Texte zur Kunst #56




Fashion and art – are not these two pairs of shoes? Should this not be kept apart for the purposes of this metaphor, although structural similarities to seduce her analogy? The situation is indeed complicated: If one understands fashion and art are each as differentiated social systems, which have their own criteria, value formation processes and laws, then you have attention to these systemic differences, of course. And on closer inspection, the pair is in the metaphor suggested symmetrical relationship is anything but identical. There are cases where art will be by no means fashion and the fashion itself does not seek to art status. As long as a classic of art in understanding dominated the art is about their separation from the applied arts – determine – that is also the fashion. Nevertheless, there have been numerous in recent years “crossover” experiments in which these systemic and categorical differences were leveled tend. They simply went over them. On the other hand, can also be no doubt that the boundaries between the two systems actually more permeable, the transitions have become increasingly blurred. The reciprocal exchange ratio has reached a new level. Now, it may have traditionally been attempts, from both sides, to adorn themselves with each other, be it that designers like Paul Poiret cultivated the habit of the eccentric artist, or that artists / inside – just think to Marcel Duchamp -. to the mass industrial production methods of the fashion-oriented [1] However, while it was rather the fashion now, the cross-eyed as it were on the arts, in this regard is a shift has occurred, that one of the world – the art world – more and more the moves the other – the fashion world – seems to assume. The formerly with the metaphor of the small company circumscribed “art world” would be better described today as a “visual industry,” especially since he structural similarities to other cultural industries – such as Hollywood or just the fashion industry – has. “Visual industry,” says that the responsibility for image production and no longer visible on individual artists or dealers, but at higher concentrations. As in the fashion world, the format “retail” has given way to corporate structures. Galleries where previously only international cooperation were discussed, they join together in large companies today, amplified, just think of the famous “international players” such as “Gagosian,” or “Hauser & Wirth.” In addition, culture-industrial principles – such as the principle of “Celebrity” – are now in the art world. But fashion designers explain their designs more explicitly than previously on art, limited editions and produced by “Editions”. Karl Lagerfeld’s collection of limited edition and sold out in minutes for the fashion chain H & M is just the tip of the iceberg.

The fascination of fashion for the arts in turn appears to be limitless, which is evident in promoting with fashion magazines such as V or self service, at the option of a matter of course a number of editorial pages for art projects and welcome them as descriptive as emphatic, like a new piece of design. Another symptom of the intense interest of the fashion in art could also be the luxury handbag label “Longchamp” call, which recently strongly committed to their work on self-presentation-setting as a designer, artist Tracey Emin. Emin designed a monstrous bag she vorführte personally in the associated campaign, while their typical, spoiled and put on “extreme” looking face. The accessory is expensive in this way, as it brought to life and charged with the alleged authenticity of her artistic personality, as if it had included appearances on the infamous Emin. Leafing through the rave reviews of the U.S. American and British Vogue, where more then one comes to photos of exhibition openings. Events that were previously a specialist audience was reserved – about an opening at the Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac – are now covered in colorful mention what is surely the high celebrity factor of these events: Sun circulating the rumor Ropac Claudia Schiffer have a appearance by paying in his gallery. So those gallerists, like Ropac or Jay Joplin seek contact with the fashion world, vice versa, the status of “celebrities” is attributed, in which they make themselves suitable for the character of her celebrity events. As the celebrities of the British cultural sociologist Chris Rojek are according those individuals to call, in the eyes of the public as so “glamorous” as are “notoriously”, that have enormous potential for identification and attract media attention. [2] It has long been the place in the art world rather reserved individual artists: Andy Warhol, Julian Schnabel and Jeff Koons him occupied. Meanwhile, there are several vendors, but most of all artists with Celebritiy status, whose appearances in the lifestyle press mention, Cecily Brown, Vanessa Beecroft, Rachel Feinstein, Sam Taylor-Wood, Tracey Emin – to name only the most famous. If the current lifestyle press as much by visual artist / interior promises, then this has to do primarily with the fact that their techniques and subject designs are more than ever shaped by principles of fashion. Art has thus, so to speak, lost her intimidating moment, by becoming self-mode-like. This development may be regrettable from a cultural-critical perspective, back nostalgically yearn for those (imaginary) time, where art was not “pure art”. My suggestion would be, however, can be seen in the fashion one of the prevailing social norms and frameworks, from which artistic practices and subject designs are influenced and to which they are in turn divided into the relationship.

Even Adorno had placed in his “Aesthetic Theory” the dictum that great artist had been since Baudelaire with fashion “in the plot”. [3] What he had, however, was a rather implicit admission of fashion logic in the art, for example, their commitment at present, which should be binding for the Arts. Today you can see, however, confronted with a situation in which the fashion not only as a principle latent in art works, but is their literal content. A fashion photographer like Juergen Teller, for example, which operates at the much vaunted interface between fashion and art, represents such a fashion to the content-making approach, especially as its shown in galleries images remain completely determined by the proto-realist aesthetic of his fashion photography, which by the way the trademarks of magazines such as Purple is. The mode can also act as a shaping principle, nestle like Vanessa Beecroft or Sylvie Fleury, whose objects and performances mimetic conventions of the fashion business. Here, too, is set directly on the semantics of fashion, on the overall readability of their characters, which reward the fashion magazines in return by attention. From the fascinating potential of fashion model witness numerous long-portraits in the painting, with the object – is passed through each different painting techniques – preferably Kate Moss. The spectrum can range from callow dimensionality (Gary Hume), bemühtem classicism (Elizabeth Peyton) to carelessly on the screen cast silhouettes (Merlin Carpenter) range – different methods that are either hard or superior to the competitors visual culture on the territory of painting. meet Mode can thus be themed to a variety of ways in which art, in which mention even those cases would be where the fashion is like a “hidden figure” (Walter Benjamin), the work impresses – such as in the brilliant screen images by Sarah Morris, whose choice of color the fashion colors of the current season picks up and glossy surfaces, the splendor of their luxury object took upon himself to speak. These various intersections of art on fashion is one side, on the other hand there is reason to hope the galleries, achieve “more” of popular cultural relevance when fashion photographers such as plates or – issue Terry Richardson – currently very popular.

For fashion companies that are active as sponsors of artistic events, it is primarily the (justified) hope for image transfer. A label such as Hugo Boss helped his commitment to contemporary art to a new, less conservative appearance, image and this shift was accompanied by a more aesthetically pleasing advertising campaign. The increased presence of fashion ads in art magazines also suggests that designers such as Prada, Gucci, Helmut Lang and promise a lot of the art. The framework of “art journal” rubs off on their ads off, gives them the aura of the artistic. More still connects this artistic value with the legitimate economic calculation, the specific purpose of achieving its potential clientele. It is precisely the actor / inside the art world – if they have financial resources – often prove to be notorious collector / interior designer gowns. In fact, the interest in “high fashion” is in a gallery /, consultants / interior, collector / inside and successful artist / interior least since the eighties, particularly pronounced. For the fashionably stylish appearance makes sense to pay. For example, if a gallery / indoor fairs, about the year in June, held the Basel Art Fair, also prepare clothing technology and ensure that they carry the pieces of the latest Marc Jacobs collection on the body (a designer, by the way, according to Prada new uniform supplier for the cultural sector functions), then they send out the signal in this way, they were at the height of the time. It’s as if they represented something new, what they want to stand up so well in art. The brands that are carried by them and shown capable of, respect and instill confidence, a confidence that carries over to some extent its artistic offerings. As ambassadors for their exhibition program, they face themselves. Whoever so chic and yet so tastefully, informed and seemingly at the forefront of fashion, whose aesthetic offer cannot be wrong. Even Baudelaire wrote that the idea which makes the man of beauty, notifying his entire presentation. “They wrinkle or firming his suit and bring in the long run even some changes it in his face” [4]Sun doubt this assertion of a hundred percent correlation relationship between physiognomy and aesthetic preferences may be, is, in this observation, the essential fact stated that the fashionable appearance allows conclusions.

