Fashion and Functionality - Topic of the day 12/11/23

Do you value fashion over functionality? At what point do you draw the line or do you believe both can be balanced seamlessly.
No description
238 Replies
Sal
Sal11mo ago
I live a gentle city life so functionality really just means dressing for the weather which isn't difficult
youngblood
youngblood11mo ago
No description
s stands for nothing
I dont much care about optimizing the most functional outfit possible, but if something is dysfunctional to the point of being annoying, my concerns over fashion evaporate pretty quick. That said, I rarely wear anything which would really push this issue so my experience is limited
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Fashion, like most art forms, is inherently unfunctional
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
I've walked miles around a city in converse. 90% of functionality for me is choosing appropriate shoes. Otherwise, idgaf hell I've walked miles around a city in suicokes
Sal
Sal11mo ago
can you speak on this a bit
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
when i lived in minnesota, id wear like 4 layers when other people got the same results out of one puffer jacket. so functionally the puffer wouldve worked better but wearing 4 layers didn't make it too inconvenient so it was fine. liked the way i dressed at the time too so it worked out. during the summer i used to only wear pants cause it was during the mfa period where everyone was heavy against shorts, but now my stances has changed and conveniently the most functional 5 inch inseam shorts are also the ones that align with my fashion goals.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Its like the difference between an artist and a graphic designer. Fashion, as an art form is like being an artist in which you make something to create a statement, challenge a point of view, or express an emotional idea for the purpose of expression. Clothing versatility is like graphic design where the intention is for functionality, readability (wearability) and causing least upset with the customer base The more “fashion” a piece gets the less inherently functional it is Whether the materials being used (not machine washable), the colors (not versatile for other wardrobes), the silhouette (sweaters that have open holes), or even details (EG pockets have no real use because no one is putting shit in there and just make it bulky), the elements that make something cool or fashion-y are not there to provide utility and rather tend to subtract from it
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
I'd disagree, so much of fashion has its roots in explicitly functional garments Workwear/Militaria, and even Ivy to an extent are all drawn directly from garments that were made first for functionality and then became/were repurposed to be fashionable Throw some westernwear in there too Think thats too narrow a view of "fashion"
s stands for nothing
Ive never been convinced about a single definition of "Art", if fashion is considered art I feel it would be the same philosophical quagmire to each their own
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I've always loved people finding really nice functionality in items that were not explicitly designed to be "functional". Like yes of course basically anything you buy at REI is going to have enough pockets and "perform" really well as a jacket/shoes/pack. But I love finding less obvious items that turn out to be super functional. A poor example, but I love my leather DR as a travel jacket bc I can layer under it well, it's a hardy jacket and has a bunch of really useful pockets. Even other DR jackets I've tried have paled in comparison.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
And what makes the actual item vs the spinoff of it more fashionable isn’t that it’s more functional though. Military inspired garb is inherently less functional than actual military garb
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
The snaps instead of buttons on all westerns are (allegedly) a functional choice to clothes would rip away more easily if they got caught on something.
Sal
Sal11mo ago
I would say that achieving basic functionality with clothing is very simple, and then optimizing functionality for certain people/uses/environments versus adding stylistic elements is the next step. These aren't mutually exclusive of course.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Military inspired outfits incorporate other elements that would definitely not be useful on the field Vs actual full camo
Sal
Sal11mo ago
It's genuinely difficult to find or create clothing with no or intentionally limited functionality
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I could talk about this forever but I think the definitions we use of function and form in both design and fashion are severely lacking and fail to define what is or isn’t “necessary” and presuppose that humans have any ability to make decisions objectively which they simply do not
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
functionality very critically requires a point of view
Sal
Sal11mo ago
for this reason I have to disagree that fashion is inherently unfunctional
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
in the same way that good fashion requires a point of view
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
So many of those garments are worn unchanged from their original state though: Cargos, Carpenters, Field Jackets for example
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
This is the most salient point
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
v interested in more detail here since I'm pretty sure I agree but I haven't thought about it as much as you probably have
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Function is entirely relative
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
^
s stands for nothing
I was wandering around an art museum and wondering... why do all the modern pieces of "art" (not necessarily "modern art") have this aura of "high art", art for arts sake, while in the exhibition next door there are ancient arts, which are simply historically/culturally significant artifacts but are mostly examples of practical items done exceedingly well
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
It is fully meaningless without context Any object or even any concept can have causal effects and therefore function
yurt
yurt11mo ago
I don't do anything so I don't worry about functionality
Sal
Sal11mo ago
^^^
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I think @The Teenage Gentleman lol has a fun article along these lines https://alittlebitofrest.com/2023/02/05/dressing-like-a-journalist-a-primer-on-spencers-style/
Ethan M. Wong
a little bit of rest
Dressing Like A Journalist: A Primer on Spencer’s Style
Extra, extra! Read all about how Spencer likes to dress!
