Anna Wintour is
one of the most powerful people in the world. Her multi-billion dollar empire
and infamous, unwavering equanimity aside, she has the power to define beauty.
Through her quotidian exigence, she has transformed a magazine into a bible,
and in doing so, she has given her personal opinion ultimate legitimacy. Although
I do have the utmost veneration for Wintour, I am disinclined to acquiesce with
the societal fallacy that she possesses some sort of absolute truth regarding
the idea of beauty in the fashion industry. As John Locke wrote, “The law of
nature being unwritten, and so nowhere to be found but in the minds of men,
they who through passion or interest shall miscite or misapply it cannot so
easily by convicted of their mistake where there is no established judge.” Whether
one views Wintour as artistically enlightened or not, it is her dominance over
an industry and a culture that allows her to define beauty in her monthly
exhibition, Vogue.
Writers and
artists may give birth to ideas, but editors and curators select the status
quo.
Proposed Exhibition: Pure Beauty
Pieces:
Campbell's Soup Can The
Fountain
Andy Warhol Marcel Duchamp
Pure Beauty
John Baldessari
Proposed argument: Pure beauty is
only achievable through minimalism. From Warhol’s pop art, to Duchamp’s dada
readymade, to Baldessari’s plain text, there is a refinement and synthesis of
artistic perfection. Art is a question of concept, not of skill.
Of course I do not believe the
proposed argument, but it is a testament to the power that an exhibition has to
incite delusion in the minds of its audience.
The comparison of fashion and art, especially modern art, is a very interesting concept. In my experience, many people take the same approach to both subjects. They imagine that art connoisseurs and fashion experts as in some sort of exclusive club that they are not a part of, and because of this consider them worthless and a waste of time. It is a shame that so many dismiss these complex topics because of their fear.
ReplyDelete