Is Fashion a Means or an End?
I do not own paper plates for fear their callous scalloped edges and soggy centers might contaminate the delicate flavors of my snacks. I iron my sheets, knowing I will snuggle sounder in a wrinkle-free milieu. I hone the writing of my pen at regular intervals so each stroke of my hand-written correspondence will utter a pleasing turn. I call myself an aesthete (my husband prefers a three letter acronym initiating with the letter O), but I believe beauty enhances function. And charm is never trivial.
Your smarty, sharp mind may have already concluded my fancied form of beauty: the ornamentation of the human figure. But even in this pet realm of cloth and zippers, I believe style should be applied with purpose. I prefer fashionable matriarchs, executing their divine roles of nurture with grace and poise, to modern fashionistas pouring their entire purpose into undiluted decoration. Lady professionals can profitably exploit pressed button holes to a more polished work output. Younglings can render trouser leg angles to identify and express their internal souls. Seasoned dames can express wisdom and sophistication with the turn of a collar.
The goal of fashion is not to be stylish, the goal of fashion is personal style.
Am I contaminating the purity of aestheticism with my own moral, political, and dirty didactic ends? Can art not exist for itself? State your arguments in the comments.
So you’ve caught me stalling this week, but you’ll want to come back Monday, trust me.
I really enjoyed this post- it is very you, and it is why you love antiques so much, they have meaning and a story and depth to them. That is much more interesting than something new or made just because, no matter how pretty it may be. So, while art for arts sake has it’s place- it will just never be as meaningful as art that carries with it experience, emotion and purpose.
Dearest Reachel,
I must comment. I am no fashionista, I am closer to the matriarch you discussed. But I love this post and had to de-lurk to share my thoughts.
You are NOT contaminating the purity of looking beautiful simply to look beautiful. I fully believe there can be no true beauty unless the wear-er of such beauty has higher purpose in their lives. We decorate our homes to hopefully create an atmosphere of pleasing warmth and a welcoming spirit. A museum commands awe but not true love, and who wants to live in a museum? In that vein, we should adorn ourselves to convey our inner beauty on the outside, not just to invoke exclamations of envy and admiration from others. Without an inner light, aren’t we just an empty shell? All that we do, say, wear, watch, read, love and enjoy is a sampling of our souls. When I see pictures of you, I see a glow emmanating all around, truly. The beauty of your dress and style just enhances the light that surrounds you. We are drawn to look at you because of your style, but we pause in admiration to enjoy the warmth of your smile and the Light of Christ in your eyes.
Outward beauty without an inward beauty and charm to match, will wither and lose it’s bloom. You my dear, hold a bloom like no other, and show your grace and charity when you share your fashion wisdom with us. Thank you.
ooh, i am intrigued about monday…
So glad I stumbled on your lovely lovely blog today, it’s always nice to find other blogger out and about on the net!
Agneta & Sweden
In Ways of Seeing John Berger stated that all art is a conversation – and I think that at its purest, fashion is art. And what else is meticulous attention to detail in one’s presentation than a desire to be understood? We should all be so lucky as to be associated with beauty….
Oh I trust you, Reachel. I trust you completely. But is it really trust if I already know?