlights the uneasy balance between cultural institutions and their sponsors. Especially in times of economic hardship, relationships between art centers and their patrons are ever more precarious and therefore precious. Among museums the Met retains one of the most prestigious reputations in the world. But the news that is perhaps the most widely disseminated about the Met every year is not about its new acquisitions, nor its beautiful newly renovated American wing, but the Costume Institute gala, arguably the most hotly anticipated social event — to say nothing of fundraising events — of the year.

The 700 invitations are coveted by high society and pop culture icons alike, and the photos are disseminated equally by pop culture websites, blogs, and newspapers. I freely admit that I comb the internet for photos of the chic attendees — more than other galas or award ceremonies even — as there is always a fashion theme relating to the spring costume exhibit that is supposedly being promoted by the event, which I think prompts people to be even more outlandish in their sartorial selections than they might otherwise be, glamorous lives notwithstanding. This year’s “Models as Muse” was a bit weak in terms of gala inspiration (it resulted in many haute micro-mini skirt ensembles), but it did succeed in attracting celebrities who may or may not actually be personally invested in the museum’s mission (specifically the “advance knowledge of works” “in accordance with the highest professional standards”), but whose presence attracts the photographers nonetheless.

Helena Christensen at Met Costume gala, 2009, doing her own shilling for Vogue in Zac Posen dress

Michael Gross concentrates on the questionable relationship between the Met and Vogue in his newly released book “Rogue’s Gallery: The Secret History of the Moguls and the Money that Made the Metropolitan Museum.” In it, he blames the Met’s collaboration first with Diana Vreeland and then with Anna Wintour to co-host the Costume Institute fundraiser which, he claims, has been twisted into a publicity platform for Vogue and Wintour’s personal vendettas, displacing the Met’s own mission. “The most highly publicized event at the museum has been turned into a magazine and movie-promotion party, where Anna sells herself and movie stars sell their latest projects,” said Gross. “What gets lost in the process is the museum.”

Suspicious as I am of Vogue’s motives (it is clearly in their best interest to invite the beautiful people they’d like to court to be in Vogue’s own pages), I whole heartedly support utilizing an institution’s fashion collection as a revenue generator — which the Costume Institute absolutely is for the Met, raising a significant portion of the museum’s income (the 2008 total of which was $297,790,000). First, as demonstrated by my drive to work on this very blog, I believe there is a wealth of knowledge — social, financial, and political history for starters — to be gleaned from the study of clothes, just waiting to be disseminated in an engaging and articulate manner. I crave museums tackling projects involving costume. Tragically, many institutions small and large (i.e. Merchant House, Brooklyn Museum) have fabulous costume collections that are rarely displayed and even more rarely exhibited in-house due to budget, space, staff, and/or costume history expertise shortages. Second, costume exhibits have been proven to be excellent revenue generators precisely because anything fashion related draws in younger, pop-culture obsessed people who may not otherwise attend museums that have the unfortunate reputation for housing stuffy, inaccessible “high art.” I have no problem whatsoever utilizing fashion exhibitions to tap into this market. Isn’t the goal of museums to market their exhibitions to attract in people, and then actually teach them to look more deeply into a subject they may only have had a superficial understanding of?

The trick is for museums to capitalize on this obsession with glamorous fashion. Obviously, money can and should be raised for the institutions. Museums increasingly struggle for attendees, and in this free market democracy, private investors are relied upon to fund so-called worthy projects more than the government is. With the latest financial crisis, corporate sponsors have become ever more sparse (working for the Development department of a New York museum, I have witnessed this scramble first-hand). In some cases, this has forced museums to hike their admissions (in New York it’s not uncommon for tickets to be $20), which has the unfortunate cyclical consequence of making these exhibitions even less accessible to the general public.

Do these galas confirm the perception, accurate or not, that fashion is inaccessible to the mainstream public? Or worse yet, that the study and presentation of fashion in an historical context is unimportant, has no bearing on “serious” studies, offers no insight into history, and has no greater implication on or by current events? My fear with the Met Costume Institute gala is that Vogue’s self-promotion cannibalizes what could and should be an opportunity to present fashion as an incredible marker of human civilization that varies according to technological breakthroughs in materials, social morays, etc. I’m doubtful these parties accomplish this. And this is due, in part, to the accompanying spring Costume Institute exhibitions that are usually of the blockbuster variety with a lot of flash and glitz, but weak-themed and presented with little-to-no background information drawing from a larger historical context, which in my mind must be the crux of any exhibition, costume or otherwise (I am specifically thinking of the popular but superficial “Chanel” and “Superheroes” exhibitions).

