Photos via Today & Tomorrow
This is an image of a high fashion show where a hot model is wearing clothes with a sunny side up egg on it. I think she also has a baguette on her head. She might be some sort of transformer who transforms in2 a picnic. Not sure what the dress is trying to ’say’, but I think it has sometimes to do with survival, and how we have to go grocery shopping to stay alive, instead of being a hunter and gatherer. Might also have to do with the death of the nuclear family.
I know that I am kind of a ‘fashion blog’ but sometimes I don’t ‘get’ fashion. It seems like the most bloggable looks are stuff that are too expensive for even upper-middle class people to buy. And most people ‘don’t look like models’ so they look like they are ‘trying too hard’ when they try 2 look ‘all cool and fashion-forward.’ It makes me sad when I see poor people who wear ‘clothes for poor people that they think are cool, trendy, and sexy.’
Every1 is just trying their best to look presentable and modern. Kinda sad when people ‘try 2 b sexie’ when they aren’t.
I feel like if I saw some girl with eggs on her, it would make me think she is ‘trying too hard 2 be kutesy’ and probably needs to focus on developing a more intense sexual identity, instead of seeking shelter in deceptive kutesy aesthetics which represent a reluctance to ‘grow up.’
Designs by Agatha Ruiz De La Prada
UGH. Still haven’t figured out what’s the difference between design, art, and memes?
http://www.hipsterrunoff.com/2008/12/whats-the-difference-between-art-design-and-memes.html
Sometimes I just feel like we live in a world where every1 is just trying 2 b blggd about. Kinda like that ‘In the future, every one will be world-famous for 15 minutes’ quote by Andy Warhol, except it’ll be m0re like:
“In the future, everyone will be internet-famous for 15 blog minutes.”
-Carles, blogger from HIPSTER RUNOFF (2009)
Loading ...
IAmCarles.com
16 Comments
ugh…
Reply
//////////Reply by dvdi
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
@oL,
I kinda like the women who shop at these places, only because theyre the type you can “cum on”
Reply
why are the “tastemakers”/definers of feminine aesthetic fggts and women who dont wanna fuck them (women)
Reply
art = doing shit nobody must understand
design = doing shit to make people like it
fashion = doing shit that tries to be art or fashion
memes = doing shit to get attention
the art of design is to define personal brands.
Reply
//////////Reply by Andrea
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
@cockboy,
Pretty much. I get the feeling saying they’re the same is like saying Love/Sex/Freedom/Life are the same…. which is great if you’re a Rasta bus driver, or whatever, but a lot of us get off on the details. Considering the fact that humans have been discussing “What Art Is” since the beginning of philosophy as such, I’m willing to go with “Theoretically Infinite Source of Fun.”
Reply
//////////Reply by Andrea
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
@Andrea,
of course, good art SHOULD be able to be understood. WHY it is understood is less clear (something to do with mutually agreed upon symbols/color-mood associations). But it should express the collective consciousness of a people, or, what makes a people a people. Although these days we have moved into the more precarious territory of “What makes me, me?” *Whitman vs. Personal Branding!* I think I’ll go with Whitman. That’s why we go to concerts, right?
Reply
//////////Reply by Anony
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
@Andrea, In a capitalistic society there is no “collective expression” anymore. The essence of most of humanity has been striped away by consumer culture. Essentialy art has become something only the “artistic” can understand. Society as a whole has placed little value in art…. unless it can be pre-validited by a significant group of people. Hopefully one respects these people… sometimes they may not.
//////////Reply by Peebs
//////////Posted March 8th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
@Andrea, I don’t think that it’s art’s job to express anything other than the feelings of the person or people who created it, or to communicate a concept, the creator’s job is to be good enough at that task to be able to communicate that feeling or concept to as many as possible, it is then received by the collective but doesn’t become representative of it until the collective has consumed, assimilated and regurgitated it. So, along comes someone from the collective who thinks that they “get it”, and who tries to make their own art, based on the implied language and communication in the art they’ve just consumed, if you’re lucky you’ll now have a new – albeit derivative – piece of art which speaks roughly the same language and says the same thing as the “original”, several others do the same, and the “collective unconscious/zeitgeist” theory appears to gain weight, as long as you forget about the original work at the top of the pyramid that is.
