(Top left) Readings (2008) s/s
(Below left) a chandelier for the swarovski crystal palace installation. it is an airplane wing, balancing against a wall.
when its large wing flap moves, a long strip of swarovski
crystals are illuminated by LEDs (2006).
Afterwords (2000) 
Afterwords (2000)
Afterwords (2000)All images from www.designboom.com
Hussein Chalayan is an artist and designer, working in film, dress and installation art. Research Chalayan’s work, and then consider these questions in some thoughtful reflective writing.
1. Chalayan’s works in clothing, like Afterwords (2000) and Burka (1996) , are often challenging to both the viewer and the wearer. What are your personal responses to these works? Are Afterwords and Burka fashion, or are they art? What is the difference?
I think Afterwords(2000) is a great work. The idea of clothing changes to living room; chairs become suitcases and tables become skirts, is quite innovative and interesting. I admire his imagination and courage to create something new. I also love his work with LED lights on clothes in his 2008 s/s collection. However I do not like Burka(1996) it is just too radical for me. I understand enough that he is saying about women in Iran who are demanded to dress burqa, but I do not think that Iranian women would appreciate how Hussein Chalayan refers their custom.
I think both of his work, Burka and afterwords satisfy both categories of fashion and art but I think they are more close to fashion. In Britanica Consise Encyclopedia defines fashion as “Any mode of dressing or adornment that is popular during a particular time or in a particular place.” Burka(1996) and Afterwords(2000) collection are not for actual wear but they still consider human body in their work and they somehow enhance or show body.
Not all clothing is fashion, so what makes fashion fashion?
The key point for fashion is whether the dressing or adornment is popular for particular time or place. If a clothing is popular among a group of people in an area or during particular time then it is fashion, otherwise it is not.
2. Chalayan has strong links to industry. Pieces like The Level Tunnel (2006) and Repose (2006) are made in collaboration with, and paid for by, commercial business; in these cases, a vodka company and a crystal manufacturer. How does this impact on the nature of Chalayan’s work? Does the meaning of art change when it is used to sell products? Is it still art?
Those works mention above would have brought more attention and fame for Chalayan and therefore his repertoire would have gain more recognition. For example, due to The Level Tunnel (2006) he proved himself he can be as good in installation design field as he is in fashion. Also I think the collaboration is good thing. It promotes each other’s reputations like Swarovski and Hussein Chalayan. I think his works are still art because they are made to be aesthetically beautiful and made to be sake of art. I do not agree that the meaning of art change when it is used to sell product because its purpose for existence do not change, to be aesthetically pleasing. I also understand that due to the commercial purpose there could be lack of Chalayan’s personal idea or statement but it does not mean that the meaning of art in the work is gone because the purpose of being asthetically beautiful is not affected.
3. Chalayan’s film Absent Presence screened at the 2005 Venice Biennale. It features the process of caring for worn clothes, and retrieving and analysing the traces of the wearer, in the form of DNA. This work has been influenced by many different art movements; can you think of some, and in what ways they might have inspired Chalayan’s approach?
I think Chalayan is inspired by DNA art. “The world's original DNA Art portraits printed on canvas as personalized artwork from your DNA and fingerprints.” (www.dna11.com) But in Chalayan’s work he used DNA as the direct metaphor of identity and discuss the issue of certain identities adaption to a new environment.
It is very interesting that how he thought about the issue that are so common around us. This work also includes me when it talks about the adaption of new place as the same to my own experience. I admire his idea to talk about this in such a interesting way that uses fashion. This is some description for his work.
Chalayan opens the argument on how certain identities can or cannot adapt to new environments and generates a research based narration for his cross-disciplined installation with filmic images and sculptures. There is a serious research behind the end product displaying the interplay of the real and the imagined with a series of collected clothes and deformed crystallized garments. A DNA extraction process from the clothes collected from unknown people, an anthropological evaluation, and a 3 D manipulation all treated through the London sound-scape as the environment reveals the approach of Chalayan to the dilemma of identity. (http://www.e-flux.com/shows/view/2032)
Hussein Chalayan, still from Absent Presence, 2005 (motion picture)
4. Many of Chalayan’s pieces are physically designed and constructed by someone else; for example, sculptor Lone Sigurdsson made some works from Chalayan’s Echoform (1999) and Before Minus Now (2000) fashion ranges. In fashion design this is standard practice, but in art it remains unexpected. Work by artists such as Jackson Pollock hold their value in the fact that he personally made the painting. Contrastingly, Andy Warhol’s pop art was largely produced in a New York collective called The Factory, and many of his silk-screened works were produced by assistants. Contemporarily, Damien Hirst doesn’t personally build his vitrines or preserve the sharks himself. So when and why is it important that the artist personally made the piece?
Well I think the issue around is whether we should value craftsmanship in art or not anymore. I think the artists do not necessarily make their work by their own hands. The most important thing is the idea that brings out the final product and I think that is where the artists’ soul present. Nevertheless people still want the art made by its artist and sometimes value artists who create his own art solely by himself. I reckon this is because people still want to see some artisans and their spirit.
Reference List
Hussein Chalayan. (n.d.) Retrieved August 29,2010 from http://www.designboom.com/eng/interview/chalayan.html
Hussein Chalayan at the design museum (2009). Retrieved August 29, 2010 from http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/8/view/5209/hussein-chalayan-at-the-design-museum.html
DNA art (n.d.) Retrieved August 29, 2010 from www.dna11.com
Pavilion of Turkey, 51st Venice Biennale (2005). Retrieved August 29, 2010 from
http://www.e-flux.com/shows/view/2032
Regine. (2005) Hussein Chalayan. Retrieved August 29, 2010 from http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2005/10/his-autumnwinte.php
Hussein Chalayan is an artist and designer, working in film, dress and installation art. Research Chalayan’s work, and then consider these questions in some thoughtful reflective writing.
