one of my favorite things about this channel is the anti-gatekeeping attitude. can't afford new or popular designer pieces? buy secondhand pieces you love. don't know where to start designing? start by making SOMETHING, then keep going. in a field often associated with old-money elitism, this channel blasts open a direct path to fashion.
One perspective to have on the superficiality of fashion: it's not superficial at all, but an acknowledgement that we are social beings and everything we do in terms of presentation (e.g. how we speak, posture, smell, what we do etc) is a signal to others about who we are. Under this perspective, fashion *can be* a genuine attempt to authentically present yourself to the best of your abilities to others around you. In the same way you might increase your vocab in a language like English or Spanish so you can better express your thoughts, you can see "getting into fashion" as an attempt to increase your vocab to better express your *self* through how you dress. Of course, there are many other ways to express yourself, such as music, painting, poetry etc and it's not as common to hear someone say those are superficial domains. This could be because large portions of fashion use exclusivity to generate a lot of money. So, for those not interested in fashion for the art of it, there is always this alternative theory they can entertain that says people who engage in fashion are just shallow and trying to posture as someone who is rich and trendy, rather than people who want to express who they believe they are.
A guy with a channel about metal music did a look at the new Balenciaga collection and made a joke about them making a garbage bag bag, without realizing they already had. Got a really good chuckle out of that.
Just a comment from a frustrated former fashion and design student. Your channel gives me hope for the future of what fashion can become. You give perspective and artistic integrity to fashion reviews and avoid the trappings of being catty and overwhelmingly superficial. Your insight provokes thought and has allowed me to ask myself questions and do my own research. Bravo!! Keep it going!
I read someone say that everything is just a thing until you love it. They used the example of stamps, like a stamp is just a stamp until you're a collector, then they are detailed and interesting and worth collecting. Noone would say anything about a stamp collector, so why do we judge people that like and collect fashion?
Honestly honestly with me finally taking fashion seriously since discovering your channel this year and finally doing away with trends as we heavily advocate here, I finally see myself wearing the clothes in my closet because instead of outsourcing cool pieces it’s finally coming from within now. I’m finally feeling more comfortable in my clothes as I can express my love for fashion without actively consuming it now and have since decided not to buy anything new for the next 3-6 months, therefore I think I can justify a patreon subscription even as an international viewer from Malaysia ^_^ see you soon! Thank you for all that you do here
I love how you can’t really find fault with message behind all of Martin Margiela’s creations! He was always true to his message… he was a disrupter pointing a finger at the excesses and craziness he was seeing everywhere in 80’s, 90’s & 2000’s fashion ( and we all have to put clothes on our bodies to protect from the environment) to highlight and question these excesses… I love his work, his ethics & philosophy, I admire him tremendously just as I admire you for bringing all these ideas 💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡to as many people as you can! Please don’t stop 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🙋🏻♀️❤️
Hi Bliss! Recently discovered your channel. I'm a fashion design teacher, though my school recently closed down that program, so now I'm doing private lessons. I love your approach. I wanted to share that when I taught my classes, I was highlighting how we're moving into a new paradigm of upcycling and DIY. Haute Couture was shown to illustrate embellishment techniques, but I always wanted to impress on my students that they could learn these things, and that their success in "fashion" does not need to be on the same - or even close to - the level of haute couture. Mainstream fashion seems to have fractured into more focused interests in substyles or specific trends (i.e. Cottage core, Fairy kei, punk, goth, et al.). And what I've seen is more people not being able to afford that "Selkie" dress, and just making it themselves. I love this, and see this as a good direction.
I really respect and appreciate when people create the content that they wish they had as a beginner to something. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experiences with the world!
All fashion is apparel but not all apparel is fashionable. I see that fashion is as superficial as the wearer wants it to be. It is literally just warmth insulation for some and an expression of self to others. Price does not belittle or increase the importance of fashion. I deliberately wear balenciaga and clothes from Tesco (uk grocery store) as I like to contrast quality; the cheap is as important as the expensive to achieve my look. Every decision to put a certain piece of fashion on has a thought behind it - be it for warmth and/or how it looks. This decision gives purpose and meaning to the item and in my eyes makes it more than superficial; there shouldn’t be a hierarchy of reasons to justify the importance or depth of fashion. Thanks Bliss - I love the Patreon by the way - totally amazing. Your archive is outstanding!
fashion is a form of creative expression. all art has surface elements to it to make it interesting. the more you analyze this the less meaning it has. its like magic
Thank you💚 I really agree that fashion is superficial for many but not all of fashion lovers. Most fashion pages on Instagram are all about cool or hot looks from fast fashion brands which are honestly a little bit ridiculous to my eyes. But the truth is not everyone can afford high fashion. I'm a simple student and can't afford it too. Still, I think it feels better when people value fashion as an art form, and here I feel like it's not that superficial because it involves meaning and storytelling... I don't know much about sociology, but many movements (political, and social...) have involved fashion, so it's kinda important too...
you absolutely do not make fluff content and, IMO, are the definitive source of intelligent, educated and insightful fashion content that pulls from historical references, pop culture zeitgeist and deep knowledge of designers to give us content that is easily digestible. and funny. and highly informative. a lot of other fashion UA-camrs out there, i won't name names, but ok - tim dessaint, frugal aesthetic, ariel rosado, richie le, flywithjohnnythai (the list goes on), and to a lesser extent, harry has or gallucks - seem to only have come into the subculture relatively recently and can only speak to fashion "of the now." a few of them are more about hype than actual design and couture. they certainly don't have a lot of knowledge or historical context to pull from and as such, can only recommend what's trending because that's all they know. i think the only other fashion UA-camr out there who has your level of charisma and intelligence is fashionlover4. so keep up the amazing work. we definitely recognize and appreciate it!
