Mediating Modesty: A symposium at the London College of Fashion

by Ana Carolina Minozzo. Satin Wrap Band Snood by Maysaa

Earlier this summer, a crucial step in the innovative research in the field of fashion studies took place in London. A one day symposium ‘Mediating Modesty: Fashioning Faithful Bodies’ presented the conclusions and opened a space for discussion after a year of studies conducted by the ‘Modest Dressing: Faith Based Fashion and Internet Retail,’ a research project, which operates as a platform of multidisciplinary intellectual interchange on the topic of modest dressing.

Professor Reina Lewis, from the London College of Fashion, has been conducting ongoing research on gender, ethnicity and orientalism. During her investigations, she came across issues relating to Western, especially European, attitude towards Muslim women. “They dress differently, they cover their bodies differently and that is seen as a controversial political symbol by Western and European society...and rarely as a fashion statement, although they adorn themselves and consume fashions as much as any other group” comments Professor Lewis.

According to Lewis, religious women, especially young Muslim women, are also consuming fashion, and their consuming behavior has changed in relation to the internet. Those girls are also part of the religious revivalism movement that we witness at present, which generates specific social impact that is worth analyzing. ‘I became interested in expanding these questions I encountered to Christian and Jewish communities. They also share this juxtaposition of ways of dressing in contrast with the secular world’, adds Lewis.

She was then joined by Dr Emma Tarlo, from Goldsmiths College and the researcher Jane Cameron and, in February of 2010, the idea had a shape and a name. She explains: ‘We wanted to look at the internet for it being a space of crossing boundaries of faith and territory. It is a deterritorialised and dematerialised sphere, which offers the possibility for a new type of dynamics’. In her own words, the internet ‘allows to torn apart the binary divide between the religious and the secular worlds’, and this perspective guided the variety of points studied and analyzed through the last year, which were discussed during the symposium at the London College of Fashion.

This month, the papers presented during the event as well as a podcast with the complete coverage of what was talked about became available online, on the page of the Religion & Society organization. You can download all this information here.

You can also find a brief summary of the symposium below, with an introduction to the work of each of the invited readers from England, Europe and the US.

Teenage Girls in London, Photo by Ana Carolina Minozzo

The day began with Professor Frances Corner, the Head of College at LCF, welcoming the participants and stressing the relevance of addressing the concept of ‘sustainability’ in Fashion. Social sustainability must also be in our agenda, by which we should consider diversity and inclusion, the consumer sustainability. At that very moment, the relevance of what was about to come was set and from then on, a rich and energetic exchange took place.

Professor Reina Lewis was the first to share her findings with the audience. She drew on the internet’s capacity of presenting fashion solutions, challenging spacial and cultural constrictions and permitting a dialogue between women from different communities and religions. This ‘deterritorialized’ platform of discussion that are blogs and general websites of e-tailing are sometimes informed by a religious spiritual mission. Such arguments add to the seeming contradiction found in the relation of modesty, beauty and fashion. The last carrying with it the necessity of being ‘the first’, ‘the most’ as well as ideas of exclusivity and competition.

However contradictory certain websites and forums may seem, their cultural impact is remarkable. Through the cross-faith online debate, a fragmentation of the religious authorities is noticed, as well as changes in the religious discourse itself. A challenge of the male authority, in some cases, is also present, by means of the new access to power given to women through such virtual platforms.

Issues surrounding Muslim modesty dressing, specifically, were further explored by Annelies Moors, from Amsterdam University. She stressed that modest dressing is also considered a religious practice in itself, a form of worship which allows a social connection with ‘equals’ united in faith. In the case of Islam, dress codes are related to its public evaluation, especially when Islam is a minority group, and it had a strong and meaningful role through different moments in history. Moors also questioned the concepts of ‘modesty’ in different communities, which vary from humbleness, chastity, and purity to not resembling a man. Techniques used to produce this particular identity, of the modest self, were discussed alongside the greater question of how god and the community influence one’s ability to make choices.