As friends know, there are few things that exasperate me more than a flubbed costume exhibit. The wasted opportunity hits me like a brick in the face: that money could be collected, venue provided, fashion displayed, and the opportunity to use costume as a teaching tool not utilized kills me. Partly because I’ll walk away disappointed for the lack of new information I personally collect, but mostly because I’m all too aware of how superfluous and flighty the majority of the population views fashion, and exhibits that don’t treat the subject academically confirm people’s belief that there is nothing but pretty, outrageous, or at best creative works at play and nothing deeper. This is perhaps a I see the Met’s Costume Institute gala as just such a wasted opportunity to broaden the public’s opinion and understanding of fashion’s relevance and importance.

Museums must weigh the pros and cons of the opportunities corporate money affords them — not just more elaborate exhibits but more advertising to reach wider audiences — versus the control corporate sponsors believe they become entitled to exert (i.e. Rudy Giuliani’s attempt to cut the Brooklyn Museum’s public funding when it exhibited controversial material in the “Sensation” exhibit of 1999). The American Museum of Natural History in New York actually had trouble securing sponsorship for their 2005 Darwin exhibition because (exasperating as it is to me), creationism and the so-called “theory” of evolution continues to be incendiary and corporations were afraid of alienating their own potential supporters, political and financial. (Ironically — or not so? — once funding was secured, the Darwin exhibition was extremely popular.) The Museum made up for this difficulty with its latest corporate partnership.

The movie series Night at the Museum prominently incorporated two Smithsonian museums: the first film (2006) took place in the Museum of Natural History, the second (2009) in the Smithsonian Institute, and it actually contains “Smithsonian” in the title: marketing jackpot! This arrangement gave writers license to incorporate actual Smithsonian-owned ephemera (like Amelia Earhart’s plane, Dorothy’s ruby slippers, etc., used to great comic effect) into the plots, and both museums have enjoyed the reciprocal reaction of an immediate and impressive surge in attendance. I see this as a fair exchange. Like the Museum of Natural History, the Met needs to reassert its power and purpose with Vogue (or another sponsor), because the Costume Institute is more than an exclusive venue, and should be leveraged as such.

Much as I’ve concentrated on current corporate collaborations, the alliance of patron and artist (or art institution) is not a new subject, though it’s taken new forms. The Mérode Altarpice is a triptych by the early Netherlandish painter Robert Campin, c. 1425 – 1430. Though ostensibly a religious painting depicting the popular Annunciation, the commissioning family was painted directly into the religious scene (left panel).  They also guaranteed their identities by their coat of arms seal in the window, and by the presence of a costume (yay costume historians!) typical of a town messenger from Mechelen, where the family was from.

The Merode Altarpice by Robert Campin c.1425 – 1428

As religious paintings waned in popularity, patrons continued to be inserted into works. Fragonard’s “The Swing” (1766) is a delightfully naughty painting  portraying a pink-clad woman (I will refrain from dissecting her ensemble in greater juicy detail, though I’m tempted!) being pushed on a swing by a bishop in the background, while her “hidden” lover in the foreground gazes admiringly up her yawning skirt. John Fleming writes “The identity of the patron is unknown, though he was at one time thought to have been the Baron de Saint-Julien, the Receiver General of the French Clergy, which would have explained the request to include a bishop pushing the swing. This idea as well as that of having himself and his mistress portrayed was evidently dropped by the patron, whoever he may have been.” Fleming points out “the picture was depersonalized and, due to Fragonard’s extremely sensuous imagination, became a universal image of joyous, carefree sexuality,” (my italics) as opposed to a straightforward vanity portrait. Since then, corporate sponsorship has replaced less conspicuous donations as a major funding vehicle for many arts organizations.

"The Swing" by Fragonard, 1766

So collaborations between moneyed patrons and starving artists has not been uncommon historically, but patrons were not advertising themselves — no revenue was expected from the inclusion of their images in commissioned paintings, unlike corporate sponsors today who slap their logos on every visible posterboard. There can be mutually beneficial relationships — partnerships — established between non-profits and corporations (as with Fragonard and his patron), but it’s vital that those non-profits remember that they need not be beggars bending to the whim of their sponsors. Corporations can offer money, but museums offer  credibility in public relations and marketing return. Children today may very well associate Exxon Mobile with the funding of public television instead of my own foremost memory, the infamous Exxon oil spill of 1989, and the Altria Group, owner of cigarette giant Philip Morris, is not coincidentally one of the most significant donor to the arts in a transparent but successful attempt to gain positive PR-by-association. Perceived cultural good will is important in any era, but essential in times like these when the financial sector and big business are regarded as especially villainous. I don’t condemn corporate backing; I just want curatorial integrity to remain in tact.