metcarfre
metcarfre11mo ago
CDBs in the louvre in 1k years
Sal
Sal11mo ago
I put on my silly little boots to run my silly little errands
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
I've seen plenty of modern art in museums that is not "art for arts sake" fwiw anyway
yurt
yurt11mo ago
There's like a billion works of philosophy on this idea
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
don't think thats relevant to this thread
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
The idea of function wrt fashion is basically about if you can carry your shit and you don’t freeze to death or get heat stroke and basically every other thing depends on the specific context to a much higher degree
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Slash litcrit
Sal
Sal11mo ago
Exactly bishop
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
EG isn't the only company selling clothes with pockets
tun🌻
tun🌻11mo ago
This is a good question, because I think there are actually two different academic schools of thought as to why humans developed clothing. The first and most obvious one is to keep warm, i.e. as we moved to be upright and lost our coats of fur, we decided to steal from other animals to make fur coats. But then there is also that school of thought that clothing right from the outset was a form of decoration - similar to body paint and tattooing, people developed clothing to express themselves, show power, and make statements. So I think right from the outset clothing has been both functional and an artistic expression
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Is expressing your personality to others a function? In animals it is Why not us Is making yourself happy a function
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Idk I think it’s in the museum bc of context. Andy Warhol pop art vs kid on MacBook pop art type deal
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I also greatly dislike the false dichotomy of function vs form
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
100%
Sal
Sal11mo ago
The prompt is about sacrificing added functionality beyond the basic function of a garment in favor of increased style/form/etc and my answer is that basic functionality of a garment is good enough that it is not a meaningful sacrifice to look cool all the time
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
In that viewpoint anything that doesn’t actively hurt you is function
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
sometimes the line does get crossed through where the fashion becomes very unfunctional like charli mentioned. hence the suffer for fashion.
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Even in the strictest sense function and form both inform and play off of each other
sioku
sioku11mo ago
Ethan M. Wong
a little bit of rest
Yes, Menswear Can Be Practical
Kinda. You just gotta make it so!
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Dieter rams had a specific design philosophy but the way that people seem to understand it is not compatible even with his own work
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Oh I think this is the article I wanted to find!
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
No even that could be function, which is why I think it’s silly to talk about broadly
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
isn't this an argument for everything in a museum?
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
He was led by function but the idea was that the form highlights and elevates the function not that it ignores beauty
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
its so broad its meaningless
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Sure but his design philosophy is used to sell products which would serve under the definition of function
punchouli
punchouli11mo ago
In the grim wisconsin tundra i cannot be swagged out january-march cause there will be days it hurts to breath outside. I wear wool baselayers to extend the time i can get away with nice clothes, but past a certain point its snowpants, bunny boots etc. i dont know how anyone lives well north of me.