The Muslim modesty debate was then discussed together with Jewish modesty and the online encounters of these two faiths was the subject of Emma Tarlo’s research. Parting from the idea of segregation and differentiation inherent to a faith-based dress code, the actual concern of women to buy only from shops or brands, which correspond, to their religious group was questioned. By means of a through analysis of the online inter-faith dialogue, Tarlo recognized certain recurrent topics of discussion such as: the value of modesty as a female attribute; gender differentation; sex only within marriage and the idea of attractiveness versus the ‘sexiness’ of fashions.

Transporting the audience to the US, the day’s conversation was joined by Barbara Carrel, from the City University of New York, who focused on New York based community of Hassidic women in her research. This very interesting group of women have strong shopping habits and, although their outfits may look like they are ‘all the same’ to outsiders, a rich variety of embellishments can be found in the way they adorn themselves. The Bobover women were carefully studied by Carrel, who managed to analyze their dress code in contrast with secular fashion and also on contrast with other orthodox Jewish groups. The modest dressing regulations, in this case, contribute not only aesthetically to the formation of a group identity, but also mark a form of protection towards the ‘dangers’ of a secular society which lives by a distinct ethos. A negotiation of fashion, taste, tradition and faith is constant in the life of a Bobover woman, who will chose to adapt (or not) certain mass produced garments and reestablish the rules of dressing in faith.

A round up of online forums and an analysis of what sort of questions and interaction is being presented within their scope was read by the researcher Jane Cameron. As an online ethnographer, she spotted recurrent themes in order to clarify the motivations behind dressing modestly. Supported by the anonymity of the internet, women from all sorts of religious and non-religious backgrounds discuss the ‘level’ of modesty of certain garments, swap tips on how to cover yourself or how to be an example to your children whilst exchanging judgment over the most varied current issues which relate to modesty, in general."

Last but not least, Daniel Miller, from UCL, came into de debate to share facts of his ongoing research on denim and connect it with the event’s theme of modesty. Undressing - if this term is allowed here- the semiotic and cultural aspects of denim through history and across the globe, the orthodox Jewish prohibition of the material was explored. For its property of blurring, if not eliminating completely, distinction of class/gender/age and so on, the fabric is seen as a threat to a community that thrives on maintaining itself distinguished from secular people and other group not just in faith, but symbolically as well.

At the very end, we were joined by designers Shellie Slade and Hana Tajima-Simpson founders of Mod Bod and Maysaa UK respectively, in an interesting juxtaposition of academics & their ‘object’ of study. The public had the opportunity to listen to and ask questions to both of the very successful modest fashion professionals, who rose with the internet and still use it as a main platform to express their ideas of faith and creativity.

The discussion, surely, did not come to an end with the closure of the event. Quite the opposite, Mediating Modesty opened the doors of reflection and enticed further debating and thinking over this important contemporary phenomenon.

Ana Carolina Minozzo is a Brazilian-born and London based writer and fashion researcher. She is finishing her BA at the London College of Fashion whilst working as a journalist and working on her first novel.

Fashion Projects and Other News

by Francesca Granata

This upcoming fall, I will be starting a new post at Parsons the New School for Design as Assistant Professor in the School of Art and Design History and Theory.

If anyone is interested in finding out more about the school, its faculty and their impressive new MA Fashion Studies program, please visit the school’s and program’s sites respectively.

Additionally, Fashion Projects is thrilled to announce that our new print issue -- on the topic of fashion criticism -- is underway. It will feature interviews with Suzy Menkes, Robin Givhan, Judith Thurman and many others…so please stay tuned!

A Conversation with Matthew Teitelbaum of the AGO about Art and Fashion

Matthew Teitelbaum, Director and CEO of the Art Gallery of Ontario

Matthew Teitelbaum is the Art Gallery of Ontario's Michael and Sonja Koerner Director and CEO. Matthew joined the AGO in 1993 as chief curator and was appointed director in 1998. Born in Toronto in 1956, he holds an honours bachelor of arts in Canadian history from Carleton University, a master of philosophy in modern European painting and sculpture from the Courtauld Institute of Art, and an honorary Doctor of Laws from Queen's University. He has taught at Harvard, York University and the University of Western Ontario, and has lectured across North America.

Mr. Teitelbaum met with Ingrid Mida, artist and writer, in his office on July 18, 2011 to have a conversation about art and fashion. This is a condensed and edited version of their conversation.

Ingrid Mida: I recently interviewed Nathalie Bondil, Director and Chief Curator of the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, who initiated the exhibition of Jean Paul Gaultier.  We had a long conversation about fashion and art, and she was adamant that fashion should be considered art.  The MMFA has exhibited Yves Saint Laurent, Denis Gagnon and Jean Paul Gaultier as  contemporary artists. How do you view the presentation of fashion as art?

Matthew Teitelbaum: I’m not going to give you a contrary view per se. I can give you an institutional view. It is fine for Nathalie to take that position and I have no argument with the position, except the following which is: you make decisions about your programming based on whether you want it to or whether it should relate to the strength of the collection. She has made the decision to commit to this as a programming initiative notwithstanding the fact that she doesn’t have a [costume] collection and doesn’t have a curator. And that’s fine. We are not so inclined. In fact, we are feeling even more strongly than we ever have that programming should come from the core part of our identity which is our collection and where our staff actually have expertise. We don’t have any particular staff expertise in this area. Anything we did would be more or less a borrowed exposition. That doesn’t mean that we haven’t quite consistently included fashion and clothing in our exhibitions. We do it a lot. We did it in the Catherine the Great exhibition; we did it in the Tissot exhibition where we worked closely with the Royal Ontario Museum to borrow period dress; and we did a great Warhol exhibition about Andy Warhol and fashion about ten years ago or so. As a category, it is not that we are allergic to it or don’t agree with it, or think that it has space, and maybe we can even agree that it would drive audiences, but I don’t actually think that we in the AGO can create strength in our institution without building on what we know, what we have, and where our expertise is.

Ingrid Mida:  In Paris there is an exhibition in which clothing designed by Madame Gres has been placed amongst the sculptures of Musee Bourdelle. This created an interesting interplay between the objects of the museum and the work of a fashion designer. Would you ever consider something like that?

Matthew Teitelbaum: Sure. I say sure in that regards to an animation strategy. It hasn’t come up. It is resource heavy to do that. Again, you are talking about a museum doing that by borrowing fashion. It is a nice idea. I don’t think that anyone has ever come to us with that idea.  That is one thing to do and you certainly could do that. At one time, we explored the idea of getting someone to do an audio tour of our collection with a commentary on dress or design. You could do that interpretative stream or you could bring fashion in as sculpture pieces in relation to [art] sculpture. There is no reason not to do it. One would want to do it in the right way, at the right time.

Ingrid Mida: Have you seen the McQueen exhibition at the Met?

Matthew Teitelbaum: No.

Ingrid Mida: That’s a shame. That particular exhibition is one of the strongest examples of a fashion designer as a contemporary artist. The underlying precepts of life/death, good/evil, light/dark and wonder/terror are also sources of inspiration for artists. They were effectively presented as a complete installation with sound, light, and video. It was a really comprehensive and beautiful exhibition that focused on the concept of McQueen as Romantic Hero and the idea of the sublime. (Read the exhibition review of Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty here.)

Matthew Teitelbaum: Maybe I should try and go see that.  Is it going elsewhere?

Ingrid Mida: No it is not. That’s it. There is also an incredible exhibition catalogue that doesn’t have installation photos but the book offers another level of presentation in that the clothing was photographed on live models wearing white body makeup. The photographer then manipulated the photos to cut off their heads and give them articulated joints. It was another creative enterprise added onto the exhibition itself. The Met seemed to take the exhibition of fashion to a whole other level. Fashion as art seems to be taking over the museum world.