Further Reading:

• “Corporate Sponsorship A Growing Area of Arts Concern” AllBusiness.com, October 2000
• “Fashion Victim,” NYTimes.com, May 6, 2005
• “Ethics and the Visual Arts” edited by Elaine A. King, Gail Levin, Allworth Communications, Inc., 2006
• “Establishing Dress History,” Lou Taylor, Manchester University Press, 2004
• “Patronizing the Arts,” Marjorie Garber, Princeton University Press, 2008
• “Night at the Museum Smithsonian’s PR bonanza” NPR.org, May 21, 2009
• “Smithsonian Hopes to Cash in On Stiller Movie” NPR.org, May 21, 2009

Recommend this post:

: : : : : : : : : : :

The early work of Richard Avedon has been getting a lot of attention lately because of the Avedon Fashion Photography 1944 – 2000 exhibit at The International Center of Photography.  “Dovima and Elephants” is also being featured at The Metropolitan Museum of Art as part of the “Model as  Muse” exhibit in the Costume Institute.  Here are a few of my favorite early Avedon photographs.

Dovima in Balenciaga cloche - Cafe de Deux Magots, Paris 1955

Dorian Leigh - evening dress by Piguet, lie St.-Louis, Paris, August 1949

Sunny Harnett - evening dress by Madame Gres, Casino, Le Touquet, August 1954

Carmen - Coat by Pierre Cardin 1957

Suzy Parker and Robin Tattersall - coat by Guy Laroche, Palais-Royal, Paris, August 1957

Dovima

Georgia Hamilton - emsemble by Balenciaga

Suzy Parker and Robin Tattersall - Evening dress by Madame Gres, Moulin Rouge, Paris, August 1957

Have you seen the new Grey Gardens movie on HBO? I watched it a few days ago, and super-loved it. Drew Barrymore and Jessica Lange are fantastic. I must watch the actual documentary now. And buy some head scarfs, and perhaps a dilapidated mansion in East Hampton….

My boyfriend was giving me a lot of shit about watching it, and I feel the need to publicly vent. I mean, I tried for, like, five days to get him to watch it with me. He absolutely refused. I don’t get it. It’s not like I was asking him to watch Bride Wars or Must Love Dogs or something, and this TV movie is only like 90 minutes long. (Hmm…he probably secretly loves Kate Hudson movies.) Then he had the nerve to come in at the end, when I was on the verge of tears, and mock Little Edie’s accent. I was like, THIS IS A SERIOUS MOVIE FOR CHRIST’S SAKE! THIS IS SAD! IT’S A TRAGEDY! HAVE SOME RESPECT!

Men. They wouldn’t know a good tv biopic on HBO if it hit them in the face.

Plus, my love/hate relationship with the Olsen twins continues. When I was watching the film, I remembered this photo shoot MK did with Lauren Hutton a few years in Harper’s Baazar, inspired by Grey Gardens. Familiar feelings of wanting to kill Mary-Kate Olsen while also forcing her to hang out with me came bubbling to the surface. You see, at the time I didn’t get what Grey Gardens was, but I loved the photos and the styling nonetheless. (I even hung one up on my wall. Yikes.) Here’s one of the pics below. I don’t know why; I love it.

Lauren Hutton is also a pretty amazing woman. Unlike MK, there is no love/hate there. I just find her inspiring and she seems to really embrace aging well. I actually have no clue how old she is. Does it matter? She’s still seems sexy and fun and willing to laugh. I’d like to hang out with her. Maybe I’ll call her after I post this.

Here she is with Michael Kors at the Met Gala a few weeks ago. UH SHE IS LUMINOUS.

I love stripes. Sigh.

Here is the trailer below. It’s fantastic, the music is great too. It should be watched, fo sho.

I went to the “The Model as Muse” exhibit at The Met on Saturday and  it has inspired me to write about my own favorite models. These women have been my favorites for a very long time. In no particular order…

Jessica Stam

If I can describe Stam in one word, it would be “ethereal.” She has an otherworldly quality to her that naturally draws people’s attentions to her…I think mostly out of intrigue. And she has an unforgettable face.

