Saturday, January 16, 2010

Things They Should Invent: celebrate functional fashion design

If you've ever had the pleasure of owning a particularly well-designed piece of clothing, you'll know that they work with your body to make your shape look better than it is. Well-placed design features smooth out any lumpiness, make your torso look sleek and your breasts look high, and use your hips to create a general impression of sexy curves rather than pear-shaped endomorphism. I had the extreme good fortune to find two such dresses in the past year (name-dropping to give credit where credit is due: dresses by Calvin Klein and Adrianna Papell respectively, both found at Winners) and was very impressed by the thought that went into the designs. It was like engineering or architecture! I came away with a profound appreciation of the talent that goes into good fashion design.

However, haute couture doesn't really work this way. The outfits on a fashion show runway are pure artistic expression by the designer, and the models are specifically chosen for having figures and features that aren't going to interfere with the clothes.

Fashion magazines do sometimes do articles on dressing to enhance or conceal certain aspects of your figure, but they place the responsibility on the wearer to find clothes that work for them. It's presented as a way to improve the wearer's shopping skills, without lauding the designers for designing helpful clothes.

This does make sense from a practical perspective (the person reading the magazine is the wearer, who presumably does want clothes that work for them), but I think it's unhelpful overall. People often worry that the use of extremely skinny fashion models leads to body insecurity and eating disorders among the general population. I'm wondering if it isn't the skinny models per se, but rather the fashion hierarchy that celebrates haute couture where models are chosen not to interfere with the clothes as the pinnacle of design achievement, while actual well-designed clothes that work well on real people are seen as more downmarket. This leaves people feeling insecure because their body won't serve all the clothes, whereas in reality the clothes should serve the wearer. Good interface design makes it obvious where to click, rather than requiring users to RTFM. Good architecture or engineering works with how users are going to naturally use the structure, rather than requiring a change in user behaviour. Good fashion design - the work that is celebrated as the pinnacle of fashion design - should be similarly user-centric.

I'd love to see a piece in Vogue where big-name designers make clothes for real people. Not magazine "real people" - flawlessly attractive people whose hips happen to be slightly bigger than their bust, or size 12s being dubbed "plus-size models". I'm talking about people who are as conventionally attractive as Susan Boyle. Get top designers to design clothes specifically for these real people to wear in real life, and present it as a celebration of real design skill.

Alternatively (or in addition), there could be a TV show akin to Project Runway where the designers are given real-life design problems. The subjects could be real people, or they could be more extreme real-life issues (like that one house makeover show where they renovate houses for families with special-needs octuplets or whatever). Up-and-coming new designers could have challenges like making a functional and attractive wardrobe for someone with a colostomy bag, or creating flattering workout wear for a 60-year-old triathlete who has to train outdoors in the Canadian winter, or designing clothes that a transgender person could wear throughout their entire transition. This show would have to be done well (i.e. not stooping to presenting the subjects as a freakshow), but I think it would be enormously valuable both for the body image of the general public and for the design profession to present functional user-centric problem-solving as the pinnacle of exemplary fashion design.

4 comments:

laura k said...

It's a fantastic idea, and the wonder is that it hasn't been done yet.

I saw a preview for "Look Better Naked Canada" (I may not have the name right and can't go check right now), and it actually was almost this idea. A very ordinary looking woman was helped to dress in a more flattering way, which helped her feel better, which helped her look better. It was not at all about weight loss, which is what I would have expected.

impudent strumpet said...

Weird that they put the word naked in the title if it's about clothes. Rather misleading, I think.

laura k said...

I think it's about self-image in general. The culmination is a naked photo shoot, something the person imagines they could never do.

I only saw a few minutes, I hope I'm not misrepresenting it.

impudent strumpet said...

That's odd, because a flattering nude photo shoot is perfectly feasible with a talented team of people and proper equipment. You've got lighting, lenses, hair, make-up, posing, draping, photoshopping - if the subject doesn't look good, it's the crew's fault.

I think dressing flatteringly is actually harder, because it has to work in real life and from all angles. In a photo shoot, if your stomach isn't working, you can pose lying on your stomach. In real life, you have to stand up and walk around.