Fashion is so much more than superficial. Some people just don’t have the knowledge or desire to learn about Fashion as an Art. Sidenote: I hate when someone’s see’s a couture garment and say “That’s stupid, where are they gona wear that”.
I do think fashion has a larger than usual potential for superficial exploitation because of its connection with the appearance of the human body and therefore ego. However, I think the opinion that it’s superficial comes mostly from those who misunderstand/don’t know about fashion. Fashion is about culture, expression - like any form of art. It is unique in its closeness and necessity for all humans. Because of its flexibility (used for practical reasons, uniform, status or creative expression) it lends is self primarily to the possibility to push the boundaries of what is possible with regards to dressing the human body and extending and bending meaning. It is unique also because it is mobile as the human body moves. It also maps time because of its constant in being used by all humans everyday. Because it is worn by the body, it can change the way a human feels during the whole time of wear, in comparison to simply viewing a painting for example. All imho.
Before there could be fashion or even art humans had to be able to clothe, feed and shelter themselves. Only when social production was brought to a certain point could “fashion” as it is understood today take root in human society. And the cultural expressions of fashion you speak on have always had a meaning that was superimposed by different social classes in their societies and usually the “fashionable” have been the rulers of those societies, not by accident but by design. I don’t see any difference between those societies and our own. However, I do believe that being into fashion is fine but there’s no reason to not be honest and act like it’s not a superficial relationship we give to clothing that gives it meaning.
whenever I hear someone talk about how some form of creative self-expression isn't Real Art (fashion, video games, animation, etc.) I think of how people used to say the same thing about painting
What I enjoy about fashion, is getting these different pieces from let’s say charity shops, my dads old clothes, maybe Depop once and again, and maybe from an online store ( artists website if i find a good deal) - usually don’t because of tax and shipping. I buy these items separately no outfit in mind really but I always somehow get them into an outfit. These outfits make me happy because they normally come from nothing. To end my comment find outfits let’s say 3-5 (trousers,tops, and jacket plus shoes) that you absolutely love no matter the trends no matter the weather (preferably have stuff for all conditions) keep loving those clothes to the eventual end. Constant outfit pics with new clothes aren’t my thing but do you I guess.
to me, fashion is an absolutely insane pillar block of society. like literally, we’ve ALWAYS had fashion, and we probably always will. idk if anything is less superficial lol
Really liked this Q&A! I had a thought on your comment at 4:55 regarding most people not understanding the joke. I like art because I appreciate the artist providing their POV through a medium, in this case clothing. I do think that fashion has mass reach but suffers from people not viewing it as art because most people view these creations as practical object first as oppose to art. A canvas for example where it’s sole purpose is a medium for art. So for example paintings of Piet Mondrian would be first treated as something to be interpreted because that’s it’s inherent purpose. Clothes for the mass populace is still viewed to be practicality first. Hope that makes sense 😂. Thanks again for the video.
i’ve always thought beau brummell brought about the end of fancy-looking men. he was active in the early 1800s and i guess single-handedly ushered in regency men’s fashion. men used to watch him get dressed in the morning, like a living breathing gq magazine
It really depends one thing I do kind of hate is how all these young kids on Tiktok just getting into archive avant garde fashion act all elite like they have all the knowledge and look down on ppl who dress in "regular" or "normie" clothes as they call it. Ive been collecting since 2010 and I don't like to brag about it I just like to study brands and designers and appreciate getting to look at pieces in person and see the work the designers put in.
5:20 I know this was a joke but hear me out. A car is definitely a medium to express yourself the same way clothes do. A lot of is deciding wether or not you view them merely as an appliance vs an extension of your daily life. Like fashion, is something you kinda have to get
was going to say there are definitely stories surrounding cars, although the cars themselves may not express a narrative. Regular Car Reviews has done a couple large retrospectives on things like Lee Iacoca's run with General Motors, and their entire channel is ironically, a lot like this one. The guy graduated with some kind of lit degree and applies concepts from it and sociology into his reviews, its very cool.
Actually, if you look at how a rolls royce is made you’ll see that the same can also be said for cars. Actually, anything that requires a manual technique or that can be artisanal could be valid.
In a literal sense fashion is superficial, of the surface. But one's surface generally tells a lot about one. If one is pale, one might be ill. Or doesn't get outside much. If one walks with one's eyes cast down, one may not have much confidence. And so on. But fashion is only part of our surface, there are so many things visible on the surface that reflect who we are inside, our grooming, our jewelry, our body language, our facial expressions, our weight, our fitness, and so on.
7:50 actually, fashion magazines kinda did that but the way you or loic prigent for example present to us fashion is much more interesting and easy to adhere to and understand.