Daria Werbowy

What separates Daria from the rest is 1) she has boobs 2) she’s not pasty white and 3) she does not look sickly. She has a strengh and confidence to her that really does set her apart from the rest. My favorite Daria moments include her opening and closing for Versace Fall 2007 and her in the Chanel 2006 ad campaign.

Sasha  Pivovarova

Some say that she looks like Gemma Ward on crack but I think those people erroneously believe that a successful model needs to be pretty – not that Sasha isn’t pretty but her face is fierce more than anything else (sometimes she looks downright pissed off). Tyra Banks has forever ruined the word “fierce” for me which is a shame because there is no word better fitting for Sasha. I remember the first time I saw her and the two words that automatically came to mind (and continues to turn up) are “fierce” and “stunning.” She always leaves an impression.

Oy vey, I am so sleepy now and I know my body is going to be mad at me if I delay sleep any longer so I must cut this short. The others I wanted to include were Linda Evangalista, Du Juan, and Caronline Trentini.

On May 4, 2009 fashion’s brightest stars were out to celebrate the opening of this exhibit. Oh, the clothes! This one night was better than all of the award shows combined. Below are some of my favorites.

Short and Sassy

Liya Kebede in Derek Lam

Anne Hathaway in Marc Jacobs

Alek Wek in Emanual Ungaro

Bar Rafeali in Marchesa

Diane Kruger in Chanel Haute Couture

Emma Stone in Matthew Williamson

Emma Roberts in Atalier Versace

Belles of the Ballgown

Oluchi Onweagba in Oscar de la Renta

Liz Goldwyn in Rodarte

Chanel Iman in Zac Posen

Jessica Biel in Atalier Versace with Justin Timberlake in William Rast

Designer Love

Liv Tyler, Kate Hudson, Stella McCartney all in McCartney

Lakshmi Menon, Rachel Roy, Joy Bryant all in Roy

Heidi Klum in J. Mendel with Gilles Mendel

Marion Cotillard in Dior with John Galliano

Kate Beckinsale in Marchesa with the designers

Jessica Alba in Jason Wu with Wu

Kate Moss in Marc Jacobs with the man himself

Hello Menswear!

Lake Bell in Rag & Bone

Monday night was the Costume Institute Gala at the Met.

Honorary co-chairs Marc Jacobs and Kate Moss, in the turban she had specially designed for the evening.

The $7500-a-ticket gala is thrown to honor couture (as if it needs more honoring. Could there be a more lauded industry?) and mark the opening of a new exhibit. Those who make the invite list are fashion insiders, models, designers, and industry ingenues.  This year was no exception. The theme was “The Model As Muse” and I actually clicked through a staggering 146 images from the red carpet to confirm that yes—models were present. A lot of models, and the wiry movie stars that challenge them for magazine covers. As you can imagine.

Some appear to literally be in costume, although I’ve determined this is not a stipulation of attendence. It’s probably just that those in the know must really use this night to let their hair down, so to speak. Since the rest of us normal folk must stifle them from their full potential every other evening of the year…

I’ve never been shy about conceptualizing outfits with an element of the costume in them. In reinventing looks of my own (yesterday, some warped sort of secretary look), I tend to envision a specific stereotype of a person or character then pull things from my closet that I think she might appreciate. It keeps things interesting.

The day you think you know exactly who you are, what you like, and what you’re about—I’m convinced that’s when you’ve lost your edge.

Of all the attendees, here are some of my favorites (and a few that I just couldn’t ignore):

My girl crush Jessica Biel in Versace: beauty and a geek like Funny Face all over again.

I'll trade you my 2001 Audi for that dress: Ashley Olsen in a dress of her design, The Row.

Marie Antoinette does 2009: Kirsten Dunst in Chanel Haute Couture.

 Anne Hathaway pays homage to the “Blow” wardrobe in Marc Jacobs.

MK Stoker's Dracula: the other Olsen softens Goth in a grey lacy Lacroix creation.

Kerry Washington brings a little Dangerous Liasons in Louis Vuitton.

 And then they all went and blew it out at Bungalow 8. Not too shabby, ladies!

[For more pictures, look here.]

A bleg = blog + beg — i.e., using a blog to beg for information.

Note: I beg here for what inspires YOU…MINIMAL OR MAXIMAL?

