Advanced Research Seminar has been a tough course this semester, pushing me to read weekly scholarly articles and book chapters that I never would have before, making me think in a new way. The readings, although not always connected to my research, has helped me adapt my way of reading and thought about my topic. When we first started to create our own personal archive, I felt a little lost with how this could connect with my interest in the imagination and creativity in children. I started to trace my own childhood through photos and found that there was a huge connection between imagination and creativity that I had as a child that has stayed with me. Anke had us meet with a research librarian which helped me SO much, I can’t thank Brita Servaes enough. She helped me find great books that are directly helping me to answer questions I have about the imagination, youth today, how the digital world is impact them physically and developmentally and how toys and books are changing to keep up with this. The on site, space interactions and behavior assignment felt really weird at first but as I visit it more and more, its interesting what changes by it and how things are different at different times of the day. I have been going to the Lego Store on 5^th Avenue with is interesting to see how adults and children are interested the toys. I am looking deeper into all this and reading a lot – interested and excited to see where it all takes me!

When answering the question “What is Fashion?,” I think about the uniformity exhibit and the lesson about uniformity, fashion and nonconformity has changed the way I think about fashion. Originally, or before this class, I answered this question with saying that it is clothing that is created by designers that has a cultural or social significance. I wouldn’t have classified uniforms to fit into the fashion description because I never thought they had any influence on fashion or that fashion influenced them, I saw them as boring, meaningless, and just specific to whatever job they were for.  After seeing the exhibit and reading the article by Jennifer Craik called, “The Cultural Politics of the Uniform,” I see it as a piece of fashion too- as an influence for fashion and for the uniforms to be influenced by the fashion of the time. In this reading she says, “Uniforms are intriguing. Uniforms are all about control, not only of the social self but also of the inner self and its formation. Uniforms send out mixed messages – some of these are obvious but others less so. Often it is those other subliminal messages that make them so intriguing. Those mixed messages are a combination of “not statements” (rules of wearing and not wearing that are often unstated or only partially stated- or arbitrarily applied) and transgressive messages” (Craik, 128). The idea of mixed messages being shown through uniforms are so interesting, and something that I never thought about before – but what’s most interesting is that the mixed messaged she speaks about are also seen in fashion too – all fashion shows mixed messages. So to now answer the question, “What is fashion?” again after this whole semester, Fashion is anything that is worn or adorned by all types of people (any body shape, social level, job) that shows cultural, personal, social, and/or economical significance – which definitely includes uniforms as part of this definition of fashion!

1. 2 Images from Dress Practice Log:

2. Overall Reflection of Dress Practice Log:

In my dress practice log, I noticed that an overall theme was that I was really concerned with how my clothing affects my daily movement and function. Everyday I was wearing sneakers, mostly I was wearing my white leather high top Nikes, or on the weekends I was wearing athletic sneakers, so I can stand for long hours working at school and at work, or running and biking around the city. Another theme within this large theme I found of movement and function was comfort. Everything that I was wearing and the reason I was feeling good is because I was comfortable and could be myself. Another theme that I found in my dress practice log and that I had never noticed before about myself is that I wear a lot of the same clothing, like reusing clothes, before they are dirty. I always throw things on my chair (my “chairdrobe”) and I never realized I grab things on there all the time rather than open up my closet everyday. I thought I wear more different things each day, but I really reuse pieces all the time. I grab them on my “chairdrobe” because it is convenient, easy, and I know it’s comfortable and cute because its out and that I’ve worn it recently. The dress practice log has impacted my understanding of the relationship between clothing and the body because I never realized how much I dress for the comfort and ease of my body. I know many dress for what looks best on their body, and I thought that I did that too, but I see now that the number one priority is comfort and movement for my body when dressing, then number two is for looks.

Learning Portfolio Post #2

This is a 2-page spread from Glamour magazine, September 2015 issue. This advertisement is for Prada Eyewear. There are two models, both that have a collared shirt on with a sweater over it. The model on the left has very short hair, flat chested, wearing a yellow and pink sweater with a blue silk collared shirt. The model on the right has her hair up with a jeweled broche, wearing a turquoise collar and shades of blue sweater. Both models do not have much make up on and are not wearing jewelry. This advertisement is very interesting when looking at it through gender – It subverts traditional gender norms by the way the models are styled through color, clothing style, and hair. It is not clear if the model on the left is a woman or man, because the short haircut and flat chest are two details that have a tendency to be seen as masculine, it does not scream femininity,  like most feminine advertisements do. The pink in the sweater on the left is usually seen as feminine but the blue collar is seen as a masculine color traditionally (since the 1930s). Kaiser discusses in great detail in Fashion and Cultural Studies about differentiating gender in fashion through features of dress; “Hegemonic masculine discourse of differentiating gender and distancing from fashion and femininity was neither a sudden nor a decisive renunciation… Instead, it was a protracted process of emphasizing what were to become known as “manly (heavier, darker, wool rather than silk) materials, cuts of clothing (gradually less shapely or form fitting and yet still streamlined), and subtlety in detailing (stitching, ect)” (Kaiser 2012, 126). Both models have very masculine collars on, like the ones that are traditionally recognizable for being on dress shirts for men, but they are made with silk, which Kaiser states as being a more feminine material, and the sweaters they are wearing are heavier, thick and wool-like, which is seen as more masculine as well. The clothing is not very tight and covers up the models, having a very high neckline, which is also something that is more masculine, since feminine advertisements usually show tight form fitting clothes and/or lots of skin. Also, both glasses have a feminine feel to them because of the larger, unique shape, which is usually a more feminine style, and the blush color, which is more common for female glasses.

