I don’t like reading catwalk reports - and yet this was one of my fave newsletters of yours this year! I think it’s so funny the way ‘commercial’ (and New York as a fashion week) has always been seen as less. 99.9% of shoppers do not care if something is super directional or a ‘first’ in that texture. They just want to look good and feel good. And whilst I admire the Fabrican dress for EG, I include myself in that.
I loved this essay. I don’t read or peruse any other fashion coverage, because I don’t need to! I trust your insights and ability to contextualize the industry as it moves through time. It’s also just really pleasurable to read.
I don’t want to see fashion through any other writer! Thank you for articulating your insights for us. I can’t wait to pull out all the sheer millennial pink garments I have had stashed in my closet since 2015 💞
I really appreciate how you were able to define these paradigms of New York fashion brands. The last paradigm you described, the one of the Canal Street girls, reminds me of this academic article called “Trust Us, We’re You”: Aspirational Realness in the Digital Communication of Contemporary Fashion and Beauty Brands" by Rosie Findlay. I recommend it if you haven't read it. This article was about the way brands like MNZ use imperfection and off-ness as an aesthetic to communicate with consumers in an emotional (and anti-commercial) way. I think aspirational realness may go beyond digital communication and extend to actual collections, like the ones you mentioned.
Where did you find the article? Something about the summation of a vibe makes it feel less authentic, even when it is a true and honest reflection of a person (be it a designer, creative director, etc) way of being — but that is the stake we are constantly
I don’t think being able to define the aesthetic makes it less authentic necessarily. It’s a bit like art movements. I think whomever originated this aesthetic probably did so instinctively. Then the rest of us who tried to emulate it (or spin on the same wheel) made it so ubiquitous that it’s now possible to define what the aesthetic it is or isn’t.
I don’t like reading catwalk reports - and yet this was one of my fave newsletters of yours this year! I think it’s so funny the way ‘commercial’ (and New York as a fashion week) has always been seen as less. 99.9% of shoppers do not care if something is super directional or a ‘first’ in that texture. They just want to look good and feel good. And whilst I admire the Fabrican dress for EG, I include myself in that.
I loved this essay. I don’t read or peruse any other fashion coverage, because I don’t need to! I trust your insights and ability to contextualize the industry as it moves through time. It’s also just really pleasurable to read.
Shana Tova ❌⭕️
I don’t want to see fashion through any other writer! Thank you for articulating your insights for us. I can’t wait to pull out all the sheer millennial pink garments I have had stashed in my closet since 2015 💞
I really appreciate how you were able to define these paradigms of New York fashion brands. The last paradigm you described, the one of the Canal Street girls, reminds me of this academic article called “Trust Us, We’re You”: Aspirational Realness in the Digital Communication of Contemporary Fashion and Beauty Brands" by Rosie Findlay. I recommend it if you haven't read it. This article was about the way brands like MNZ use imperfection and off-ness as an aesthetic to communicate with consumers in an emotional (and anti-commercial) way. I think aspirational realness may go beyond digital communication and extend to actual collections, like the ones you mentioned.
Oooo this is setting off lightbulbs
Where did you find the article? Something about the summation of a vibe makes it feel less authentic, even when it is a true and honest reflection of a person (be it a designer, creative director, etc) way of being — but that is the stake we are constantly
Up against these days right?
Here’s the link: https://academic.oup.com/ccc/article-abstract/12/4/553/5573578 - looks like it may be behind a paywall at the moment.
I don’t think being able to define the aesthetic makes it less authentic necessarily. It’s a bit like art movements. I think whomever originated this aesthetic probably did so instinctively. Then the rest of us who tried to emulate it (or spin on the same wheel) made it so ubiquitous that it’s now possible to define what the aesthetic it is or isn’t.
Shana tova! Really incredible writing, Leandra.