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
This is a great article and one that really pushed me more in the tailoring direction. Viewing even these "fancy" garments as inherently functionals and just wearing them as functional clothing
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I think he would argue with you
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Ya so it’s still art in an art museum
sioku
sioku11mo ago
honestly the line really is just about what you want from your clothes. and most of the time you can always have a bag that can carry what you need lol. Do we really need a bunch of performance from our clothes? Most of the time we just need pockets and basic weather relevance
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I think he wanted to make beautiful functional objects and selling them was serving that purpose As someone who wants to make beautiful functional objects
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
His whole purpose in his job was to create Braun products no? I’m sure if he wanted to make more beautiful and less functional products he would do so
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I disagree
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
But he operated under the confines of a company
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Yes because you have to if you want to make things
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
I think explicitly yes he would say that but implicitly Braun’s selling point was their design language They’re making mass market consumer goods
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I would bet everything that in a world where he had access to all resources he would still make stuff with the same philosophy His writings are about good design
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Wasn’t that they had the most efficient/cheapest/highest grade products but they had the prettiest within its functionality
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Not making money
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Ya sure, but I think that he would’ve had the Lemaire to Braun’s Uniqlo U
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
This just seems like an exclusionary definition for the sake of being exclusionary
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I don’t understand the analogy or the point of it honestly
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
"Thats not real art cause it has confines on it"
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Function does not preclude anything is basically my point
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Idk I think his philosophy was make a beautiful product that sells
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I don’t know why you think that Because sell products are not among his rules for design
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
isn't it a "if you build it, they will come" type of thing? I'm far less informed here but it seems like good design on a functional product simply will sell
Sal
Sal11mo ago
No people still find things boring
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
No description
No description
Sal
Sal11mo ago
even if they work good
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
i think the sells is more of a byproduct rather than the main focus. like a mentality that people would opt for the product that looks better and serves the same function
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
His principles of design is customer facing
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
products are about customers though
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Objects are about people
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
What design principles are not?
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Function is about the interactions between person and thing This is fundamental
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Yes and dieter rams principles are specifically for designing products that sell
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Obviously he's focused in a industrial/product design area but what are you designing for if not for people?
Sal
Sal11mo ago
yourself/institutions
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
You cannot make principles about the construction of the object that do not address the person if you wish to communicate with them
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
I think there’s a difference between designing for art vs people Which is why there’s the difference between art at a museum and art on a Facebook ad One is graphic design and one is art
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
am I not a person? Institutions are made of people. I don't see how those are different
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I think you have a view that design is capitalist inherently but it is just pressured more obviously by capitalism
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
There’s a difference between vintage military garb that can be used in a cool outfit vs an avant garde piece that has to be used in a cool outfit
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I am a person who yearns to make objects
Sal
Sal11mo ago
Institutions have power over people but do not always represent their interests is what i'm trying to say beans
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I have no inherent desire to make money I communicate with people through object
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
Again this just feels like you want to excluding thigns from being "fashion" or "art"
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I get joy and satisfaction from seeing the way that a person and an object can have a relationship The capitalist element is not design
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
You are still designing for some specific groups of people and their interests. Whether they're grouped as an "institution" or as a "target customer base" doesn't seem to make much difference to me
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Well yes!
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
i think an aspect that should be included in the fashion, functionality convo is convenience. i mean you can put that under functionality but theres a certain amount of inconvenience in doing a certain function people accept for something that looks better.
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
boo
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
i think there is a difference imo. for example designing something to be shipped easier vs more usable where also materials play a big part
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I agree that design and art are different I just disagree about how and what makes design design
s stands for nothing
Question- would anyone distinguish between a "Designer", including whatever implicated relationship that means to industry and marketing, and a "Fabric Sculptor" or some other term which dosnt imply selling their work as a commodity (or advertising for their brand, etc)
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Definitions are by definition exclusionary?
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Competing groups of people/users with competing view points is part of the trade-offs made in the design process
s stands for nothing
didnt really read the past 100 messages, so sorry if thats not relevant
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Again, it's about the PoV
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Yes 100% which is my thesis
Sal
Sal11mo ago
This is true, but also represents a way a designer is abstracted from the people they are designing for in the end. There's a degree of separation via institutions.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
As someone who dabbled in photography there’s a MASSIVE difference in photo style and intent in people who are great at wedding photos vs their portfolios if they were to apply to art school I wouldn’t hire an editorial photographer for my wedding and vice versa
Kyler
Kyler11mo ago
but my wedding is front page news
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I just think you have a view that comparing extremes being easy means that comparing the middle of the spectrum is easy too
yurt
yurt11mo ago
It's art if I think it's interesting and not art if I think it's uninteresting. Me specifically though, not you.