Aphorism 1: Fashion is intensely personal, in the same way that poetry is intensely personal. It is a medium through which personal stories can be told, memories re-lived and futures foretold.

This aphorism argues that fashion is a personal expression from the designer who creates the clothing, and the wearer. In these two sides of fashion, through designer and wearer, stories and emotions from both are told. In poetry, it’s told through words but a designer and wearer, it’s told through clothing and accessories. The designer uses their memories, emotions, and feelings through silhouette, color, texture, material choices, that the wearer also uses to tell their story, as well as how they pair articles of clothing with other pieces. Memories are relived through the clothing that they represent, designers who create based on a memory, or for a wearer who has an emotional connection to a piece of clothing because of the memories that it holds. I strongly agree with this because as a designer, I pour my thoughts and emotions into what I design and as a wearer, I choose outfits and clothes because of how I feel, and certain pieces of clothing remind me of events. When I walk down the street, the way people dress themselves is a way that they show their stories and feelings and is a personal expression of themselves.

Aphorism 2: Fashion does not define. It is instead a term that demands definition.

This aphorism discusses fashion in the idea that fashion does not define someone. Different groups of people, sometimes categorized by race, religion, sexual orientation, ect, make up what fashion is. Society and people are defining fashion by what they do, say and wear. It’s not easily definable also because as people are always changing, the meaning is always changing. The time old saying of calling someone “fashionable” is not accurate because we cannot be defined by fashion since we are creating it and we need to define what fashion really is. I agree with this aphorism because I believe that subcultures and society are always re-defining fashion, and that the word fashion is defined by us and what we think it means. I am not defined by what fashion means, I create what fashion means to me by dressing the way I choose to.

1. READING RESPONSE OF READING AND VIDEOS (INCLUDING 3 QS FROM READINGS)

The videos and required reading on climate change, specifically the scientific basis on it and about extreme events, was interesting to read since I didn’t know the exact facts of what has been going on, only general ideas. The first video, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, was a general video on climate change and how greenhouse gases have affected the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases have been created by human influences and the facts have shown that there is no denying this. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising because of the melting of glaciers. With all these problems arising and more, we need to learn how to adapt to this and design for resilience and for the new climate that we will be living in. In Video 2, Overview of the IPCC Report of Extreme Events, experts discuss the climate and how to manage and reduce the risk of disasters. It is discussed how the combination of climate and society is how natural events become disasters because this is when society is unprepared for climate events. This made be think, if us being unprepared makes the event a disaster, than can you classify the events as a climate change disaster? Or is it the fact that we are just not prepared for the climate events that happen (but its not because of climate change)? Interesting to think about.  In the reading, Climate Change and Cities: First Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network, this reports builds the scientific basis and research to show a city’s vulnerability to climate hazards and how cities can change and steps that should be taken to act on the effects of climate change. The risk and vulnerability framework that has been determined is: climate hazards, vulnerabilities to the social, economic or physical characteristics, and adaptive capacity aspects that relate to the ability for a city to act. This framework seems extremely broad and not specific, which made me ask why so broad? Wouldn’t it help more to have a framework that’s more specific that cities can use as a checklist to go though and see if they are at risk for certain climate change events? Throughout this whole report, it describes urban climate, the impact and adaptations a city needs, the transportation system, water supply, and how the land effects climate change. It was surprising that according to 2004 data, transportation accounts for 23% of greenhouse gas emissions and in many cities it is higher. Why is it higher in cities? Shouldn’t it be lower since so many people walk, bike and take public transportation instead of driving their own cars? Yes there are more people per square mile in cities but so many people use sustainable ways of transportation.

2. QUESTIONS TO ASK SPEAKERS AT UN

1. Why do you think that it has been so hard for many people to believe that climate change is a real thing when there are many scientific data and improved data showing it is?
2. What tips would you give the US for becoming more sustainable in a short amount of time like how Denmark was able to accomplish this?
3. Bikes have been a main transportation mode in Denmark, a wonderful way to get from place to place without contributing to climate change.  With so many people biking, have designs been created to ensure the safety of bikers in Copenhagen? If so, how was this accomplished? Do you have ideas in ways that NYC biking can become safer and more effective like in Copenhagen?

3. PHOTOS OF NOTES AND QUESTIONS FROM TRIP TO UN