GIve me silence, a white snowy expanse, an open infinity pool, a Rothko, a clear blue sky and sea and I am full or overstimulate me to the point of fainting from a cacophony of senses.  Anything in between, forced, half-baked, adopted without reason or humor or complete abandon will annoy me.  

What appears on the red-carpets of Galas and Award events usually falls into the “annoy” category and yet many women do actually understand how to work the formula for good taste and spontaneity.  For New York City’s Metropolitan Museum’s Costume Institute’s “The Model as Muse: Embodying Fashion” opening last night, May 4th, there were many inspiring muses and I especially appreciate the annoyance of the not so beautiful ones which has inspired this BLEG from me to make events like this more inspiring and legendary.

FIRST…THE WINNER.

THE BEST OF ALL WORLDS…ALEK WEK

BEG ONE.  PLEASE WAKE ME UP!

I beg you…Vogue…is it not time to wake up and shake in your “inside-of-a-codfish-blue” sweater set that influences millions… that maybe actually the street, style bloggers and underground dandies and performers have much more influence on fashion than models?  If last year’s Superheroes exhibit left me with my head shaking the theme alone of this event is already making me quiver to see the inside of the museum. 

The official wording of exhibition says it will examine “the reciprocal relationship between high fashion and evolving ideals of beauty and will focus on iconic fashion models of the 20th century and their roles in projecting, and sometimes inspiring, the fashion of their respective eras.”  

HO-HUM.

“We are trying to sell magazines today kidz.”

OK, I take off my “annoyed” turban to comment upon Kate.  The Moss, here dressed by her co-host Marc Jacobs in role of Queen Muse.  Her turban was custom designed by Stephan Burrows.  I like it. She wins, where Lopez and others have failed.

Oluchi Onweagba in Oscar de la Renta is like a bold illustration, this is a model whose red carpet does inspire.  This is the look of a muse.

One color looks like Kate’s or the classic power of black and white done well will go a long way on the carpet. Thanks go to the legendary muse Coco Chanel for adopting the black and white power colors and emblems of men and their boyish interplay with the female body and attitude.  This is classic good stuff.  I guess Coco’s trousers and cigarette back in the day = Kate’s candy.  (Coming to the screen soon, muse Audrey Tautou as Coco Chanel)

Coco Chanel

BEG TWO: PLEASE INVITE THE REAL NEW MUSES!

As a publicist who works with many designers, editors and stylists I completely understand the beauty of models and their personal style.  But if there is anyway to position yourself as old-fashioned and perhaps not viable, it would be to ignore what has always driven fashion and style and now more than ever…individuals way outside of the comfort zone of class and race and society’s red carpets.  Brands like Vogue do just that and it’s becoming so boring.

The legendary models in the exhibit, Lisa Fonssagrives-Penn, Dovima, Suzy Parker, Sunny Harnett, and Dorian Leigh are highlighted in the exhibit but this was another era when all it took was beauty, a visionary photographer (and maybe some dramatic elephants) to make one sheath come alive. 

What if there were 50 random invites sent to street style experts like those bloggers I so admire such as the Queens at The Kingdom of Style, some random invites to the best Harajuku kids plus the winners of  The Alertnative Miss World contest.  (hmm… interesting typo: Alert-native for Alternative…) Everyone knows this is where looks originate that end up on Paris and London runways.  Now that would be an inspiring Costume Gala.  Legendary.  A model of ingenuity, perfect for the times.

BEG THREE: THE COLLABORATION OF TALENT IS KINDA THE NEW NEWS!

While it is true that anyone with the goods can be a model, it is still the the art directors and designers who are the actual muses and visionaries who determine the face of the moment.

Fashion historian and co-curator Kohle Yohannan,(whom I met while he was Mary McFadden’s muse/boyfriend, sporting tennis whites), who worked with the Met’s curator-in-charge Harold Koda,  commented:  “You look at those women and you understand what it meant to be modern in that time.” 

 “I think that any woman that inspires other women to want to lead the life that she lives – that’s a muse.” 

That inspiration comes from the team of talent and before all that from the artists, designers and culture makers themselves who use the model as their canvas.  If she or he is smart and is winking through the canvas…then you have a Muse.  Kohle, yes, your explanation PLUS mystery, interplay of tension and seduction…an interplay between creators and models.

BEG FOUR: KEEP IT SIMPLE!

THE MINIMALS

So if personality is a blank canvas…I beg you…is this what Ashley Olsen was thinking?