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I wouldn't hire a woodworker to tailor my jackets? I don't get this. Different people do different things all the time
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
eh fair. But art (and fashion as an extension) is very broad and I don't think related to functionality (cough duchamp cough) Or tangentially related to functionality and design i don't think something being designed to be functional precludes it from being art
Sal
Sal11mo ago
I think half the people here would agree regardless of the many strands of discussion
yurt
yurt11mo ago
"Functionality" is such an empty term though (as Bishop has repeatedly stated/explained)
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Less tersely I don't see how a different style of something like photography precludes it from being art. Is editorial photography not its own art?
s stands for nothing
Perhaps there is an issue in what is considered art... is wedding photography art even though its not artsy? This is why I brought up artifacts being considered art, not trying to be expressive in themselves, just an expression of a refined craft. "art" is too illdefined a term to be thrown around, imo
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
That’s a false equivalence though, a photographer who specializes in art vs wedding photos is not the same as a cobbler vs tailor
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
why is wedding photos not art?
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Another example of art vs design is Spotify wrapped 2021 which I argue is good art bad design
No description
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Artist isn’t expressing themselves, they’re doing it purely for functionality Sure there’s stylistic elements
s stands for nothing
I could have been more clear, I believe it should be, even if its not the same motives as more abstract art
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
But that factors in them getting paid to do their “style” I don’t think wedding photos are art.
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
again lets remove capitalism, since some people would likely happily capture photos of say a friends wedding purely for them
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Unless specifically it is up to the discretion of the photographer
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I disagree, I think they're just mostly bad art
Sal
Sal11mo ago
No such thing as bad art
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Yes, and that’s the intent of the artist not the subject (client) No it’s not art, good wedding photographers are insanely talented
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
so the same photo is art or not art depending on the photographer's mindset?
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
And they usually have an art portfolio
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Off topic but if my top genre was hauntology I would stop listening to music
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
The intent of the medium yes
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Like it's over for me
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
ya i disagree with that
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
This design vs art
yurt
yurt11mo ago
If it's bad it's not art gigachad
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I think I understand your distinction now but I still don't think I agree
Sal
Sal11mo ago
Does considering something art not also require a pov Why is there even an attempt to define this
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
I don’t expect everyone to agree but that’s just what my view is
Antedeleuzian
Antedeleuzian11mo ago
There’s been an ever-growing sentiment in philosophy for around half a century and which is currently at its peak regarding the relationship between people and objects and how this divide is likely unnecessary. The school of New Materialism argues for a view that objects themselves have vitality and their own agency so if everything is just “people communicating” you’re leaving out the inherent power of objects themselves (there is room for this to be a dicey position because, of course, we cannot remove ourselves from the position of observer). Functionality in regards to fashion (or design, going back to Charli’s original example) viewed in this manner could be considered solely observer focused on-top of being rooted in commerce, rather than either being communicative on a human level or viewed through the lens of the object's form.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
As someone who has had a difference in an art portfolio and a regular portfolio
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
Like POV can be important but I don't think its the only thing that defines something as "art" it can be sometimes but not always
s stands for nothing
I think John Cage hit the issue on the head with pieces like 4'33", really makes one consider "what is the art work", is it the idea behind its creation, is it the actual sounding or physical result, how does the audience relate to the creator and to the artwork, and most importantly, does it matter?
yurt
yurt11mo ago
"New" Materialism Looks inside Spinoza
Antedeleuzian
Antedeleuzian11mo ago
His monism influences people like Bennett yes
Sal
Sal11mo ago
We're just rediscovering modernism at this point
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I don't think your "regular" portfolio isn't art tho, which seems to be your position?
