On a sleepy afternoon this week, I went to see the exhibition at Fashion Institute of Technology, ‘Retrospective’. It was a fascinating display : creations from Balenciaga, Anna Sui, McQueen. The exhibition demonstrates how throughout history, fashion has been inspired by its past. The catalog quoted from Vogue’s coverage of Paris collection in 1914,’There is a universal tendency to borrow from the past’. Worth a visit, if you are around NYC. I did put up a few images from Anna Del Russo’s blog for a sneak peak for you.
NORMAN NORELL, 1962
ISABEL TOLEDO
This is possibly true, but it got me thinking about where we draw the line between inspiration and plagiarism within the industry. Just the other day, super-blogger Tavi Gevinson, ranted on Twitter about the unauthorized use of her logo on an ASOS sweatshirt. The infamous case of the Red sole, Louboutin Vs. YSL took the matter to the court of law. The court decision allowed YSL to make monochromatic red shoes while Louboutin was allowed trademark protection over the red sole.
Something that happened with Marc Jacobs,once struck a chord with me. It seems that Oscar de la Renta suggested a jacket by Marc Jacobs looked very similar to one of his designs. To which Guy Trebay, a critic for the New York Times said, “Unlike the many brand-name designers who promote the illusion that their output results from a single prodigious creativity, Mr. Jacobs makes no pretense that fashion emerges full blown from the head of one solitary genius”.
Recently, I watched a TED Talk that really wrapped things up for me. The speaker was Johanna Blakely teaching ‘lessons from fashion’s free culture’. She asked some thought provoking questions and brought about some interesting revelations about the fashion industry. She starts with a story about Miuccia Prada in a vintage store, mulling over a Balenciaga jacket, because she wanted to replicate it. While that may sound like copying to many, it was her genius that she could see the potential of the jacket in the now.
What she did was not illegal. Because the courts do not allow something as utilitarian as clothes a copyright or patent protection. The only thing allowed is trademark protection. ( So now you know why Louis Vuitton likes to go monogram overload, I love their monogrammed canvas anyway).
Shocking, isn’t it? The fashion industry actually allows one designer to copy another. Unlike paintings,film and music, which can be copyrighted, a fashion designer can take any element of design from another and incorporate it into his own design. This makes us wonder how the fashion luxury brands survive the copying of their designs by H&M, Zara and Forever 21. Johanna goes on to tell us about how Tom Ford, ex creative director at Gucci, said it was simple,that the customer is a different person. What was also eye opening was a sales figure chart she showed, of industries with low copyright protection,such as automobiles,food and fashion with very high sales, whereas industries with high copyright protection such as books,music and films with much lower sales figures. Who’d have thunk? I thought she was phenomenal. Inspiration from other designs may not be such a bad thing,but counterfeits? Now, that’s a whole different story. An ugly one. For another day. Click here to watch the Ted Talk.
Vivienne Westwood told Vogue in 1995,’ Being retro is associated with something conservative but I think all ideas come from the past. Well spoken, Ms Westwood.