The nature of the fashion prevailing Performativitätszwang now dominates the art scene. Everything depends on the public appearance, even though there was supposed to arrive at the supposedly intrinsic properties of the artistic work. Crucial for their credibility, however, whether the artist “credible” appears, therefore, represent a “personality” can that radiates a sense of his work and this interestingness, relevance, uniqueness or whatever certified. Personal appearance is something manufacturable, something in which you work, which is subject to fashions as well as certain modes of occurrence and associated utilization of presence. Simmel, coined the term “personal mode”, which fits the individual sphere of personality to some extent in a general scheme. [5] As he went out initially assumed that the fashion of the individual would be outside, he cashed in the topic “Personal Mode”, that here “the inner world of the individual subject to a fashion. was”[6] The fashion system stands still then into the seemingly most individual self-expression and Verhaltensidiosynkrasien. Fashion is the medium through which individuals produce a “personality”, where the standards are for a “successful” performance in the art world deems less severe. You do not look like a model and not be styled to perfection but in this respect take out a few liberties, although there are more and more artists are to cultivate a kind of “model” look. Others opt for more idiosyncratic or eccentric-looking self-dramatization, which – incidentally – as so “real” as “staged” should be considered. This momentous significance of the occurrence could now be concluded that it mattered not at all more on the specific nature of the artistic work. This does not reflect this: The actual level of artistic work is still one of them is just not the decisive factor – at least at the level of the art market.