Most of the stuff i wear is so obscure to most people in my area, that I’m not sure you could call dressing up superficial; at least not in the monetary or clout aspect. But to say we don’t dress up to look good is asinine. Of course you are wearing what you think you look good in. So from a certain aspect, we’re all being superficial to ourselves; regardless whether we are doing it to be superficial to others.
your channel is such a gem!! i'm a complete beginner to actually learning about fashion & your vids have taught me so much already! def joining the patreon soon
I heard the practicality zeitgeist for menswear came in with the French Revolution. I cannot confirm this with my current resources, and I got it from the internet, scrolling, but the associated images were pretty convincing. I think it is fascinating, because on one hand, menswear could be seen to be in it's current state as an artifact of revolution, and one of the few successful overthrows of the elites in class struggle. On the other hand, the procrustean drabness is a fierce tool of the Patriarchy, keeping men from identifying themselves by differentiating identities based on unique, and openly laudable qualities, especially ones available to them natively, ones they do not have to work for, or serve a hierarchy to acquire. Even in the first days of this reality, the underclass was discouraging each other from dressing like the Aristocracy, and thinking of themselves like protagonists in their own stories, or in any way, simply comfortably special, for being themselves. The other possibility, that men would break out in color, and fashion, and become anything they liked, in their rebellion, did not happen. Perhaps, at the time, there was reason for this in particular sadness, and fears, or even a deep and precious sense of solidarity. (The trend of both sexes wearing overalls, that made them a thing in the twentieth century started with a determination to stop wearing, and aspiring to participate in the games Elites were playing with everyone's lives and livelihoods. Solidarity does turn into fashion, trends that become ferocious Style.) But the legacy today, is a kind of deep anti-revolutionary sentiment. It should be noted that the later creation of the tuxedo, and the suit in their shortened forms, were also a revolutionary take. However, I cannot say it surprises me that Hugo Boss basically created modern formal suits, and there was no real separation between this vision, and the uniforms he designed for the Nazis, with their cult and fascism needs. Knitting Cult Lady says something very wise, which is that appearance control is about behavior control (in the context of cults). Patriarchy, White Supremacy, and Capitalism are the cults we live in, the broadest ones... I'm not a fan of suits. I'm going to own that right now. I know this will be a controversial opinion, but I think suits are deeply impractical to wear well, and so the secret desire of men is to wear them well, leading to much bodily control, second guessing, and constant self monitoring vigilance. The goal of a suit is procrustean sameness, and the pseudo 'practicality' of fitting in with the group. The goal is to fit in, and not to stand out, but to wear a suit well is to have broken the self most rigorously into the shape of the requirements of the clothes. Every man wants the validation of being a king among men, the one to wear it best, but the experience is brainwashing him to be angst ridden about the impossibilities of it, and to associate self sacrifice with kingly position. I once put this as wanting to be 007, a strong, decisive man, who can handle himself in any dangerous situation, who seeks a position where his life means nothing but convenience to his employers, to be ruthlessly used. Many people have argued that tailoring is the art of small, very personal adjustments, making the most of the best materials. Why, then, are knits, which stretch and drape around the body, so conspicuously absent, even from invisible places of adjustment? Why are the shapes so boxy? And why is everything designed to look bad when all but the most restrained movement happens within them? One could argue that this last is the lamentation of nearly all formal wear, but mens fashion is distinctive for, somewhat on purpose, not emphasizing the distinction between formal and street wear, perhaps as a form of social mobility, or as a way of showing the strangely elevated, and yet, abject, role men are supposed to take from the equality of their role in Patriarchy. My final issue with the suit in particular, is that suits do not ask for, nor showcase, the grace of the man wearing it. (I'm going to cite deliberate upper arm wrinkling, if you bring up Gene Kelley.) They ever so slightly detract from truly graceful men, especially the ones who are good at dancing, and moving their bodies. In this way, a suit makes no demands on a man, that he cultivate grace. But for those who are graceful, or who have figured out that cultivating grace elevates how they wear their suit, in their war with it, they come to know that ultimately, their grace will only go so far, and no further in a suit, far before their grace, and physical performance would naturally set their limits. They are locked in battle with their suit, and doomed to fail. And worse, this entire struggle is framed in subliminal, or private form, a topic which men are isolated in discussing only with themselves, if they realize what has happened at all. I don't think I need to go into the symbolism of putting on a tie, do I? Just going to point out that neck scarves and cravats were more useful, beautiful, and flattering, before the current incarnation of things. I make twisted exceptions for rebels like John Constantine, but... Come on!
I was reading an old post I had saved, and I recalled a recent video I watched here on youtube, and I think I have given men at the genesis of this turn of narrative, too much credit. What else was happening in the late 1700's, and early 1800's? Women were becoming mantua makers. Women were starting to make their own money, and have their own businesses making fashion. Where previously, tailors had taken the lion's share of money and credit, and used women as anonymous laborers. As with every profession, when the women move in, and get credit, money and prestige are pulled from the entire affair. If women were making soft and graceful fashions, if suddenly there was cache, and care in their work (and mantua making was distinctive for draping the fabric on the person, instead of piecing with pattern pieces in flat form), then men would devalue their work, seeking drab and practical fashions. Therefore, Patriarchy was well present for the original buy in to this idea, and in fact, represented a defense of privilege.
The very first question could be answered by stating that anything with monetary value is superficial, since money is superficially and socially constructed by humans. Great vid for the rest of it though :)
I know the name that gets memed a lot as far as men's clothes becoming very plain at some point in history is Beau Brummel (1778-1840), who kind of became famous for mocking people who dressed too fancily and making a lot of cutting remarks about people's clothing. He would say stuff like "To be truly elegant one should not be noticed," and "If people turn to look at you on the street, you are not well dressed, but either too stiff, too tight, or too fashionable." His wikipedia bio mentions, "Eventually, he died shabby and insane in Caen."