The controversy in art begins when you have one of two things happen, you either find:
A work of true genius that no one can understand or,
A highly derivative work that seems to play by the rules of the work that it’s been derived from, but which in fact makes no sense whatsoever.
These are the works that make people think that art isn’t there to be understood, and because the derivatives become more and more common as more unintelligible copycat work is accepted as significant by people who either have vested financial interest or who have no real comprehension of its derivative nature and lack of content, (as there is genius in art, so there is also stupidity) so more of it appears, and it becomes ok to make art that no one gets at all – because now that’s what we think art is.
If we all look poor and ugly in our clothes, then what’s the point? Wear clothes just to ‘keep warm’ and ‘cover our privates’?
Reply
//////////Reply by Citizen Science
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
@Von Colander,
Looking poor IS the point.
Reply
//////////Reply by truth
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
@Von Colander, u didnt ‘get’ it. and if think about it, that’s actually good.
Reply
my cat can eat a whole watermellon
Reply
//////////Reply by tommy c
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Reuben and Ed reference? Well Played…
Reply
*a girl w two eggs on er unstead of inside er.
Reply
<3 u crls
Reply
//////////Reply by A Carles In The Wind
//////////Posted March 6th, 2009 at 2:30 am
@(p)ossum, is <3 a meme? is <3 authentic?
Reply
anything pretty or unique (can b ‘not pretty’) and thin is fashion + design. art is stuff dat “makes u think” and “challenges ur precipitations”. memes r meaningless crap like uggs or terrorist scarves.
Reply
//////////Reply by до свидания
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
@до свидания, i meant perceptions/does ne1 think dat language is holdin us down!?!? h8 god 4 kocking down the tower of babel!!!!!!!
Reply
//////////Reply by .
//////////Posted March 5th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
@до свидания, “Language is the impetus that empowers individuals to forge ties that bind into a community, thus giving them personal, social, or cultural identification.”
-James Baldwin
Reply
//////////Reply by до свидания
//////////Posted March 5th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
@., is he another baldwin brother. h8 that show w/ tina fey.
//////////Reply by до свидания
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
@до свидания, also richard dawkins made up memes + their a lie like evilution.
Reply
//////////Reply by Von Colander
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
@до свидания, I know it sucks to say this, but I can’t tell to which level u are kidding. Blame robo[via tussin] I guess.
Wouldn’t religion be a meme tho?
Reply
//////////Reply by Anony
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
@Von Colander, Not unless used ironically… Placing a giant illuminated cross on stage for example.
//////////Reply by до свидания
//////////Posted March 4th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
@Von Colander, y would i kid about “our lord +savior jesus christ”. if u dont accept him in2 ur p. brand + accept that his father made earth + has a divine plan 4 all of us then ur going 2 hell.
YOU STOLE MY STYLE
Reply
that was harsh esp the eggs
Reply
i dnt undrstnd the point of frvrtwnty1.
cheap mnstrm clothes if u ask me.
Reply
SORRY, BUT I THINK THIS IS BEYOND AMAZING
Reply
The tasteless way that Americans dress makes me feel a sense of loss. I feel especially bad when I feel that someone is “keeping themselves down” by sending the wrong message.
Also wish I had more $$$ for clothes.
But I really wish that dressing well was part of the national culture, not an elitist hobby for the “creative class” and vain people.
Reply
//////////Reply by Anony
//////////Posted March 5th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
@¶, Fuck “dressing well”. People should dress exactly how they are naturaly compeled to… which may be atypical for the so called “creative class”. Excluding issues of personal hygine people should be judged on their chatacter and actions which sounds cliche but is rarely the case. Unless of course you enjoy conversing the vein, shallow people who are mearly a shell of their humanity.
Reply
Also think the designer is showing that they can execute a concept that “puts a new spin on ordinary things.”
Reply
Needs more bacon
Reply
hi
Agata ruiz de la Prada s tribute to salvador Dali,I presume (reference to the sculpture the Bread woman with the angelus on her head[URL=http://img266.imageshack.
Dali wore occasionally a fried egg sunny side up as a pochette . you try
Ants are not included tough.This isnt a picnic either
Au revoir
A.Frog
Reply