Matthew Teitelbaum: Partly because it is so seductive. Audiences come for that.

Ingrid Mida: Isn’t attracting audiences an important part of your job? Wasn't your presentation of King Tut a drive for audiences?

Matthew Teitelbaum: King Tut was a similar initiative where we didn’t build on the strengths of the institution, maybe going off brand or whatever that means. As successful as it was in introducing the institution,  it is an open question on how active that is in developing sustainable audiences. And again, one might say that about fashion exhibitions. You can slam your fist down and say that fashion is art and make a compelling case for that and I wouldn’t necessarily argue against it. Whether or not you can integrate into your program something that is meaningful and makes sense for the institution is another question. And I think that there are plenty of artists in the traditional visual arts sense who would argue pretty strongly that it [fashion] is not art and might not be so pleased to have a mannequin next to their work.

Ingrid Mida: Isn’t that always a balance between the artist and the audience, because many people don’t find contemporary art accessible. They just don’t get it in a way that they might understand a piece of clothing because they can more readily relate to the clothing as an expression of their identity.

Matthew Teitelbaum: I think that is worth having an active conversation about.

Ingrid Mida: That's why I'm here.

Matthew Teitelbaum: Right. Fashion is seductive. Of course it is seductive. And you are right to ask the question, doesn’t it matter that people want to see Alexander McQueen? Of course it matters. But it is seductive. You could use that argument to justify a whole year of fashion exhibitions, designer exhibitions, why not?  I think it is harder to calibrate and strategise in the context of a really popular field because it is so seductive than it would be to calibrate for things that are hard to fight for. That’s how I look at it. I’m interested in fighting for the artist. I’m not implying that Jean Paul Gaultier’s world doesn’t connect with the world of visual artists.

Ingrid Mida: Did you know that Gaultier said that fashion is not art. That was what part of my conversation with Nathalie Bondil was about. How can you present the work of a fashion designer does not believe his own work is art?

Matthew Teitelbaum: And what was her answer?

Ingrid Mida: She said he can have his own ideas and she can present his work as an artist. She said she thought it was important for a museum to present objects that people could engage with.  She said that his couture garments are works of art because there is so much craftsmanship and skill involved. Plus the only way that a regular person could ever see such a thing was to present these items as works of art. And then she went on to talk about elevating the clothing to reflect the message underlying his work, which was that beauty has no singular standard of size, age, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. They created these new kind of animated mannequins that are effectively video sculptures of faces. The mannequins were based on real people’s heads and a video is projected onto the face to create the illusion that they are talking and which convey the messages and themes underlying Gaultier'swork. (Read the complete interview with Nathalie Bondil here.)

Matthew Teitelbaum: You know, I’m much less engaged by the question of whether or not something is art but instead whether or not it is good.

Ingrid Mida: How do you define it if is good?

Matthew Teitelbaum: You have a confrontation with the work and it has meaning.  There is a point of view and a system of value in the work and a language that articulates something about the world in which we live. Which is why a De Kooning painting from 1952 will always be more important than a painting that looks like a De Kooning but is from 1982. There is a point of view and a value system that is very specific to the point in time in which it is made. You could make an intellectual argument that the individual prototypes of haute couture are works of art compared to the mass production line. There is a point of view of the artist and a discovery about that point of view that is specific to that object. But then the question is: are you actually engaging with somebody who wants to engage with the world by talking about the piece that way? Which is what artists do – talk about the objects that they made as having meaning and representing a point of view. That is where I have some hesitation and why I’m not so quick to say that Jean Paul Gaultier is an artist. What he is saying is that I am not related to the world as an artist making art objects. He might be relating to the world as someone with a creative temperament or somebody who has an artistic idea but it sounds like he is not relating to the world as an artist. That interests me and that is a problem for me. That is a hesitation for me. That’s not to say I don’t admire the achievement or the high creative achievement. Maybe somewhere in there is the reason I don’t think it is art the same way that art is art.