However, fashion is not just art, and the recognition of the systemic and functional differences must in my view the starting point for any comparative study to be. Finally, it is in the case of fashion with a veritable industry to do (mass production, mass consumption), while the art market anmutet small, manageable and almost archaic -. At least until the eighties [7] were most likely to be perhaps the art system and the system of haute couture to compare, especially since the haute couture fashion, the role of the avant-garde plays: sublime really intolerable and all purposes, is reminiscent of the ideal of autonomous art, be so well without purpose and should not go up in features. Avant-garde art as well as haute couture also address an exclusive audience that has to do with the first case of severe employability of the product in the second case, with its underlying financial conditions. The solid condition of art, which sees itself not just by itself corresponds to the side of the haute couture of the fact that only few people in this world of a dress – do we have said Lacroix. Where can enter the collector, however, with comparatively little money by buying new art editions or acquires a consumer must submit to the haute couture dress large sums of money on the table. At the end of the circle of potential buyers is limited in both cases from the outset, and this applies especially for the higher price segment. At this level, the art market, operate the super-rich, representative of what Marx called “ruling class” – a term that implies that one group exerts on the other power. Given the monopoly power of the new collector, whose influence increased enormously in recent years, this term seems appropriate again. The clientele of haute couture is recruited from the “upper ten thousand” as we used to call the upper class moving concretely in the seventies – an elite circle, consisting of the usual suspects.They know each other. The fact that the path to economic and institutional recognition, which is typical for these actors, lengthy design, resulting in a roundabout way and requires a complex support system is, certainly for fashion designers, while access is still difficult. Young, aspiring designers are faced with enormous obstacles. While as a young artist already with low material cost and is able to achieve compliance, it must be the young designer to be perceived, have plenty of seed money and a distribution system. Financial commitment and initial risk are particularly high. Seen from this perspective seems to offer the artistic production more freedom, because – in theory at least – is a less demanding full involvement in prospect. On closer inspection, however, must include certain preconditions (contacts, attorney, etc.) must be met before it ever comes to an exhibition opportunity. As the analog stage of opening of the exhibition and art fair would be for the fashion show and fashion collections include: events, where each lot is at stake. Just as the recording of a show will decide whether they will find buyers, is the effect of the “success” of an exhibition on the status of the artist. Only, this “success” just be a mere moderate success in the arts, he does not have to make payment immediately. Does this not also the fashion? In fact, based fashion designers again and again – most notably Vivienne Westwood and John Galliano – in an artistic ideal of freedom by moving their shows to remote places or in contravention of the Convention, such as older models used [8]produce or decidedly dresses with little or no practical value . This is to them the reputation as the “enfant terrible” as is evidenced by her collection of course profits. In the end, but one that the more portable unit is sold her clothes and carried. The prerequisite is that their label ends up in the relevant fashion boutiques or represented by an indicator such as the New York department store Barneys is. Only then can it be assumed that this label will be considered by a majority of consumer fashion / interior as “significant”. For the value of arts education process, however other than traditional economic criteria such as utility or usability have tipped the balance. Its importance was not measured solely on the fact whether they are selling well, with this now – seems to change – in the wake of a new definition of market power.
Art is also located on a different timeline than fashion. At the fashion thrown down as the moment, a felicitous phrase from Adorno. Who buys art sets, however, on long-term value creation, so on time. The idealistic notion that the art of their time “survive” must be closely linked with possessiveness. From this time the ideal of art acquisition is motivated, at the same time directing him faster and faster each new set of modes of art in a certain direction, they show him the direction, so to speak. The pace in this regard has tightened, so that those names were still in the nineties on everyone’s lips, come completely at the beginning of the new millennium into oblivion. As in fashion also dominates in the art world, the short-term memory, as you start over again from scratch. This means that after certain achievements – such as the analysis of institutional critique – is dropped back regularly, as they are by virtue of their no longer remember. Impermanence is indeed the principle of fashion is emphatically committed to the new. According to the New is also directed from the market for contemporary art. Collectors can sometimes act as fashion obsessed and shake in the morning, even before the official admission times, at the gates of the art fairs, along the lines of a first-come, first served. Behavior that seems to be not far from that trance state in which the “Modenarr” – such as “Fashion Victim” means in Baudelaire and Simmel – while shopping device. This Modenarr loses all sense of time and space and is nonetheless remains extremely systematic. Rational and irrational behavior fall into each other here. The purchase of art, however – so nervous and feverish, he also may make – remains necessary linked to the economic horizon of a possible increase in value. Such considerations play no role for the fashion consumer. In the face of the coveted fashion items past and future are rather hidden history comes to a standstill and it still even if the dress – is of historical allusions to “folklore” completely interwoven – such as Bernhard Willhelm. . Simmel spoke aptly of a “strong presence” feeling that for conveys the fashion [9] From experience I can say that one can get while shopping in a kind of noise while no thought to the future – any financial consequences, for example – is wasted. Fashion seems to be irresponsible, so do not ask about the future actions directed positively. It gives her back for the moment. Even at this point, a bridge can beat the visual arts, which is intended to provide a modernist understanding of art, according to similar experiences “immediate presence”. Standing before a painting by Barnett Newman, it is actually possible to be completely occupied by his presence, to hide the conditions, which are based on this experience. The crucial difference, however, concerns the level of the reception: Fashion is consumed, is a consumer product that is determined by its value in use or has at least a remnant of practical value.Circulate works of art as pure exchange value on the other hand, the art market, in the manner in which they have been received, but they are not in their venality. One could compare them in this respect with luxury goods, which in turn is indeed characterized by the decomposition of the utility value and yet a “je ne sais quoi ‘assets trigger. For a luxury accessory like a Cartier Clock for example, “use” is not the decisive factor, however it can support a sense of their majesty to give.

At this point one might object, but also that the fashionista is not really “need”. This is certainly true is only the act of shopping is simply embedded in a rational rhetoric that one whispers ceaselessly, that you desperately need something new to wear. It legitimizes the cause of their practical value, even if it ultimately does not comes. The spending spree would be that stage where every feeling has been lost to convenience. The utter indifference of fashion against the “objective standards of life” had been quoted Simmel, only the mode is also very well – and that would add additional – a discourse of convenience surrounded, suggesting a further parallel to the art close to the Kant’s formula “without useful purpose” was coined.
While we are dealing, however, the fashion consumer with a veritable economy of waste, since the value of designer clothes from the current season, with each day, each hour that passes expire, the value of certain works of art increases with the years. The wait and hoarding pays off here – one can speculate on high profits, which has endurance. Hardly a “fashion victim”, however, would still be in the late fall of the things from the Autumn / Winter collection elicit behind the stove. At that time, fashion fans are already planning their summer wardrobe. And who wants to do with fashion designers profit, must be incredibly fast, the scarcest and most coveted goods – immediately back to them the next day to auction on ebay profitable – brands such as Seven Jeans or Hogan. However, it seems to make little sense, designer clothes store in a specially equipped warehouses. Unless we rely on the “vintage” effect and preserves the property for decades in the closet, hoping that might be one or the other soon Decade “hot”. [10]