Your idea of superficial is more of an indictment on capitalism than it is of having a hobby. “Buying stuff” itself is not a sufficient reason for the superficiality of a hobby, that’s a necessary precursor to do anything under the conditions of modern society. What makes a hobby superficial is when commodity fetishism dominates your enjoyment of that hobby, it’s when rods are no longer to capture their intended target but because of the exclusion of buying that brand versus other practical but cheaper options. Clothes and fashion I believe is where this relationship is brought to its peak, the fact you used nobles, aristocrats and monarchies to describe the relationship is perfect also. They did not dress like that because they had a great sense of fashion but it was to distance themselves from those who weren’t apart of the same classes as them, mainly the poor and working classes. Honestly, I believe clothes lose their significance when they are not consumed for their practically but instead for the significance of owning that commodity. No matter how you care to justify it, you’re still giving a commodity extra-human qualities that only exist bc of societal valuations that are not controlled by the majority of people. You’re buying something for the purpose not that it’s intended for but for the significance and prestige that comes with owning this or that piece of clothing and it becomes a superficial relationship. It abstracts the human element from the ownership of that commodity and you begin to identify yourself with a commodity, which is inherently superficial.
Speaking to nuanced story telling: I’d love to hear people’s thoughts on Bstory’s 5th season sAmsArA. The collection has been the target for most of the internet as “cringe bait”, what with the 4 hoodies with bullet holes featured from school who had mass shootings. I’m unclear with the message of the show.
To me, clothes are just that. Clothes. They are something that to cover my body. At the end of the day, I don't care about the trend or fashion. I am after comfort and body coverage. I think that is the point where we go superficial when we care who the designers are and how much they are and use them to show off and for social status.
Fashion and fishing aren’t the same. You grab a pole and fish, it’s a quiet thing people do for leisure, sport, it costs little to nothing to do. Spending thousands of dollars shopping to dress yourself… like, it’s not the same at all
I am curious about Margiela specifically. Are you specifically aiming to analyze avant guard fashion? Ive been getting more into brands like Killstar. Though they dont have the shoes I want.
Fashion has always been superficial. It's initial use was for practical purposes; add layers of protection for the human body as we go out. Like anything else, clothes ended up being used to further the birth of an industry as well as incorporate luxury into them as we found out we could use them to express ourselves.
i think if you look ugly like me then fashion doesn't matter because no matter what i wear i still appear unattractive to the vast many people i find attractive. So no dior prada balenciaga rick owens et al is going to help me out here so i dress in cheap tkmax own branded clothes in the reduced section. I have a very lopsided face and right eye that is bigger than the left eye and a top lip that leans to the right when i talk. Also i have a thick 2 cm nasal fold crease line on my left and almost bling in my right eye but can see 70% out my left eye.
well even if you can't be beautiful there are degrees of ugliness. wearing the right clothes you might only be a little ugly, whereas the wrong clothes you might be very ugly. this isn't to say the right clothes are necessarily expensive. there is cheap chic.
one of my favorite things about this channel is the anti-gatekeeping attitude. can't afford new or popular designer pieces? buy secondhand pieces you love. don't know where to start designing? start by making SOMETHING, then keep going. in a field often associated with old-money elitism, this channel blasts open a direct path to fashion.
FR
it's waht Virgil would've wanted
One perspective to have on the superficiality of fashion: it's not superficial at all, but an acknowledgement that we are social beings and everything we do in terms of presentation (e.g. how we speak, posture, smell, what we do etc) is a signal to others about who we are. Under this perspective, fashion *can be* a genuine attempt to authentically present yourself to the best of your abilities to others around you. In the same way you might increase your vocab in a language like English or Spanish so you can better express your thoughts, you can see "getting into fashion" as an attempt to increase your vocab to better express your *self* through how you dress.
Of course, there are many other ways to express yourself, such as music, painting, poetry etc and it's not as common to hear someone say those are superficial domains. This could be because large portions of fashion use exclusivity to generate a lot of money. So, for those not interested in fashion for the art of it, there is always this alternative theory they can entertain that says people who engage in fashion are just shallow and trying to posture as someone who is rich and trendy, rather than people who want to express who they believe they are.
A guy with a channel about metal music did a look at the new Balenciaga collection and made a joke about them making a garbage bag bag, without realizing they already had. Got a really good chuckle out of that.
Just a comment from a frustrated former fashion and design student. Your channel gives me hope for the future of what fashion can become. You give perspective and artistic integrity to fashion reviews and avoid the trappings of being catty and overwhelmingly superficial. Your insight provokes thought and has allowed me to ask myself questions and do my own research. Bravo!! Keep it going!
I read someone say that everything is just a thing until you love it. They used the example of stamps, like a stamp is just a stamp until you're a collector, then they are detailed and interesting and worth collecting. Noone would say anything about a stamp collector, so why do we judge people that like and collect fashion?
Great point. (Also wanted to mention that I recently subscribed to your channel and I’m really enjoying the content!)