Smiles
Smiles11mo ago
like obviously the fountain is probably not art if it wasn't arranged and displayed as art, but is that not the same thing with clothes to circle back? Like wearing vintage milsurp vs the design intent, because it was designed to be functional does that make it not art? even though it is now being used in a "Fashion" context blurring fashion and art a bit but 🤷
mewball
mewball11mo ago
what the fuck is going on in here
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
What is art is a topic with no answer so it’s not worth trying to figure it out here, I’m just defending design as not purely or inherently capitalist
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Aesthetics really gets the people going
mewball
mewball11mo ago
all my clothes are strictly functional. i need all of the drip or i drown
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
from what i heard, youre too tall to drown
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
mew wearing a lifejacket in a landlocked state: It's functional
yurt
yurt11mo ago
When you wear shitty sweatpants and a t shirt water immediately fills your lungs
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Just like there is no clear or true definition of art, there isn’t one for design either
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
No it’s a job portfolio Military clothing was designed for a purpose. Wearing it in a non-military fit is adapting it to work for you which is self expression and thus art The piece wasn’t created as an art piece Wearing it to look cool vs wearing it to gun down baddies is fashion vs function bc you don’t need the camo/pockets/longevity
Sal
Sal11mo ago
Given all the debate over art and absolute crickets over function it's p clear which mfad values
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Me wearing gym clothes outside of the gym: Behold. My art. (/s)
s stands for nothing
well put
mewball
mewball11mo ago
its true if i step outside in this i will perish
Sal
Sal11mo ago
The fashion police will arrest you immediately Although they haven't been seen in Bushwick in a long time
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I do think the mainstream obsession with "function" in garments is horrific. Sneaker dress shoes. Lululemon "chinos". Try to find a decent mainstream clothing brand for men that doesn't talk about some bullshit like "go from the boardroom to the driving range" Which is particularly sad because so many more interesting clothes have great functionality
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
Convenience and efficiency obsessions create some of the worst shit
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
General male inability to engage with self-expression at a meaningful level so you end up finding one pair of pants you like and buying them in all 15 colors as "self expression"
s stands for nothing
I like to express myself with 15 pairs of near identical blue jeans with defining details such as +/- .5 ounces, orange stitching instead of yellow, etc. etc.
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Combined with modern capitalist and service tendencies to aggressively shepherd people onto the same and efficient happy path. I think a lot of individuality is lost. Even with the typical MFAD house style there's a wide range in which people wear and utilize OG107s
Dexter
Dexter11mo ago
I’m going to present a little anecdote about functionality in garments from my life, stemming mainly from my Barbour jacket. I own a Beaufort, and it has a very large game pocket along its back side originally meant to hold the spoils of shooting. However, this antiquated function that can serve no purpose in my life is put to use almost everyday, carrying books, sandwiches, loose papers etc. It is a form of functionality that does not make the garment ugly, as it makes sense in its original context but it also serves a much different purpose very well and makes my life a lot easier. In conclusion, old clothes with a lot of pockets for different things are immensely versatile whilst not sacrificing their aesthetic value.
Sal
Sal11mo ago
You can appreciate form over function without looking down on people that value function over form You express yourself through your clothing and that's great but it's not everybody's path and that's okay
Confuzzler
Confuzzler11mo ago
attacking my 5 pairs of grammici pants 😭
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Not the best phrasing on my part. My point is more along the lines that I don't think this many people (men specifically) value function over form that much and that there are lots of external pressures that I disagree with that are often hidden from people thru dark patterns and capitalism
yurt
yurt11mo ago
I don't think it's possible to make that value judgement without at least partially treating it as a universal. Anything else would be insincere.