The language of fashion seems to be universally accessible and understandable, what is the language of art can not say absolutely. Finally, fashion labels across national borders and across social differences have become established as a universal symbol systems that “speak” without hesitation, as it would require no further explanation. Who says Prada or Gucci can be automatically determined by association – and expect Konnotationsfeldern. Art on the other hand never speaks for itself. It is still – even though the trend seems to be decreasing – to a certain degree of accompanying and explanatory measures (such as art criticism) dependent. In contrast, fashion journalism dominates the purely descriptive, however, that immediately turns into prescriptive. Such is extensively described in its materiality new chiffon material at the same time always a “must”. Emphatic descriptions mutate to purchase instructions. Given the new definition of the art market power could bring the same results for a large part of art criticism, as well as here descriptive categories are hopelessly mixed with normative. Within the meaning of the market as “successful” artist to be described is suddenly deemed “interesting” or “important”. It remains, however, that fashion editors do not usually have the freedom to subject the collection by a designer of a systematic and well-argued criticism. Bad reviews come to my knowledge in fashion magazines is not available. Such an undertaking has in art criticism still has its place, although their influence is dwindling value-creating processes. If the objection raised by her but once in space, then he will be able to unfold its potential long-term effect. It is wise to speak no more of the hand. Art criticism has benefited so unlike the fashion critique of the relatively autonomous status of the subject matter and thereby developed the expertise to challenge the normative value judgments of the market. Conversely, reminds the authority with which have many fashion critics over the debts of the next season, to those modernist art critics like Michael Fried and Clement Greenberg, the ever arbitrary judgments of taste precipitated or apodictic tone of a work of art good or bad welcomed. But the normative modernist art criticism introduced a set of criteria that have been trained in the fashion critics hardly know what lies in the lack of autonomy of the subject matter. In its functioning seems fashion criticism zuzuspielen the spectacle, which Debord According constitutes as a “tremendous, undeniable and unmatched positivity”: “It says nothing more than: ‘What appears, that’s good and what is good, the shows'” [ 11] This attitude is today not only in the “Celebration” postulate of Rainald Goetz, but also in those parts of international art critics continued, increasingly accept their statements in the nature of press releases. The terms of appearance, or their relevance there are not questioned, but basically yes.


But fashion is not it much more democratic than the so still decried as elitist art? Designer fashion now seems to be accessible to everyone, where hang but the cheaper versions of the Miu Miu blouse or the Marc Jacobs dress at Zara or H & M. Thus, the opportunities to participate in the fashion had spread. But fashion is not the end but “class fashion,” as Simmel postulated, is so tied to money, and social privileges? Evidence suggesting that today govern again, the luxury brands that now times have their price. Experts capable of at least the expensive cashmere sweater from Zara Chloe straight away from the cheap imitation to differ. In its relation to structures of inequality fashion works two tracks – they promise and enables social mobility and cemented at the same time existing social differences. So, as you see reflected in the Hermès boutique on its financial capabilities, the new outfit just holds the potential to draw up his mind and transcend the space of a capitalist society has been assigned. The price tag – about the black chiffon dress by Yves Saint Laurent – remember, but inexorably, the fact that fashion is the one medium level, takes place in the social inequality expression. [12],satisfaction of needs is here, as in art collecting and, in financial and cultural resources tied. You must have not only money but also a wide range of information, to get an overview of the latest “must haves”.
The point of the standards, which sets the mode is, however, is that you behave towards them, they must interpret. Fashion puts us out of their constraints, but also an initiative called. Elena Esposito pointed out the connection, in the fashion that the search for uniqueness and spontaneity to it as a forced auftrete. [13] This occurred in the nineties phenomenon of the so-called “customizing” can well illustrate this paradox. “Customizing” means that the proposed standards by the designers are sometimes rejected and a different design. There were initially stylists, such as self service Zeischrift, who applied this new fashion, by reserving certain interventions: They cut holes or fringes in sweater, dyed or bleached clothing and triggered by a wave of Abwandelns. The rejection of the normative proposal but introduced new and more sophisticated constraints. Finally had the surgery, which makes it be the right ones. Fittingly, fashion magazines continually since the nineties promote the freedom to assemble his own clothes, so favorable to the noble blouse Gap jeans from Blue Navy combined. This creates new spaces for action, not to disregard. But also new constraints. Because it’s enough not to find their way to a brand, you have to get an overview of the entire range – from Dior to Kookai – gain. New boutique concepts as “Colette” in Paris show, where this new freedom leads to truth. Here are the “must haves” of the season put together, from the Chanel-trailer to a swimsuit by Michael Meier.”Colette” forces one of these impressive selection of high connoisseurship as it were purified coercion, supplemented by the offer is an informed choice of the latest beauty and lifestyle products, which creates an aesthetic continuity. In the end it is the whole person and all aspects of their lives, which seeks to subject themselves to these differentiated fashion imperative comprehensive. You have the choice, the choice is in fact closer examination, to prescribe the mode with skin and hair.


As a crucial difference between fashion and art, the transferability or applicability of fashion emerged – they can be brought physically attracted to and used. Fashion is a typical “good identity” and the benefit of maintaining our personal identity. [14] It allows individuals to enter into a social reality. Art is certainly fulfilled although some social functions, such as prestige exhausted, but not in them. And in terms of identity formation, it plays a comparatively minor role of fashion. The question of who wants to be and how to even use the mode, stages, is now existenziellerer times of importance than the question of the specificity of aesthetic experience. First, the question of clothes to be resolved, then we will go out if necessary and discuss art.
True to fashion Louis Althusser might be called a referral system because it produces subjectivity and directly affects our self-conceptions. The same could be said of the difficult art which, while quite capable of addressing and positioned their viewers, but not in the same way a subject calls qua fashion presentation to life. While it is hardly possible to escape the ubiquitous invocations of fashion, its omnipresent normative ideals of beauty, capable of the big events of the arts to reach an equivalent mass media impact – which seems to change in this respect also currently a bit if you about the enormous popularity of “MoMa” spectacle thinks in Berlin. Even the tabloids every day presented one of her paintings. Despite all the fashion has a potential for identification, can only dream of the art, since they can be used directly for their own self-image. It is also the advantage of art that is the relationship to her principle mediated and abstract. Herein lies, if you will, rise to a portion of their remaining autonomy, and this would be countered those art forms that rely on direct participation and the benefit of the arts, not just to satisfy primäridentifikatorischen needs be wasted in this way.
But one could not argue for the art collector, he seeks his identity through the art making? Finally, he surrounds himself with his collection, adorns himself with it. He will literally can not carry on the body. The art collector, who has publicly occurs, although its collection is a way in the back, and the treatment of his person to be submissive and respectful accordingly. For the actual design of his self-image can be instrumentalized his art collection is not.


