03 July 2018


I've been advised by a knowledgeable reader not to make fun of haute couture because I don't understand it.  So be it.  Res ipsa loquitur.

Image cropped for size from the original at The Guardian.


  1. Staring at a Rothko, do you say, "I could do that"?

    This is a similar impulse. Fashion is worn art. It is meant to be thought-provoking, a moving, living image.

    If you feel frustration because it's part of a world you don't understand, then seek to understand that world. If not, just ignore it.

    1. All I did was post a photo and admit that I don't understand it. No reason to get your panties in a twist.

    2. You admit you post these often and have been called out for it. Hiding behind "res ipsa" snark is lame. I've been reading the site for ~10 years. You're certainly entitled to be a luddite about certain topics. But know that it IS annoying.

    3. mehughes124, I understand you are upset, so I reviewed my similar posts for the past five years -

      There's no point in quibbling over what constitutes "often" for posting subject matter. I write posts about things I find interesting, or things I want to remember by storing them here, or things I want to share with my family and friends. Posts like this one would be "interesting" (definitely not a "want to remember" or "need to share" item).

      The "fashion" category of TYWKIWDBI -


      includes Goth styles, odd tattoos, unusual hairdos, accessories, historical and ethnic items, and other oddities and ephemera. For the most part, that subject matter is "interesting," and I seldom pass judgment on the material.

      I thought this outfit was "interesting." I made a point of not giving my opinion on it. Frankly, I bet if I had written a description of it as an "interesting mesh fabric sheath dress with embroidered flowers and matching gloves and a stunning floral-themed hat," you would still have taken objection and called my comment "snarky."

      I'm certainly not trying to offend readers with alternate sensibilities and taste from mine. I will never understand this style of fashion, and I have no desire to spend any of my remaining hours of life trying to do so. I will concede my "Luddite" status for this subject matter. I will never claim to be able to "do" a Rothko (or a Vermeer), but I do have Rothko-style artwork on my walls (cheap Marimekko fabrics on stretcher frames).

      Sorry if I got snappy with you in my first reply (no personal offense intended). I'm having a hard day at home and I sometimes get testy reviewing all the comments.

  2. LOL is she coming or going LOL

  3. Looks like you hit a nerve there ;-)

    I can imagine the reaction if that turned up in a local night-club...

    Thought provoking? My thoughts are a lot of the art world is just a big circle-jerk - I think a canvas painted black is meh, as well.

    Your (free) blog- your rules.

    Cheers ('ll be anonymous on this one)

  4. "I can't understand it. I can't even understand the people who can understand it."

  5. The first thing I thought was, this looks like a Salvador Dali painting (https://www.wikiart.org/en/salvador-dali/woman-with-flower-head)
    I like to think of these crazy fashion shows as Dada parades, celebrating the absurd.
    I'm really sorry to hear you are having a hard day. Opening your blog this morning and seeing new posts was a delight that improved my day. Thank you for that!

  6. I'm thinking this would be a perfect inclusion to a wedding ceremony.have an adult friend of the bride BE the living flower girl. BTW, is this really all that new? Peter Gabriel often performed with Genesis fully dressed as a flower some 45 years ago.

  7. That's OK. I'll make fun of it for you. Some things in this world are so patently absurd that they roundly deserve to be mocked, and 'haute couture' is one of those things.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...