Sal
Sal11mo ago
Then don't make a value judgement It's not difficult to avoid saying which is universally better by saying which is more personally meaningful
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
👍
yurt
yurt11mo ago
It's actually very difficult! We can see in practice that making a judgement for oneself is taken as a universal, even if it's not stated as such by the person making said judgement.
s stands for nothing
I will say that, generally, these questions of theoretical aesthetics are valuable, however I wonder what practical impact they have on my life. I find my personal answer in practice. Live your life, make your craft, express your art, and you will find the balance of practicality and theory which makes sense for you. In my experience, the more secure I feel in my own direction, the less I am bothered by other people's differing approaches. And its easier for me to enjoy others work without judgment. Though I realize not all have the same perspective
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
My biggest reason for wanting to dispute the usage of “function” is because it often leads to ideas about what is valuable or necessary to live, like it leads to unnecessary judgement of the self and others for doing things or buying things we deem as non functional Or what we decide is the acceptable bare minimum for life Yes you need food and water and air and shelter But what else do you need
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
Damn y'all popped off
yurt
yurt11mo ago
Real If I do not have at least one aesthetic experience a week I will wither and die
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
And why are we so quick to eschew the other things especially on behalf of others
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
Deconstructing "function" is a fun rabbit hole I went down when I first got into fashion I hear this all the time in the Pnw, "why would you spend x money on this clothes when you could've bought a more practical Arc'teryx that's actually worth the money" I want to compile all of bishops thoughts in this thread and paste it on the substack This is getting away from the topic but when I hear functionality re fashion it's usually my friends figuring out how much I spend on certain things and trying to understand why
Legs
Legs11mo ago
Like others here, I live a pretty mild city life and there's something fun about purposely skewing functionality. I pretty much commute everywhere on bike to the point that it plays a big impact on my wardrobe. A few years ago I got tired of carrying an extra load of clothes around and decided that unless I'm doing a seriously high-mileage day, there's no reason not to wear heavier and less functional clothes that I enjoy while biking around the city. Things like denim jackets/jeans, boxy sweatshirts, OCBDs, and boots are a clear deviation from the functionality of lycra, cleats, and warm polyester layers. However, they're all more than functional to wear while biking as long as I pay attention to fit (raglan sleeves and straight legged pants are key). I've learned plenty along the way of what is heterodox but surprisingly viable. I love biking in my boots due to the extra traction in the sole and there's something seemingly ridiculous yet so natural about riding in 28oz balmacaan that gracefully floats behind me like a cape while pedalling through the snow. That being said, there are definitely points where I've been too careless in discarding function. I'll never forget the first time I went for a ride into work wearing my new Bedale on a crisp spring morning, only to arrive with my clothes drenched in sweat due to the lack of breathability.
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
Like why do I have to justify a "fashion" jacket when you're carrying around a stack of keyboards to the hangout that are each >$500
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I also generally dislike the analogies to other hobbies that are more gear-oriented. Like "oh you spent $2k on a PC so why judge me for the clothes I buy?" I find it reductive unless the other person is also into something with a more aesthetic tilt like instead of being obsessed with keyboard switches it's about cute/fun/custom keycaps. They still don't get "it" and no common ground is found
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
but it's like, my PC is on the low end of gaming rigs and I can still run everything I want very smoothly
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
I think it’s funny that I am scrutinized for buying a $80 tee when my friends buy league and valorant skins
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
I think it's important to focus on the joy and fun of it and I prefer to evangelize that aspect rather than an angle of "actually these pants are super worth it bc they're engineered"
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
I just say I think it looks cool and that's that
njoyer
njoyer11mo ago
I want my clothes to be functional in that they last for a good while, and I need comfortable shoes these days, but other than that it's fair game
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I think it’s rare for there to be non aesthetic aspects of clothing, and I think most examples are probably to do with accessibility Everything becomes aesthetic if it’s visible because of the nature of people
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
do we know when humans started wearing clothing? I think we know when we lost our body hair, but not sure we know about clothing.
tun🌻
tun🌻11mo ago
I listened to a really interesting podcast on this recently but I can't remember which one! Been trying to find it. But vague answer was yes, we can make a pretty good guess based on archeological finds, such as cutting / scraping tools used on hides, and also discoveries of the first threaded needles I can't remember the timescale off the top of my head, consensus seems to be around 170,000 years ago though!
