3/15/2024 0 Comments James charles mlst naked outfits![]() How James Charles publicly addressed the situation (mediate statement, social media post, etc.).Īny legal steps taken by James Charles or his legal team in response to the alleged leak. ![]() The date on which the alleged leak was reported or discovered. Photograph: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.Overview of the incident (if such an event occurred) where private images were allegedly leaked. It reproduces the male gaze.”Ībove: Charles James’s Clover Leaf ball gown, from 1953. (I suspect that my own base impulse to breeze through a museum fashion show with an imaginary shopping cart isn’t unique.) But James himself might have agreed with Atre, that “the camera’s languor is sexy. The films, Diller says, “are more abstract than the animations” they treat the clothes as objects of contemplation, rather than of desire. At first, it resembles a column of ants, then a pulled suture. A line of tiny hand stitches, stressed by wear, gives you a creepy feeling. To watch the films, you turn your back on the exhibits (though many hurried people didn’t bother to.) It takes a minute to realize that what you are looking at is the giant blowup of a zigzag dart, the ribbing of a faille lapel, the arcing seam of a sleeve. They magnified the signature detail of a garment by panning its surface in extreme closeup then projecting the image, enlarged by several thousand per cent, on the black walls of the gallery’s perimeter. To slow the eye down, the architects tricked it. So Liz said, ‘Let’s slow down the viewer’s eye.’ ” “There are fifty pieces densely clustered in a relatively small space, and you might walk by them quickly, without noticing what makes them so special. “The subtlety of the tailoring rewards a much closer look,” Atre said. These designs are less showy than the ball gowns upstairs, but, in many cases, more radically modern. James the avant-gardist is represented, in the basement galleries, by his early spiral wrap dresses, his slinky evening clothes of the thirties, and his postwar daywear. When the digital renderings were complete, we reduced their detail to the essential.” (James sometimes spent years perfecting a single garment.) “We bought fabric to get the feel of his process. The effort took many months and was, like the couture itself, labor intensive. The first step was to map its surface using a handheld, 3-D laser scanner with stereo vision, “a common surveying tool,” Atre said, that “sweeps the planes of an object from two vantage points and triangulates them.” The hidden infrastructure-layers of boning and padding-“was studied by X-ray and by micrograph, amplified by a lot of old-fashioned measurement and observation.” Koda and his cocurator, Jan Reeder, helped the architects to identify the most innovative aspect of a particular dress-its labial folds, its cross-section cutting, its quirky asymmetries-and that became “our narrative focus,” Diller said. The team established a database for each dress. ![]() ![]() It is a closer encounter with couture than one usually has at a museum, but, Diller said, “we felt the clothes also needed an analytic perspective, and we decided on computer models that would dramatize the complexity you can’t see.” ![]() You can circle the gowns completely-mingle with them, in effect, as if the mannequins were your fellow-guests at a gala. The James show, Liz Diller told me in a conference call with her colleague Kumar Atre, was the firm’s first fashion project, “but we always start with the same basic question when we’re working in a museum environment: How do we mediate the viewer’s relation to the artifact?” They staged James’s grand ball gowns of the late nineteen-forties and fifties-the Swan, the Tree, the Umbrella, and the Clover Leaf, among others-in the first-floor gallery, at eye level, on low pedestals. They resemble those time-lapse studies that show the development of a flower, a butterfly, or a fetus, and they are a new way to understand not only the process of dressmaking but also the nature of visual intelligence. The architects produced twenty-seven digital animations-“micro-movies,” as Liz Diller calls them-that break the garments down into their pattern pieces then recompose them dynamically. Mutilation is frowned on at the Met, but the partners at Diller Scofidio + Renfro, who created the installation, devised an elegant alternative. As Harold Koda, the cocurator of the show, told me last winter, you have to dissect the clothes to understand their anatomy. There is another aspect to the mystery of James’s couture: its construction. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |