Really enjoyed the exhibition! It did feel like some of the connections made were a little superficial, and they could have perhaps dug a little deeper. All in all though it was very interesting to see.
One connection I think there is that wasn't really directly discussed, was how although both fashion and architecture are a form of protection, they can also be used as a tool to either hide, or show/display certain aspects of the contents... My further thoughts on that are a little scrambled and difficult for me to put in text but hopefully it gives you something to think about!
The exhibit, Skin and Bones, was successful in its aim of demonstrating the relationship between architecture and fashion in many ways. The parallel structure between the two very different art forms came together in respect to how both reflect the society, culture, and the theme of the time in their own way. On the first floor, especially, where the main focus was the parallelism, not the junction between the two, I was more convinced about what the relationship was; whereas, on the second floor where audiences were forced to see the meeting pint between the architecture and fashion by displaying fashion garments on one side and the architectural structures and models on the other, I was less swayed. The way the exhibit was organized on the second floor failed to mingle the two effectively when the information given in print emphasized the communication between architecture and fashion. The themes on the second floor seemed to be relatively obvious in a way too. Additionally, fashion—possibly because of its eye-catching nature—tend to take over the entire show and outshine the architectural side. Despite a few unsatisfactory pieces, however, the exhibit as a whole was very informative and beneficial.
2 comments:
Really enjoyed the exhibition! It did feel like some of the connections made were a little superficial, and they could have perhaps dug a little deeper. All in all though it was very interesting to see.
One connection I think there is that wasn't really directly discussed, was how although both fashion and architecture are a form of protection, they can also be used as a tool to either hide, or show/display certain aspects of the contents... My further thoughts on that are a little scrambled and difficult for me to put in text but hopefully it gives you something to think about!
The exhibit, Skin and Bones, was successful in its aim of demonstrating the relationship between architecture and fashion in many ways. The parallel structure between the two very different art forms came together in respect to how both reflect the society, culture, and the theme of the time in their own way. On the first floor, especially, where the main focus was the parallelism, not the junction between the two, I was more convinced about what the relationship was; whereas, on the second floor where audiences were forced to see the meeting pint between the architecture and fashion by displaying fashion garments on one side and the architectural structures and models on the other, I was less swayed. The way the exhibit was organized on the second floor failed to mingle the two effectively when the information given in print emphasized the communication between architecture and fashion. The themes on the second floor seemed to be relatively obvious in a way too. Additionally, fashion—possibly because of its eye-catching nature—tend to take over the entire show and outshine the architectural side. Despite a few unsatisfactory pieces, however, the exhibit as a whole was very informative and beneficial.
Post a Comment