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
omg this topic! It's like asking a programmer about vi vs emacs. I think it dovetails with my interest in furniture. I like beautiful furniture, but I find that furniture that isn't functional is less beautiful to me. For example, I find that Frank Lloyd Wright's furniture (and his architecture, for that matter) prioritizes form over function, and that makes it less appealing to me as a result. Whereas a Sam Maloof rocking chair is beautiful, in part, because it it looks like it WANTS you to sit in it and enjoy it.
tun🌻
tun🌻11mo ago
ah, this was the podcast episode! Highly recommend, it was really interesting https://open.spotify.com/episode/4B9v8PwWtBfl63ypho5uod?si=XUXDX4nuSgKOHR9SbyZpRw
Spotify
The Origins of Clothing
Listen to this episode from The Ancients on Spotify. Clothing has been essential for human evolution. From protection against changing climate, through to the driving force behind technological innovation in the production of fabrics and agriculture.In this episode, Tristan with the help of Ian Gilligan, delves deep into our prehistory to uncove...
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
An example from clothing: Wearing a tee that's 2 sizes too big looks sloppy. But wearing a tee that fits you but is generously cut looks good. Superficially, the two tees could be very similar in size, but the tee that fits you is more functional, and therefore more beautiful, for reasons that I don't think are totally subjective.
njoyer
njoyer11mo ago
this only works if you view fashion as a social utility and not an art form to express, subvert, or experiment with
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I worked in construction and just like everywhere, there are social elements at work as well
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Hmm...I guess I would say that even pure art has social utility. Expression, subversion, and experimentation are all valid and useful things.
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
My point isn’t that function doesn’t exist, just that it exists in combination with aesthetic almost always
tun🌻
tun🌻11mo ago
Yeah, my work has just got new "uniform" for factory floor people and everyone is complaining that it looks terrible That's not it's intended function, but it's important to people
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
100%. I got into building furniture because I was interested in function AND aesthetics, and I don't think I've ever seen them as separate.
OxfordKarma
OxfordKarma11mo ago
I find it funny when people buy things "for function" that's way beyond their needs like someone who drops immense cash on Arc'teryx for the odd day it rains. At the end of the day we're all just rationalizing buying things that make us feel good. When some use fashion and others use functional, they're both just words for describing the brain giving us happy juice for the thing we bought.
tun🌻
tun🌻11mo ago
That's what design is, really after all
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Maybe, but it seems difficult and arbitrary to draw a line between needs and wants.
Sal
Sal11mo ago
There are aesthetic scrubs but surgeons don't really have the option to wear them in the or. I'm sure many would if they could though.
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
For example, I need warm clothing in Chicago. So I bought a winter coat. It kept me warm, but it was big and heavy. Then, one day, I found a Patagonia puffer on sale. I bought it, but felt like I was being silly and indulgent because I didn't need it. But I loved that jacket and wore it all the time. It was warm enough for all but the coldest days, and much lighter and easier to throw on.
sharloy
sharloy11mo ago
Why arent they allowed?
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
m65s have a lot of non-aesthetic functions. I don't think anyone in fashion is wearing them for their intended purpose isn't anything visible an aesthetic consideration?
Sal
Sal11mo ago
OR scrubs are usually provided by the medical center a procedure is being done at. They are washed and sterilized and you get them from a big vending machine and then return them at the end of the day. They do this to prevent fomites (anything that might carry a microbe that can cause an infection) from being brought into a sterile environment. Because they wash them so often they're also the most comfortable fabric on earth.
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
I think what people are saying is you can't pick one over the other like the way the post is worded
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Agreed. And my contention is that you don't have to. Although, that's obviously false. 🙂
raisinpie
raisinpie11mo ago
I just want to see somebody wearing this bullshit changing a tire on the side of the road.
Sal
Sal11mo ago
welcome
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
I will say that since going down the MFA rabbit hole, I am more liable to wear things for the sake of appearance rather than functionality. Sometimes I manage to annoy myself, but mostly it's fun.