Ingrid Mida is a writer, artist and researcher who is inspired by the boundary between fashion and art. In October, she will be the keynote speaker at the Costume Society of America Mid-west Regional Conference talking about her art practice and the intersection of fashion and art.

On Kunsthåndverk: An Interview with Franz Schmidt and Charlotte Bik Bandlien

by Mae Colburn

Mae Colburn: How would you explain the word kunsthåndverk in English?

Franz Schmidt: It’s the Norwegian term for the crafts area.  Kunsthåndverk: arts and crafts.  ‘Articraft,’ directly translated.

Charlotte Bik Bandlien: It’s articraft versus artifact.

Schmidt and Bandlien presented an interesting play on words, especially in light of the fact that the Norwegian word artig – which to my American ears sounds exactly like ‘arti’ – translates to  ‘fun’ in Norwegian (a witty, though perhaps trivial connection).

I met artist Franz Schmidt and anthropologist Charlotte Bik Bandlien at a café on a busy street corner in Oslo several weeks back with the goal of formulating a loose English definition of the Norwegian term kunsthåndverk.  Schmidt, who describes himself as a kunsthåndverker, is perhaps best known throughout Norway for his work at Sjolingstad Woolen Mills, where he reproduced a series of archival textile samples.  His work is part of what appears to be a renewed interest in industrial textile production in Norway’s largely post-industrial landscape.  Bandlien is an anthropologist with a specialization in material culture.  Together, Schmidt, Bandlien, and I explored the contours of art, craft, and the textile industry within the context of Schmidt’s work.

MC: Could you provide a brief description of your background, Franz?

FS: I’m educated as a men’s tailor here in Oslo and I worked with costumes for two years before I applied to the Oslo National Academy of The Arts, where I studied one year at the fashion and costume department and then transferred to the textile department.  I started weaving quite late [in my studies] on a handloom, but I decided that I didn’t want to leave the school without knowing a craft, so I continued.

MC: How did you become involved with the mill?

FS: I was supposed to work with a small mill that was operating here in Oslo just after I finished my education and I went to Sjolingstad to get the basic information that I needed to run the mill here [in Oslo].  I fell in love with the place and ended up staying for two years.   The last project I did there was called Rekonstruksjoner in Norwegian – Reconstructions.  I reproduced material originally produced at Sjolingstad in the 1930s and, in collaboration with designer Siv So Hee Stenaa, made contemporary garments.  I found the original sample books in the archives at Sjolingstad and spent quite a long time studying the quality of the threads and the technical aspects to be able to produce them again.

MC: Could you describe the way the factory looks, feels, the colors, noises, smells.

FS: It’s situated in a valley just outside Mandal, as far down as you can go in Norway.  There were only two farms there before the man that started the business in 1894 decided that he wanted to build a mill.  It became a village with a shop and a post office and of course the electricity for the mill was possible because of the river that ran through the valley.  It’s quite a beautiful old brick building and you can find the original looms and technical equipment from as far back as 1910.   It’s now partly a museum and partly a small commercial business.  Because they are a museum, they have the responsibility to maintain the machines and the original atmosphere at the mill, but they also need to produce to generate some income.  Because they can’t replace old machinery, it’s a matter of finding the right balance between using and preserving the machinery [that is there].  That would destroy the museum.

MC: From what I understand you worked specifically with a mechanized Italian loom dating from the early 20th century.  What’s it like to work on a piece of machinery like that?

FS: You have to be very – tentative.  That’s perhaps not the right word, but it’s a personal relationship.  [The machine] has an individual voice.  It has a soul, so it’s a kind of friendship.  That’s the easiest way to describe it.

CBB: You could also describe how you feared it wouldn’t work out…

FS: That’s true.  I used that loom to make cloth for a suit, thinner than the regular quality they make at Sjolingstad, and that specific loom hadn’t been used to make [suiting] for a long time.  The yarn was quite thin and I was worried that the loom would be too tough, but when I started working on it, it was – and this is what Charlotte was talking about – it was like a homecoming for the machine because it is actually meant to handle that quality of yarn.  Every worry I had evaporated.