If fashion the individual, as expressed by Simmel states, “the car runs, which all go,” then individual distinction ultimately equivalent to the “melting down of the individual into the universal.” [15] For the art world, one could collect the results that imitation is the one principle that makes the individualization process itself. A kind of herd instinct led, for example chase all the actors / inside the same name, artist name, work which, incidentally, such as fashion labels. Even the credibility of a label depends so heavily on whether it can develop in the eyes of its customers ‘personality’. [16] Any individual who einschwört to a particular label, respectively, a particular artist, is at its core it sure to follow only his passions, obsessions and likes to quote the “gut feeling” when he sought truth in the brand that everyone else also desirable. And the artists themselves seek work as a recognizable, reliable brand to establish itself.
From today’s perspective, Simmel’s argument would still sharpen and indeed to the extent that individuality in the culture industry is currently certifies those who are just like the others, which reflect a general ideal of the most perfect. The current fascination with “celebrities” here is justified: but before they do an example on how to neo-liberalism in the sense of a “request and finishing structure” (Tom Holert) corresponds to succeed. Celebrities are working incessantly on her appearance, weigh each of their performances carefully, and have broken through in apparent self-responsibility, for which they envy, but also based on them. By envy a man who has already established Simmel, it is no longer completely excluded from it, you have won a relationship with him. And from the preoccupation with celebrities can actually gain insights for life. So we are interested in everything they do, their whole life. The celebrity culture is less important to the earlier so-called “power” for the successful marketing of their own person. Serve with Paolo Virno’s findings in “A Grammar of the Multitude” (2004) that capitalism now under throw the whole person, including their communicative, emotional and cognitive habits. [17] Life itself had become the productive potential and this potential would be driven by the trade could, not be separated from the living person of the seller. Thus, it would now also increasingly so in the “people” and “personalities”, because that person once before for a potential whose support she was to speak. In this new role as potential causes of the potential Virno back biopolitics. Subsequently, one could say that is expressed in “Performativitätszwang” and increased importance of the presence in the celebrity culture of access to the biopolitical life. We should do everything, throws all his “personality” in the balance, and contributes to market itself strives to give a convincing picture of yourself. Fashion is the medium through which we articulate our identity: On her way does not seem to go by.So critical performance and staging for the evaluation of artistic work may be, one has as a producer, but the possibility of this relationship between art production and staging, between “have and shine” to act in a way that the horizon of what is possible and is considered desirable, emerges. Dress warm!

Thanks to Josephine Pryde, Richard Phillips, David Lieske, Clemens crumbs.


[1] See: Nancy J. Troy, “Fashion, Art, and the Marketing of Modernism,” in this couture culture.. A Study in Modern Art and Fashion, Boston 2003, p.18-79.

[2] See: Chris Rojek, “Celebrity and Celetoids,” in idem, Celebrity, London 2001, p.9-49, here p.10.

[3] See also: Theodor W. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, Frankfurt / M. 1971, page 286

[4] Charles Baudelaire, “The Painter of Modern Life”, in: idem, The Complete Works / letters. Volume 5: Essays on Literature and Art 1857-1860, Munich 1989, pp. 213-258, here pp. 214th

[5] See ibid for this purpose, p.29

[6] See ibid for this purpose, p.30

[7] See: Angela McRobbie, “Fashion as a Culture Industry”, in: Stella Bruzzi / Pamela Church Gibson (eds), Fashion Cultures. Theories, Explorations and Analysis, New York 2000, pp. 253-263.

[8] What is also a tribute to the aging of society and of course the fact that the clientele of Helmut Lang or Prada is in large part made up of men and women over 35.

[9] See: Georg Simmel, The Philosophy of Fashion, 1905, in: idem, Complete Edition, Volume 10, Frankfurt / M. 1995, pp. 9-37, here p 17th

[10] Vintage dresses from the 50s, 60s or 70s in the boutiques now cost at least as much as the latest designer pieces. Your point is its exclusivity – because the risk that another person could show up in this dress by Alaïa from the eighties, is relatively low. “Vintage” so to speak, to write the logic of distinction of the haute couture dress that is so unique or produced in only a few runs, in the prêt-à-porter fashion, but with the difference that “vintage” pieces of affordable are as haute couture.

[11] Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle, Hamburg 1978, p.8

[12] See, Karl-Siegbert Rehberg, “Kosumismusfallen” in this issue.

[13] See, Elena Esposito, “The Theory of Fashion,” in this, the liability of the passers-by.. Paradoxes of fashion, Frankfurt / M. 2004, pp. 13-32, here p 14th

[14] Cf the remarks by Axel Honneth in conversation with Rachel Jaeggi and Rainer Forst, “commodification of life?”, Which is in the zero point of the new journal is polar, February 2005, pp. 26-37.

[15] See ibid, p.11

[16] See: M. idem, sociology of the brand, Frankfurt / Kai Uwe Hellmann, “The magic of the brand,” in 2003, pp. 425-449.

[17] See: Paolo Virno, A Grammar of the Multitude, New York 2004.