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
I think it’s more just discussion sparked by the post not arguing the specifics of the question I can be annoying about the original topic too if you like, dressing practically is as much aesthetic as dressing impracticality because it also communicates something about you and your values But the motivation of the individual is often affected by the perception whether they realize or not Which is why I think about this topic, I think there’s a lot of - self delusion is too strong but - belief that we can make decisions based purely on function and I don’t think it’s true There are certainly people who approach things from that mindset though, that they make choices based on real needs And I don’t think that’s a bad thing, I just think it can lead to devaluing of how others make decisions based on a different framework
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Definitely. Pre-MFA James looked down on people who were interested in fashion and clothing, which I think was stupid in hindsight. Or, at least, arbitrary of me.
bishopcorrigan
bishopcorrigan11mo ago
FWIW the reverse of my point is true too, people often act like they don’t care about function at all and only aesthetic, but like in New York, the aesthetic is part of the social scene And therefore functional
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
Obviously flexing what "functional" means to different people, but I agree with bishop
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
but even with a puffer, you can choose aesthetic things like color. and, of course, color can sometimes be functional.
awburkey
awburkey11mo ago
all black with colorful shoes non-aesthetic
🤔
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Colorful shoes are an under appreciated benefit of running. I got to wear red shoes EVERY DAY. Functional, too, because red shoes are obviously faster
bancars69420
bancars6942011mo ago
Oof, big one for me. I pretty much hate any decoration that's not functional. I love the idea of a uniform. Something like in a futuristic sci-fi movie. But in reality, I don't want to look like a weirdo so there's no way in hell I'm gonna wear a band collar. Even though collars make no sense IMO, for example. But then again, I've been enjoying fun patterns and colors more. I justify it by being strategic. Plain ass fit, like all black, but with a flowery orange shirt. I'm obsessed with creating the perfect, high quality, sustainable, small closet. I'm always iterating and looking for ways to reduce it and improve quality. I don't love synthetic fabrics, natural is the way to go, mostly. But synthetic fabrics are kind of necessary for poor weather, luckily I live in a pretty warm part of the country so I don't need much winter gear. I guess it's all a balance but don't @ me because I make my own rules, and that's what I love about clothes. It's like, one part of my life I can fully control. Anywayyy... I totally did not realize how long this discussion was, I just saw the title this evening and got excited. But. Really interesting conversation going on. Rereading now.
femto
femto11mo ago
I've been thinking about this, since my default really is wearing functional clothes. Though I'm not as adventurous as I used to be (gonna have to build back up strength to do even day hikes lol). I assume bishop wasn't being literal but might as well say, there's more to functionality than not getting hurt. Even if it's not literally hiking/skiing all day, or sitting still in a blind, just trying to sneak up on wild animals in city parks or deal with temperature swings on the daily, a whole pile of things matter. You notice a lot more comfort/ergonomics issues the more you push yourself. I notice how much noise any clothes make! Funny thing is, I started wearing higher rise pants than ever before this year because I think they look cool, and I guess for me they're a lot better for comfort outdoors 😛 Sticking with pants, I've found myself rather liking some seriously oversized cinched at the waist pants looks particularly that Japanese guys pull off and I was wondering if I'd want to do that too. I think at least for now, the answer is no... I get really uncomfortable with that level of obstruction in movement and I'm sensitive to stuff piled up on my waist. But at least I can 'compromise' so to speak and get some pants with very generous fits, too long inseams that I can cuff pretty hard, and slightly loose waists - so I thrifted exactly that recently. Got to recognize my personal limits.
Spuck
Spuck11mo ago
No description
Spuck
Spuck11mo ago
i know that feeling
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
Change of pace, but I was trying to think of functional things that lost their function and became aesthetic. Button down collars, high heels, ticket pockets. Maybe jeans and chinos
sioku
sioku11mo ago
technically button down collars are still "functional" in the sense that it prevents your collar from flying around
jfarrell468
jfarrell46811mo ago
True. I'm not sailing off cape cod, but I am in Chicago, which gets pretty windy. 🙂
Dexter
Dexter11mo ago
Functional for that epic roll letsfuckinggo
Spuck
Spuck11mo ago
watches, in general
Want results from more Discord servers?
Add your server