 Flavia de Oliveira and Chanel Iman in Zac Posen    Daria Werbowy in Balmain

                                                         Anna Jagodzinska in Altuzarra and…

                         Carmen Kass here in black Michael Kors are Muses of Minimal Sexy                                                  

A flash of pink or skin always works, Natalia Vodianova in pink Fortuny and Kate Bosworth in Stella McCartneyDesigner, Patrick Robinson and Virginia Smith Of Vogue

Ciara in Emilio Pucci, the last word in black and white simplicity, with Peter Dunder

BEG FIVE: GIVE ME INTELLIGENCE AND STIMULATION AND BANJI-REALNESS!

THE MAXIMALS

Derek Lam dress on Liya Kebede.  Her husband Kassy, behind her is also a favorite gentleman of mine…

 Anja Rubik in Balmain

 Caudia Schiffer in Atelier Versace

Haute Lou Doillon goes bezerk yet it works.  With Oliver Theyskens on her arm and wearing Nina Ricci

Lauren Hutton with and in Michael Kors, accessorized in Imperfection.  Skiing accident remains, famous imperfect teeth and sexy realness.  SHE WINS TOO!

BEG FIVE: CAN WE FINALLY APPRECIATE THE NUANCES THAT MAKE US LAUGH AND MAKE US NOT BELONG TO ANYTHING , BUT BE WEIRDLY AND SMARTLY TOSSED INTO ORIGINALITY?

MY FINAL BEG.  

Make sure you see Andrew Logan’s Alternative Miss World. In 1976, he hosted the Valentine’s Ball at which the Sex Pistols first got noticed and counts among his close friends and fans some of the world’s best Muses…Brian Eno, Derek Jarman, David Hockney, Zandra Rhodes, Divine and Anita Roderick.

Miss Alternative World video.

CAN WE HAVE MORE FUN AND LESS PLASTIC SURGERY?

BEG FINALE: WHAT INSPIRES YOU?  MINIMAL, MAXIMAL, FOREIGN LANDS AND PEOPLE, MUSEUMS, TINY FLOWERS IN THE DIRT, GLOWING COMPUTER SCREENS, REALLY GOOD COCKTAILS?  TELL ME.  I BEG YOU!

written by Jade Dressler

imagesource | coutorture

I was reading Cathyrn Horne’s “On the Runway” blog and she wrote that Azzedine Alaïa, who was going to have 7 models wear his dresses last night’s “Models as a Muse” Costume Institute exhibit and party, pulled his dresses from the show.  He asked the models not to wear the dresses once he saw that his work was not going to be included in the exhibit. Naomi Campbell, a longtime muse and friend of Alaïa’s, boycotted the gala altogether.   I thought it was a real shame, because I feel Alaïa is already underrepresented enough as it is in today’s American fashion magazines and editorials, especially American Vogue.   The man has been a legend in the fashion world for decades, when you think of a designer and their model muses, Alaïa fits the bill.

For instance, this feature, “The Artist and his Model” from Elle January, 2003, showcases Alaïa and his muse, Giselle Bündchen and his S/S couture collection:

And there is his biggest model muse, Naomi Campbell, who also owns a significant amount of Alaïa in her personal collection:

What I love most about Alaïa is that his clothes are made to fit a woman’s body and showcase curves.  The design is simple and unfussy, yet you can see what makes it specia once seen how it fits on the body:

Plus, his footwear is always beautiful and on point:

Images from The Fashion Spot and Browns Fashion

I swear to god this outfit makes me want to cry and rage andthrow up all at the same time.  I just don’t know if I can cope with any of it including the person that’s in it.  Look at the sleeves!! It’s every shade of  godawful wrong and if a regular person went anywhere in this, including their own bathroom, they should be at least be subjected to a gallon of green gunge Nickelodeon style.  (If this was anyone else wearing this I’d have said they should get the hairy part of the hand but…well…you know)

Rihanna wore this Knots Landing/Prince-esque monstrosity to the Costume Institute Gala at the Met last night.  She has clearly been spending too much time around a certain Mr. Kanye “CAPS LOCK” West.  Maybe the rumours of their relationship being more than professional is true. *shudder* Mullets, jumpsuits, random colour combinations and now this sweet mess?  All signs of over-exposure to The Ego.

Of course she wasn’t the only broke-down looking celeb there, the crown of “Most Shiteous” went to Vadge who looked truly horrific.

Like I said, I just don’t know anymore.

Opening at the Met on May 6th - “The Model As Muse”. I can’t wait – Fashion and Art!