Oh, if you don’t recognize the face, it’s Madonna (we know, it’s getting difficult, she’s looking more and more like Ellen Barkin—remember her?).

Now, as for the dress and accessories (Vuitton = Monsieur Jacobs)… no comment.

Unless you find this artful and thrilling…

We suppose that “pointy” is now a fashion keyword.

General consensus, not the ultimate and ideal wear for a 50-year-old homo  sapiens.

The stylist should be fired. No, banished.

Try vintage Chanel, my dear, it will better with your mansion on NY Upper East Side.

Confusion reigns—is this a video from pre-economic-freefall days? It seems as if these student’s priorities are not quite in synch with the current and very upfront concerns of the automotive industry (and particularly those concerns theoretically espoused by FORD) in 2009. The big Es (Energy, Ecology, Efficiency…) seem a little low on these student’s project briefings. Shockingly, the student speaking of how her design was guided by how much “Americans love their SUVs” only accentuates the continuing shortsightedness of American automobile manufacturers. And this is its future!? http://www.studio360.org/episodes/2009/04/24/segments/129755

Visit the APTERA auomobile site to see true originality that couldn’t get US government funding because the car has three wheels… Watch this teaser. http://www.aptera.com/

Can the unattractive attract? Is ugly the new beautiful?

Eloquence has many faces…

Why did anyone ever think that any of this was cool?

This gathering of diverse productions from the late 1970s through the mid-1980s that were apparently shown on cable TV (no memories surface of having seen these at the time—all that wants to resurface are fleeting images from “The Robin Bird Show”, which WILL be a classic).They do serve an important purpose, though, in positioning the period as a rabidly visual no-no, be it the fashion (Stephen Sprouse, Betsy Johnson), the hair (à la Tama Janowitz i.e. Slaves of New York), the make-up, the general ideal of physical beauty… the decor (look at any issue of Architectural Digest from the period), the popular music (weany wussy synthetic electro-keyboard with a drum machine always programmed to the same beat); the list goes on and on. Fuel to the fire that any 80s comeback is a HUGE mistake (look out Mr. Jacobs, and hey, you’re in this show too—how old are you anyway?).

The Maison Rouge aptly sums up this afflicted era by installing a room with two period television sets showing Andy’s favorite episodes from “Loveboat”, which seems to have been one of his favorite shows. Too bad he didn’t pick up any of their production qualities for his own efforts. Banality rules, there is no excuse for banality.

However, having watched every video presented in this exhibition, a positive factor is gradually revealed, one that will leave you with a reaffirmed faith in the human race: all the celebrities given sway on endless metres of videotape are actually more boring than you, and have about as much to say about the world that is pertinent as you did at that cocktail party last week where you didn’t know anyone and nobody would talk to you and you stood in a corner with that one drink you promised you wouldn’t exceed…

Boring… AND rude—a classic example here is jewelry designer Paloma Picasso speaking to the great Georgia O’Keeffe, where Ms O’Keeffe eloquently tells a clever story (mind you, she was almost 100 years old) and Ms Picasso looks at her and says dimlyand less cleverly “Yessss” and goes on talking about her own big self to another guest who looks at the camera like he would like to sink into the floor. This can be fun for a New Yorker, but I do wonder what impression French visitors leave with?

Contrastingly (is this a word?), it is nice to see interviews with 80s artists Keith Haring, Kenny Scharf, Jean-Michel Basquiat, as well as a 40ish David Hockney (adorable!) speaking about his artistic journey—generally, when left alone, these people show ethusiasm and charm that are a gleaming mirror of their creative output, which still can thrill.

Well, maybe we’re still trying to have our own fifteen minutes…

http://www.lamaisonrouge.org/en/fiche.php?section=menu05&rubrique=9&fiche=105

A thorough Warhol chronology

http://www.warholstars.org

We should all call perky Ms. Gottula and ask for a tour!

Honestly, is 48,000 square feet necessary for a residence—we’d love to see the carbon footprint on this baby—buying the carbon offset for this house would probably re-forest the world.

This image was included in a PowerPoint presentation anonymously circulated through email.

Although this ad merits a quick chuckle it does illustrate several more sobering points.  Is this a commentary on legal marriage, sexual rights, gender rights, ethics or merely retail?  We assume the person in the photograph to be a woman, but how do we know for sure this is not in fact a man—and—if the model is of male gender, how would it alter the intended message?

Maybe the message advocates same sex marriage?  Perhaps it discusses human reproductive rights and birth control.  Or golly, what if it is just an old fashioned, not very evolved and highly misogynistic advertisement selling diamond rings.

Foget the diamond, do some good, donate to a worthy cause:

Human Rights.org

Since when are blue jeans considered more formal than “casual” and okay for cocktail parties and business meetings?

Blue jeans were invented in 1873 by Jacob Davis and Levi Strauss.  The design was patented in that year for its unique “Fastening Pocket-Openings”—the little metal grommets that reinforce where your hand goes in and out of pockets.  Denim was used for its durability because blue jeans were invented for working men who were rough on clothing, working in occupations such as construction, ditch digging, bronco busting, and etc.