@@ytknits4892 Oh, thank you, I'm so glad you like my content 😁
Honestly honestly with me finally taking fashion seriously since discovering your channel this year and finally doing away with trends as we heavily advocate here, I finally see myself wearing the clothes in my closet because instead of outsourcing cool pieces it’s finally coming from within now. I’m finally feeling more comfortable in my clothes as I can express my love for fashion without actively consuming it now and have since decided not to buy anything new for the next 3-6 months, therefore I think I can justify a patreon subscription even as an international viewer from Malaysia ^_^ see you soon! Thank you for all that you do here
I love how you can’t really find fault with message behind all of Martin Margiela’s creations! He was always true to his message… he was a disrupter pointing a finger at the excesses and craziness he was seeing everywhere in 80’s, 90’s & 2000’s fashion ( and we all have to put clothes on our bodies to protect from the environment) to highlight and question these excesses… I love his work, his ethics & philosophy, I admire him tremendously just as I admire you for bringing all these ideas 💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡💡to as many people as you can! Please don’t stop 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🙋🏻♀️❤️
4:07 The pictures before, and "menswear has kind of had the sauce in the last few years"... my first thought was "bring back the dandy!"
Hi Bliss! Recently discovered your channel. I'm a fashion design teacher, though my school recently closed down that program, so now I'm doing private lessons. I love your approach. I wanted to share that when I taught my classes, I was highlighting how we're moving into a new paradigm of upcycling and DIY. Haute Couture was shown to illustrate embellishment techniques, but I always wanted to impress on my students that they could learn these things, and that their success in "fashion" does not need to be on the same - or even close to - the level of haute couture.
Mainstream fashion seems to have fractured into more focused interests in substyles or specific trends (i.e. Cottage core, Fairy kei, punk, goth, et al.). And what I've seen is more people not being able to afford that "Selkie" dress, and just making it themselves. I love this, and see this as a good direction.
love love love ur channel bliss, never stop because there’s no one out there doing it like you. ur art is crucial
I really respect and appreciate when people create the content that they wish they had as a beginner to something. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experiences with the world!
All fashion is apparel but not all apparel is fashionable. I see that fashion is as superficial as the wearer wants it to be. It is literally just warmth insulation for some and an expression of self to others. Price does not belittle or increase the importance of fashion. I deliberately wear balenciaga and clothes from Tesco (uk grocery store) as I like to contrast quality; the cheap is as important as the expensive to achieve my look. Every decision to put a certain piece of fashion on has a thought behind it - be it for warmth and/or how it looks. This decision gives purpose and meaning to the item and in my eyes makes it more than superficial; there shouldn’t be a hierarchy of reasons to justify the importance or depth of fashion. Thanks Bliss - I love the Patreon by the way - totally amazing. Your archive is outstanding!
fashion is a form of creative expression. all art has surface elements to it to make it interesting. the more you analyze this the less meaning it has. its like magic
i guess so
Thank you💚
I really agree that fashion is superficial for many but not all of fashion lovers. Most fashion pages on Instagram are all about cool or hot looks from fast fashion brands which are honestly a little bit ridiculous to my eyes. But the truth is not everyone can afford high fashion. I'm a simple student and can't afford it too. Still, I think it feels better when people value fashion as an art form, and here I feel like it's not that superficial because it involves meaning and storytelling...
I don't know much about sociology, but many movements (political, and social...) have involved fashion, so it's kinda important too...
The moment when the fashion UA-cam king puts you first in his video!🤩
you absolutely do not make fluff content and, IMO, are the definitive source of intelligent, educated and insightful fashion content that pulls from historical references, pop culture zeitgeist and deep knowledge of designers to give us content that is easily digestible. and funny. and highly informative. a lot of other fashion UA-camrs out there, i won't name names, but ok - tim dessaint, frugal aesthetic, ariel rosado, richie le, flywithjohnnythai (the list goes on), and to a lesser extent, harry has or gallucks - seem to only have come into the subculture relatively recently and can only speak to fashion "of the now." a few of them are more about hype than actual design and couture. they certainly don't have a lot of knowledge or historical context to pull from and as such, can only recommend what's trending because that's all they know.
i think the only other fashion UA-camr out there who has your level of charisma and intelligence is fashionlover4. so keep up the amazing work. we definitely recognize and appreciate it!
Fashion is so much more than superficial. Some people just don’t have the knowledge or desire to learn about Fashion as an Art.
Sidenote: I hate when someone’s see’s a couture garment and say “That’s stupid, where are they gona wear that”.
I do think fashion has a larger than usual potential for superficial exploitation because of its connection with the appearance of the human body and therefore ego. However, I think the opinion that it’s superficial comes mostly from those who misunderstand/don’t know about fashion. Fashion is about culture, expression - like any form of art. It is unique in its closeness and necessity for all humans. Because of its flexibility (used for practical reasons, uniform, status or creative expression) it lends is self primarily to the possibility to push the boundaries of what is possible with regards to dressing the human body and extending and bending meaning. It is unique also because it is mobile as the human body moves. It also maps time because of its constant in being used by all humans everyday. Because it is worn by the body, it can change the way a human feels during the whole time of wear, in comparison to simply viewing a painting for example. All imho.
Before there could be fashion or even art humans had to be able to clothe, feed and shelter themselves. Only when social production was brought to a certain point could “fashion” as it is understood today take root in human society. And the cultural expressions of fashion you speak on have always had a meaning that was superimposed by different social classes in their societies and usually the “fashionable” have been the rulers of those societies, not by accident but by design. I don’t see any difference between those societies and our own. However, I do believe that being into fashion is fine but there’s no reason to not be honest and act like it’s not a superficial relationship we give to clothing that gives it meaning.
whenever I hear someone talk about how some form of creative self-expression isn't Real Art (fashion, video games, animation, etc.) I think of how people used to say the same thing about painting
i didnt know that, when did they say that?
