Fashion by itself is an error. When we look into fashion for fulfillment of desires we uncover the beast of it, yet we continue to be entranced by it. Errors get multiplied as more questions are thrown into the beast, expecting answers the beast cannot produce. Fashion is an error in the sense of showing its relevance only when it juxtaposes itself with other cultural industries and therefore becomes an icon through which we speak. Fashion is thus an authentic error of one’s self as full of conflicts as the wearer can admit to them having.

When fashion puts forward an individual who desperately wants to transform the sartorial paradigm and show of the individuality, the power of collective is discovered. The cult of designers as geniuses is demystified and fashion collections are assumed as products in formation of style out of brick toys. The question of who wears it best is no longer relevant as we come to see the shift towards authenticity of collective mistakes, of desires and implications of youth in technocratic society.

Errors remind us that nothing should be taken too seriously. At least not for too long. As fashion is on the move towards product creating with a certain aura, attitude in time, collections take the back seat and make the changing of time irrelevant. Yet here comes the tricky part – attitude is a much broader paradigm than time and is subject to the multifaceted identity of the wearer. Errors will be embraced as the signs of different attitudes, yet which ones will become dominant?

If one wants to break the rules one must learn them first. And only then can the true value of disruptions erupt. When one dresses oneself to define the time, to be in accordance with it, disrupt or reflect it, obvious glitches erupt which momentarily and suddenly transform the paradigm. The emphasis is on the moment as it thrills and excites the wearer. Yet as the corresponding freedom erupts, it by default dies out.

 

/

Text: Denis Pucelj