Our first assignment for the lecture class was to agree or disagree with several aphorisms explained in the Fashion Studies edited by Heike Jenss reading. Thus the two aphorisms I chose to discuss are:
Fashion studies has always thrived, as many disciplines do, by positioning itself between borders and and the periphery. Its apparent lack of respectability provided energy. Now there are many journals and conferences to serve its purposes. They give more space for multiple points of view, but the field must strive to avoid cooption and exhaustion. (Jenss xix)
And,
Fashion is so all-encompassing and encyclopedic in its terrain that it seems to tailor-made for the era of big-data. The old antiquarians used it to map national customs and habits. We have the tools to put it to the service of as yet unimagined projects, of even greater scope and impact. (Jenss xix)
Out of all the aphorisms stated in the reading, I find these two the most contemplating out of all. I fully agree with the rest but it’s these two that throw me off a little. I do believe that fashion thrives in several areas therefore there are trends in different eras and they label the different times in the different cultures. However, fashion studies does not always thrive, in fact some trends do not last and some don’t even cut as trends. Now this discussion points to how you define “success”. For some people, success means that it sustains, which trends do but for how long? I believe that this aphorism stating the world “thrived” has over generalized the fact that fashion is indeed an important aspect to one’s life. It does position itself in between various topics whether big or small, good or bad, it evokes discussion in which we are indeed discussing right now, to this day. However, I do fully agree with the last sentence when “the field must strive to avoid cooption and exhaustion” because that’s when trends die; however, I believe that is when fashion does not thrive. Therefore, there is a debate on whether or not fashion studies “thrived”. As for the second aphorism, it is true the fashion encompasses a lot of different aspects and data of people, things, society, impact, etc.. However, what I don’t quite believe is that it is “all-encompassing”, in fact that word means that fashion is everything. Fashion is encyclopedic only if, like the person who is stereotypically on teenvogue and becoming a trend follower. Fashion can be encompassing many things but only to the limit of the designer’s knowledge which doesn’t necessarily mean they will encompass things they aren’t interested in. On the other hand, fashion is very broad because there are many things related and made out of in fashion whether it’s children’s wear, animal wear; however there are many things that fashion has yet to become which calls for future designers to decipher and create and innovate with.