What I enjoy about fashion, is getting these different pieces from let’s say charity shops, my dads old clothes, maybe Depop once and again, and maybe from an online store ( artists website if i find a good deal) - usually don’t because of tax and shipping. I buy these items separately no outfit in mind really but I always somehow get them into an outfit. These outfits make me happy because they normally come from nothing. To end my comment find outfits let’s say 3-5 (trousers,tops, and jacket plus shoes) that you absolutely love no matter the trends no matter the weather (preferably have stuff for all conditions) keep loving those clothes to the eventual end. Constant outfit pics with new clothes aren’t my thing but do you I guess.
I’m 100% with you. I’ve been buying slowly and wearing pieces out for 10 years and it is SO much better than swapping cheap stuff out constantly 💫💫
@@BlissFoster really cool man, also thanks for interacting!
to me, fashion is an absolutely insane pillar block of society. like literally, we’ve ALWAYS had fashion, and we probably always will. idk if anything is less superficial lol
Really liked this Q&A! I had a thought on your comment at 4:55 regarding most people not understanding the joke. I like art because I appreciate the artist providing their POV through a medium, in this case clothing. I do think that fashion has mass reach but suffers from people not viewing it as art because most people view these creations as practical object first as oppose to art. A canvas for example where it’s sole purpose is a medium for art. So for example paintings of Piet Mondrian would be first treated as something to be interpreted because that’s it’s inherent purpose. Clothes for the mass populace is still viewed to be practicality first. Hope that makes sense 😂. Thanks again for the video.
I love how you talk idk what that’s even about but just yes king
1:00 took me back too youtube in 2014 when fashion channels would ask people on the street how much their outfit costs
i’ve always thought beau brummell brought about the end of fancy-looking men. he was active in the early 1800s and i guess single-handedly ushered in regency men’s fashion. men used to watch him get dressed in the morning, like a living breathing gq magazine
This is the best fashion channel...
Do orange juice next time
we need a 20+ min video on that
@@Dee-- *30
I like the balanced perspective you encourage us all to take while continuing to educate and broaden our perspectives. Thanks
I think you are spectacular and singular. Thank you for not being afraid of been seen and sharing your thoughts
It really depends one thing I do kind of hate is how all these young kids on Tiktok just getting into archive avant garde fashion act all elite like they have all the knowledge and look down on ppl who dress in "regular" or "normie" clothes as they call it. Ive been collecting since 2010 and I don't like to brag about it I just like to study brands and designers and appreciate getting to look at pieces in person and see the work the designers put in.
Yeah for sure, bragging is never it.
You’re so good at describing everything. At least, in my opinion.
that meme about how we're perceived by others really hit home! I really enjoy your channel!
BLISS FOSTER U R A LEGEND 4 THIS ONE AND ALL THE VIDEOS , KEEP UP THE GRET WORK M8 !
Rick is like this dope experimental rockstar who recorded a couple of awesome albums, got a lil popular and went full-on pop.
5:20 I know this was a joke but hear me out. A car is definitely a medium to express yourself the same way clothes do. A lot of is deciding wether or not you view them merely as an appliance vs an extension of your daily life. Like fashion, is something you kinda have to get
was going to say there are definitely stories surrounding cars, although the cars themselves may not express a narrative.
Regular Car Reviews has done a couple large retrospectives on things like Lee Iacoca's run with General Motors, and their entire channel is ironically, a lot like this one. The guy graduated with some kind of lit degree and applies concepts from it and sociology into his reviews, its very cool.
Actually, if you look at how a rolls royce is made you’ll see that the same can also be said for cars. Actually, anything that requires a manual technique or that can be artisanal could be valid.
In a literal sense fashion is superficial, of the surface. But one's surface generally tells a lot about one. If one is pale, one might be ill. Or doesn't get outside much. If one walks with one's eyes cast down, one may not have much confidence. And so on. But fashion is only part of our surface, there are so many things visible on the surface that reflect who we are inside, our grooming, our jewelry, our body language, our facial expressions, our weight, our fitness, and so on.
Strong agree 🦾 Loved seeing your thoughts, Greg! Thanks for sharing with us 💫💫
I am on a Bliss Foster video. That is crazy, i think i can die happy.
7:50 actually, fashion magazines kinda did that but the way you or loic prigent for example present to us fashion is much more interesting and easy to adhere to and understand.
maybe the real priceless jawns were the friends we made along the way
Most of the stuff i wear is so obscure to most people in my area, that I’m not sure you could call dressing up superficial; at least not in the monetary or clout aspect.
But to say we don’t dress up to look good is asinine. Of course you are wearing what you think you look good in.
So from a certain aspect, we’re all being superficial to ourselves; regardless whether we are doing it to be superficial to others.
all of us humans are trying to fill a void in our heart
yea, trying to fill with clothes ain’t good
your channel is such a gem!! i'm a complete beginner to actually learning about fashion & your vids have taught me so much already! def joining the patreon soon
Galliano's Margiela menswear couture show is a prime example of men's couture done right, one of my favorite shows of the past decade
Which year?
