Good art should force people to look at what they don’t want to see, and the designers at the autumn and winter Milan Fashion Week did so.
The clothes were exquisite. Roberto Cavalli kept to his usual form by using vibrant colored sequins and animal prints to show off what he sees to be the feminine form — a shifting mix of animal sexuality and gemstones. He’s typically successful. Cavalli is the one who made jeans with sequins and leather over-the-knee boots look sexy. This time he went further. One design had a mini skirt made from tiger skin, and a jacket made from what looks like crocodile with sleeves of tiger fur.
The tiger-skin skirt was ultra mini, showing what amounted to a stitching together of animals: Human legs, a tiger-skin pelvis, tiger-fur sleeves and a crocodile torso. Cavalli’s argument is usually the same: Homo sapiens are more like animals than we think. This thesis can be erotic, as it was last winter when he combined snakes with the sex appeal of death. In short, killing arousal is the goal of arousal. This time, though, he argues female power comes from the hips and that women have crocodile hearts.
The current consumer color scheme is pastels and bright hues, and Giorgio Armani, Marni and Jill Sander were among the few to continue the trend. Armani did so by combining what are soon-to-be last season’s colors with black, which was the dominant color of Milan Fashion Week.
Armani is a master of using men’s suit tailoring in women’s fashion. He’s largely responsible for showing the sex appeal of boyish and androgynous women. Indeed, J.Crew’s unchallenging designer Jenna Lyons took what Armani has been doing for a decade and turned it into the overpriced boyfriend cut navy blazerand women’s wingtip shoe. Armani’s androgynous looks are usually powerful yet feminine, and to this he added some that scream for attention.
Armani’s models have obvious sex appeal, but looking at a woman wearing what amounts to be a man’s suit designed by a men’s suit designer beckons challenging questions of human sexuality. What, after all, makes a human attractive? If it’s flesh (as too many students assume), then surely anybody who finds a woman in a man’s suit sexy has to rethink gendered sexuality. Armani’s collection was built around two styles: gray tweed suits, and neon Bermuda shorts with black leggings and black tuxedo jackets — neither of which fit into heteronormative fashion.
Dolce & Gabbana tried hard to force black back in style. The intricacy of the D&G designs has to be reckoned with: sleek, Sicilian baroque dresses with gold embroidery and capes to match. The clothing were indeed works of art, made with actual gold embroidery on black dresses. Dolce & Gabbana are betting that austerity is out and wealth is back in fashion.
The collections as a whole seemed to be a reaction to the times. The designs lacked permanence and were rich and tailored for the conspicuous consumer class that still has discretionary income — wealth in the face of austerity. Behind the Veblen reading, which introduced the term “conspicuous consumption,” is the question: What is it to be attractive? Top designers are indeed artists and their answers are disturbing.
Reach the columnist at whamilt@asu.edu
Click here to subscribe to the daily State Press newsletter.