MC: This is a good segue into something that I’d like to ask both of you about.  Considering the largely deindustrialized nature of the Norwegian landscape, how does the industrial equipment at Sjolingstad fit into the context of contemporary textile production?

CBB: I think it’s interesting how the whole sphere of handicraft has been expanded to involve this sort of small-scale old-fashioned industry.  It’s all becoming part of [a set of] alternatives to industrial production.   What we’ve seen is a movement from a semiotic approach towards material culture to a reorientation towards materiality itself.   We currently relate to fabrics and clothing mainly as symbolic exchangeable fast fashion.  Now, due to "symbolic inflation," we need new strategies to uphold social distinction, to be exclusive, and that’s why we see this reorientation toward materiality.  It’s linked to an article by Alfred Gell called The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment of Technology, which is about this kind of dynamic: the thrill related to skill and knowledge of machinery adds value to objects. […] What’s interesting about Franz’ work is the notion of the archive; he has these small knowledge hubs, the type of knowledge that is currently being revalued.

MC: Because this is an oral interview, I’m curious whether you could provide verbal descriptions of the textile reconstructions you’ve produced.  As Charlotte mentioned, it’s a knowledge hub that you’ve worked quite hard to cultivate.

FS: The fabric that I reconstructed was quite a coarse fabric.  It’s hard, stiff; it’s not very soft.  It was meant to last for a lifetime.  I can easily visualize a young man buying a suit and thinking to himself ‘Now I have this suit for my entire life.’  I find it quite interesting to work with [historical] materials because it says something about the time and about how our perspective has changed.

CBB: Historically, Norwegian wool was considered too fine and now it’s considered too coarse because what we consider our ‘ideal’ material and tactile experience has changed.  A return to longer-lasting material is obviously a new tendency; durable, unique, environmentally sound materials are now really the only option in producing distinction and exclusiveness.

FS: […] I think it’s time for my area.  Everything we’ve been talking about now is part of the discussion.  You have a scale.  It’s like stages in a continuum.  You have brukskunst, which is the closest to industrial production, and that overlaps with areas of the kunsthåndverk field, which is more – as you say – small-scale unique one-off pieces.  And then that overlaps with design and fine art.  But we’re all using similar tools.

Mae Colburn is an independent textile researcher and writer and professional seamstress based in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Franz Schmidt is a textile artist and chair of the board of Oslo’s Format gallery, a space owned by the Norwegian Association of Arts and Crafts and devoted exclusively to developing the craft sector in Norway.  A recipient of the 2006 Kunsthåndverk prize, Franz begin the The Norwegian Artistic Research Fellowship Program this coming fall.

Charlotte Bik Bandlien is an Oslo-based anthropologist with a focus on material culture. Her thesis examined the notion of ‘retro’ and she has a background in both visual communication and trend analysis.  Bandlien is a contributing editor to Personae, a Norwegian fashion journal. She currently teaches design theory at Oslo National Academy of the Arts.

Lecture at the Benaki Museum, Athens, July 8

Pyuupiru, Mercury Planetaria, 2001

On July 8th, I will be speaking and giving a tour at the Benaki Museum in Athens, in conjunction with the exhibition "ARRRGH! Monsters in Fashion." The lecture is based on an article that I recently wrote titled “Decentering Fashion: Carnival, Performance and the Grotesque Body,” to be published in the upcomingNot a Toy: Radical Character Design in Fashion and Costume (Atopos and Pictoplasma, September 2011).

“ARRRGH! Monsters in Fashion” includes contemporary designers whose work questions aesthetic norms, particularly bodily norms, by making reference to contemporary characters. It is curated by Vassilis Zinadiakis, creative director of ATOPOS, a nonprofit based in Athens, for the exploration of contemporary visual culture. The visit is made possible by the American Embassy in Athens.

So please do come and say hello in the chance you are there (here are the details)!

Francesca