@@abigailmarks3180 there was only one season for mens couture, SS19
Rewatching....okay.....I will begin from the BEGINNING!!! Thank you so much!!! I felt lost here initially!!! Thank you 😊
I heard the practicality zeitgeist for menswear came in with the French Revolution. I cannot confirm this with my current resources, and I got it from the internet, scrolling, but the associated images were pretty convincing. I think it is fascinating, because on one hand, menswear could be seen to be in it's current state as an artifact of revolution, and one of the few successful overthrows of the elites in class struggle. On the other hand, the procrustean drabness is a fierce tool of the Patriarchy, keeping men from identifying themselves by differentiating identities based on unique, and openly laudable qualities, especially ones available to them natively, ones they do not have to work for, or serve a hierarchy to acquire. Even in the first days of this reality, the underclass was discouraging each other from dressing like the Aristocracy, and thinking of themselves like protagonists in their own stories, or in any way, simply comfortably special, for being themselves. The other possibility, that men would break out in color, and fashion, and become anything they liked, in their rebellion, did not happen. Perhaps, at the time, there was reason for this in particular sadness, and fears, or even a deep and precious sense of solidarity. (The trend of both sexes wearing overalls, that made them a thing in the twentieth century started with a determination to stop wearing, and aspiring to participate in the games Elites were playing with everyone's lives and livelihoods. Solidarity does turn into fashion, trends that become ferocious Style.) But the legacy today, is a kind of deep anti-revolutionary sentiment. It should be noted that the later creation of the tuxedo, and the suit in their shortened forms, were also a revolutionary take. However, I cannot say it surprises me that Hugo Boss basically created modern formal suits, and there was no real separation between this vision, and the uniforms he designed for the Nazis, with their cult and fascism needs.
Knitting Cult Lady says something very wise, which is that appearance control is about behavior control (in the context of cults). Patriarchy, White Supremacy, and Capitalism are the cults we live in, the broadest ones... I'm not a fan of suits. I'm going to own that right now. I know this will be a controversial opinion, but I think suits are deeply impractical to wear well, and so the secret desire of men is to wear them well, leading to much bodily control, second guessing, and constant self monitoring vigilance. The goal of a suit is procrustean sameness, and the pseudo 'practicality' of fitting in with the group. The goal is to fit in, and not to stand out, but to wear a suit well is to have broken the self most rigorously into the shape of the requirements of the clothes. Every man wants the validation of being a king among men, the one to wear it best, but the experience is brainwashing him to be angst ridden about the impossibilities of it, and to associate self sacrifice with kingly position. I once put this as wanting to be 007, a strong, decisive man, who can handle himself in any dangerous situation, who seeks a position where his life means nothing but convenience to his employers, to be ruthlessly used. Many people have argued that tailoring is the art of small, very personal adjustments, making the most of the best materials. Why, then, are knits, which stretch and drape around the body, so conspicuously absent, even from invisible places of adjustment? Why are the shapes so boxy? And why is everything designed to look bad when all but the most restrained movement happens within them? One could argue that this last is the lamentation of nearly all formal wear, but mens fashion is distinctive for, somewhat on purpose, not emphasizing the distinction between formal and street wear, perhaps as a form of social mobility, or as a way of showing the strangely elevated, and yet, abject, role men are supposed to take from the equality of their role in Patriarchy.
My final issue with the suit in particular, is that suits do not ask for, nor showcase, the grace of the man wearing it. (I'm going to cite deliberate upper arm wrinkling, if you bring up Gene Kelley.) They ever so slightly detract from truly graceful men, especially the ones who are good at dancing, and moving their bodies. In this way, a suit makes no demands on a man, that he cultivate grace. But for those who are graceful, or who have figured out that cultivating grace elevates how they wear their suit, in their war with it, they come to know that ultimately, their grace will only go so far, and no further in a suit, far before their grace, and physical performance would naturally set their limits. They are locked in battle with their suit, and doomed to fail. And worse, this entire struggle is framed in subliminal, or private form, a topic which men are isolated in discussing only with themselves, if they realize what has happened at all.
I don't think I need to go into the symbolism of putting on a tie, do I? Just going to point out that neck scarves and cravats were more useful, beautiful, and flattering, before the current incarnation of things. I make twisted exceptions for rebels like John Constantine, but... Come on!
I was reading an old post I had saved, and I recalled a recent video I watched here on youtube, and I think I have given men at the genesis of this turn of narrative, too much credit. What else was happening in the late 1700's, and early 1800's? Women were becoming mantua makers. Women were starting to make their own money, and have their own businesses making fashion. Where previously, tailors had taken the lion's share of money and credit, and used women as anonymous laborers. As with every profession, when the women move in, and get credit, money and prestige are pulled from the entire affair. If women were making soft and graceful fashions, if suddenly there was cache, and care in their work (and mantua making was distinctive for draping the fabric on the person, instead of piecing with pattern pieces in flat form), then men would devalue their work, seeking drab and practical fashions. Therefore, Patriarchy was well present for the original buy in to this idea, and in fact, represented a defense of privilege.
Here here! Well said Bliss!
People will argue that music is deep and emotional but it too is shallow all aesthetic and even less functional/ practical than clothing!
love your vids bliss!!!! you literally get me through my exams
The very first question could be answered by stating that anything with monetary value is superficial, since money is superficially and socially constructed by humans. Great vid for the rest of it though :)
You should do a video on Stone Island and vintage Stone Island. Would love to know more about that brand
Loved this and loved seeing everyone’s fits 🔥🔥
i love the little robot voices you do for the questions
I know the name that gets memed a lot as far as men's clothes becoming very plain at some point in history is Beau Brummel (1778-1840), who kind of became famous for mocking people who dressed too fancily and making a lot of cutting remarks about people's clothing. He would say stuff like "To be truly elegant one should not be noticed," and "If people turn to look at you on the street, you are not well dressed, but either too stiff, too tight, or too fashionable."
His wikipedia bio mentions, "Eventually, he died shabby and insane in Caen."