In the 1950s blue jeans became the garment-symbol for American, post-war rebellion, see the fims “Rebel Without a Cause” and  “The Wild One” for prime examples of denim as the badge of sartorial revolt.  James Dean and Marlon Brando each play disillusioned, disenfranchised youth acting out their individual disgust against society and societal norms.  They were not wearing blue jeans to be in or hip or fashionable, they wore their denim in anger and to make establishment mad.

“In the 1960s, the Soviet people were slowly introduced to the new Western counterculture personified by the Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Elvis Presley. These musicians offered new seductive and subversive rhythms, rhymes, and appearances. They sported long hair and wore blue jeans.

The Soviet authorities went ballistic. They had a tradition of being wary of foreign influences. In the 1920s, there was a slogan: today he listens to jazz, tomorrow he’ll sell out the motherland. The 1960s’ reaction was no less strong. The long hair, hip shaking, and blue jeans were declared to be alien and incompatible with the “moral profile of a builder of communism.” A true builder of communism had to sport a crew cut, dance waltz or polka, and wear traditional style, well-ironed pants. LewRockwell.com’s readers are smart and know that the forbidden fruit is sweet. To be sure, young people around Russia embraced the new Western “abominations.” There was a problem though. You can always grow long hair and whiskers (unless you have strict parents or are in the army). Almost anyone can shake hips. But… not too many of us could make our own blue jeans, especially if there is no denim for sale.

As time went on, blue jeans became less a statement of rebellion and more a status symbol. The Soviet government would neither manufacture, nor import them. But the blue jeans would still trickle into the “Evil Empire.” Some were brought in by Soviet diplomats, sailors, or military advisers to Arab regimes such as Egypt or Syria. Some were smuggled in by foreigners. Blue jeans gave life to “fartsovshchiki,” a special kind of black market “profiteers.” Those would buy jeans and other stuff from foreigners in exchange for traditional Russian wares, such as fur hats and caviar.” —lewrockwell.com

By the 1970s, “In many non-western countries, jeans became a symbol of ‘ western decadence’ and were very hard to get.” —atozbluejeans.com

And by the late 70s, Jordache Jeans arrived as did Sasson Jeans “Ooooh, la la, Sasson!”

Oooo la la on youtube.com

By the 1980s, Calvin Klein adopted denim and all hell broke loose, magazine and billboard advertising featuring the 15 year-old Brooke Shields reciting “Nothing comes between me and my Calvins.” inspired a new craze for dry cleaning blue jeans with front creases so crisp they would cut like a sharp knife.

Calvin Klein Jean commercial on youtube.com

Another Calvin Klein jean commercial on youtube.com

This respectable-ization of the rebel blue was something new (Brando and Dean sported a grittier, grungier blue jean look that was slouchy and unkempt.)  Even still through the 1990s, no executive would dare wear a pair of blue jeans into the office nor would a hostess be pleased if a cocktail guest arrived in denim.

French fashion designer Yves Saint- Laurent is credited with having said,

“I wish I had invented blue jeans. They have expression, modesty, sex appeal, simplicity – all I hope for in my clothes.”  Saint-Laurent was one of the most emblematic designers of the “Swinging Sixties”, he went on to design and garner press coverage for fashion and the fashion conscious.  In 1985 he was awarded the Chevalier of the Legion d’Honneur by the president of France, François Mitterand and  in 1999, he was awarded Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Award from the Council of the Fashion Designers of America.

By the lat 1990s, with stock prices rising, real estate in the west and some places in the east keeping pace, what was once a casual expression of fashion broke into polite society and expensive jeans were born.  Crisp, creased, thigh hugging Jordache, Sasson and Calvins gave way to $200 and $300 blue jeans that looked like the had been wrapped in an atomic bomb.  The dirtier, more thread bare, patched and broken looking a pair of jeans appeared the greater the purchase price.  Chic shops in fashion havens such as Soho, New York City and Rodeo drive were devoted to these denim decadence.  By 2000, middle America had caught the blue bug and wearing jeans for any occasion had become okay.

RODARTE—sisters Kate and Laura Mulleavy

Sometimes (most times) it is important to give a contrasting example to make a point. Therefore, in contrast to the comments on M. Jacobs below, look at the work of the sisters Kate and Laura Mulleavy for their design house Rodarte. Very accomplished, artful work by two women who had no formal art (other than art history) or fashion training. Although neither did Jacobs (in the 1970s, he was a salesperson at the now defunct Charivari boutique on 72nd street, NYC).

Check this out. Pretty. Pretty hip. http://www.rodarte.net/

Oh, Marc Jacobs… You’ve been in this business at least 30 years (don’t deny it).

To what purpose does this serve? And to what muse do you answer, the muse of EVERYTHING WE WOULD LIKE TO FORGET FROM THE 1980s? Huh? This is not even design, this is not useful, this has nothing to do with TODAY. Your critics appreciate your bright colors, Thanks, they really cheered us up. Not. Not to mention the “proportions”… or is that spelled “pretensions”?

Buffoon. Learn to design. Learn to design relevantly. Learn to create something new. You’ve had enough time. Already. God, this is tiring. If you don’t have the talent, get off the bandwagon.