Your idea of superficial is more of an indictment on capitalism than it is of having a hobby. “Buying stuff” itself is not a sufficient reason for the superficiality of a hobby, that’s a necessary precursor to do anything under the conditions of modern society. What makes a hobby superficial is when commodity fetishism dominates your enjoyment of that hobby, it’s when rods are no longer to capture their intended target but because of the exclusion of buying that brand versus other practical but cheaper options. Clothes and fashion I believe is where this relationship is brought to its peak, the fact you used nobles, aristocrats and monarchies to describe the relationship is perfect also. They did not dress like that because they had a great sense of fashion but it was to distance themselves from those who weren’t apart of the same classes as them, mainly the poor and working classes. Honestly, I believe clothes lose their significance when they are not consumed for their practically but instead for the significance of owning that commodity. No matter how you care to justify it, you’re still giving a commodity extra-human qualities that only exist bc of societal valuations that are not controlled by the majority of people. You’re buying something for the purpose not that it’s intended for but for the significance and prestige that comes with owning this or that piece of clothing and it becomes a superficial relationship. It abstracts the human element from the ownership of that commodity and you begin to identify yourself with a commodity, which is inherently superficial.
Speaking to nuanced story telling: I’d love to hear people’s thoughts on Bstory’s 5th season sAmsArA. The collection has been the target for most of the internet as “cringe bait”, what with the 4 hoodies with bullet holes featured from school who had mass shootings. I’m unclear with the message of the show.
Margiela….is amazing. Love his tech coats…but are extremely heavy for some reason.
I recently discovered your channel and i’m really enjoying this sincere and wise approach of yours about fashion!
Great meeting you the other day Bliss! Hope to cross paths again soon ✊🏾
You too, Lunden! 💫💫
Define superficial
Houseplants Plants are questionably comparable to fashion - if you choose to compare the two, have a look at their co2 footprints
Superficiality and carbon footprint are definitely both bad things, but they are not the same thing 💫💫
To me, clothes are just that. Clothes. They are something that to cover my body. At the end of the day, I don't care about the trend or fashion. I am after comfort and body coverage. I think that is the point where we go superficial when we care who the designers are and how much they are and use them to show off and for social status.
SO NEEDED. Ty!
I love the ending of these videos 😂
5:24 there is definetly nuance and art to car body design
Fashion and fishing aren’t the same. You grab a pole and fish, it’s a quiet thing people do for leisure, sport, it costs little to nothing to do. Spending thousands of dollars shopping to dress yourself… like, it’s not the same at all
fishing poles get expensive
Don’t ever change bro
Products are not superficial, people are.
Joined the Patron today! (for the 2nd time, long story)
Glad you’re back in :) I appreciate it 💫💫
lol Rust t0 Riches is a dope car show, I'm trying to make a fit inspired by hot rod culture
I am curious about Margiela specifically. Are you specifically aiming to analyze avant guard fashion?
Ive been getting more into brands like Killstar. Though they dont have the shoes I want.
Oh, boy, Bliss me & you are going to have a LONG talk about cars lol...
Fashion has always been superficial. It's initial use was for practical purposes; add layers of protection for the human body as we go out. Like anything else, clothes ended up being used to further the birth of an industry as well as incorporate luxury into them as we found out we could use them to express ourselves.
Thank you
I mean, yes, but not exclusively.
fishing can be about sustenance which i wouldnt say is superficial
Yeahhhhhhhhh he missed the mark on that one. Forgot that people fish for food lol
Fishing I so superficial when you go home and feed your loved ones
your home looks like the modern family show set
do you have any interest in researching doing intensive pieces on Calire McArdle or Charles James just to name a couple ?
Yup! I take a lot of interest in the old masters 😌
you will reach the goal
Bliss! What happened to the giant plant you had on your living room? 🥺
I wanna know as well
Coolest guy on the worldwideweb
Rick Owen’s FW01 Slab collection?
Bliss ily but youd be the guy who gets the super cool tattoo with a hour long story behind it
One More water and i will be joining the patreon 💯
but didn’t rei kawakubo release “unfinished” clothes at a similar time and/ or before
Oh God! You are such a beautiful person.
This guy is mega cool
11:49 “that didn’t look unfinished”?
u just made me want to drink water, but im lazy to get out of bed
i think if you look ugly like me then fashion doesn't matter because no matter what i wear i still appear unattractive to the vast many people i find attractive. So no dior prada balenciaga rick owens et al is going to help me out here so i dress in cheap tkmax own branded clothes in the reduced section. I have a very lopsided face and right eye that is bigger than the left eye and a top lip that leans to the right when i talk. Also i have a thick 2 cm nasal fold crease line on my left and almost bling in my right eye but can see 70% out my left eye.
well even if you can't be beautiful there are degrees of ugliness. wearing the right clothes you might only be a little ugly, whereas the wrong clothes you might be very ugly. this isn't to say the right clothes are necessarily expensive. there is cheap chic.
Shirt is post 2014 :) I think 2018ish?
Minute 4:40, What is BOF ? and where can I get it ?
Business of Fashion, they’re one of the better fashion publications 💫💫
i like drinking a lot of water.
We definitely need more videos of you drinking water and being disgusted by it....
We ball!!
y'all need to join the patreon so we can buy our boy a lighting set up and a sippy cup
your video is giving dogme 95. Special lighting is unacceptable. Great!!!
12:52 more of that, please.
Omg, I just realized I never responded to you. Damnit I’m that person now.
chess is not superficial