1. Chalayan’s works in clothing, like Afterwords (2000) and Burka (1996) , are often challenging to both the viewer and the wearer. What are your personal responses to these works? Are Afterwords and Burka fashion, or are they art? What is the difference?
I think Afterwords(2000) is a great work. The idea of clothing changes to living room; chairs become suitcases and tables become skirts, is quite innovative and interesting. I admire his imagination and courage to create something new. I also love his work with LED lights on clothes in his 2008 s/s collection. However I do not like Burka(1996) it is just too radical for me. I understand enough that he is saying about women in Iran who are demanded to dress burqa, but I do not think that Iranian women would appreciate how Hussein Chalayan refers their custom.
I think both of his work, Burka and afterwords satisfy both categories of fashion and art but I think they are more close to fashion. In Britanica Consise Encyclopedia defines fashion as “Any mode of dressing or adornment that is popular during a particular time or in a particular place.” Burka(1996) and Afterwords(2000) collection are not for actual wear but they still consider human body in their work and they somehow enhance or show body.
Not all clothing is fashion, so what makes fashion fashion?
The key point for fashion is whether the dressing or adornment is popular for particular time or place. If a clothing is popular among a group of people in an area or during particular time then it is fashion, otherwise it is not.
2. Chalayan has strong links to industry. Pieces like The Level Tunnel (2006) and Repose (2006) are made in collaboration with, and paid for by, commercial business; in these cases, a vodka company and a crystal manufacturer. How does this impact on the nature of Chalayan’s work? Does the meaning of art change when it is used to sell products? Is it still art?
Those works mention above would have brought more attention and fame for Chalayan and therefore his repertoire would have gain more recognition. For example, due to The Level Tunnel (2006) he proved himself he can be as good in installation design field as he is in fashion. Also I think the collaboration is good thing. It promotes each other’s reputations like Swarovski and Hussein Chalayan. I think his works are still art because they are made to be aesthetically beautiful and made to be sake of art. I do not agree that the meaning of art change when it is used to sell product because its purpose for existence do not change, to be aesthetically pleasing. I also understand that due to the commercial purpose there could be lack of Chalayan’s personal idea or statement but it does not mean that the meaning of art in the work is gone because the purpose of being asthetically beautiful is not affected.
3. Chalayan’s film Absent Presence screened at the 2005 Venice Biennale. It features the process of caring for worn clothes, and retrieving and analysing the traces of the wearer, in the form of DNA. This work has been influenced by many different art movements; can you think of some, and in what ways they might have inspired Chalayan’s approach?
I think Chalayan is inspired by DNA art. “The world's original DNA Art portraits printed on canvas as personalized artwork from your DNA and fingerprints.” (www.dna11.com) But in Chalayan’s work he used DNA as the direct metaphor of identity and discuss the issue of certain identities adaption to a new environment.
It is very interesting that how he thought about the issue that are so common around us. This work also includes me when it talks about the adaption of new place as the same to my own experience. I admire his idea to talk about this in such a interesting way that uses fashion. This is some description for his work.
Chalayan opens the argument on how certain identities can or cannot adapt to new environments and generates a research based narration for his cross-disciplined installation with filmic images and sculptures. There is a serious research behind the end product displaying the interplay of the real and the imagined with a series of collected clothes and deformed crystallized garments. A DNA extraction process from the clothes collected from unknown people, an anthropological evaluation, and a 3 D manipulation all treated through the London sound-scape as the environment reveals the approach of Chalayan to the dilemma of identity. (http://www.e-flux.com/shows/view/2032)
Hussein Chalayan, still from Absent Presence, 2005 (motion picture)
4. Many of Chalayan’s pieces are physically designed and constructed by someone else; for example, sculptor Lone Sigurdsson made some works from Chalayan’s Echoform (1999) and Before Minus Now (2000) fashion ranges. In fashion design this is standard practice, but in art it remains unexpected. Work by artists such as Jackson Pollock hold their value in the fact that he personally made the painting. Contrastingly, Andy Warhol’s pop art was largely produced in a New York collective called The Factory, and many of his silk-screened works were produced by assistants. Contemporarily, Damien Hirst doesn’t personally build his vitrines or preserve the sharks himself. So when and why is it important that the artist personally made the piece?
Well I think the issue around is whether we should value craftsmanship in art or not anymore. I think the artists do not necessarily make their work by their own hands. The most important thing is the idea that brings out the final product and I think that is where the artists’ soul present. Nevertheless people still want the art made by its artist and sometimes value artists who create his own art solely by himself. I reckon this is because people still want to see some artisans and their spirit.
Reference List
Hussein Chalayan. (n.d.) Retrieved August 29,2010 from http://www.designboom.com/eng/interview/chalayan.html
Hussein Chalayan at the design museum (2009). Retrieved August 29, 2010 from http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/8/view/5209/hussein-chalayan-at-the-design-museum.html
DNA art (n.d.) Retrieved August 29, 2010 from www.dna11.com
Pavilion of Turkey, 51st Venice Biennale (2005). Retrieved August 29, 2010 from
http://www.e-flux.com/shows/view/2032
Regine. (2005) Hussein Chalayan. Retrieved August 29, 2010 from http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2005/10/his-autumnwinte.php
Hussein Chalayan does have some pretty great works with that i do agree but what i dont really agree on is how the artist's soul is present in the final product. If he actually got with the work and got his hands dirty, then yes. But the difference to a product of mass production and a product of art is the 'magic touch' of which the consumer looks for. For example; $2 store item = no soul no passion, Art store = soul and passion into work.
ReplyDeleteI agree your posting. When I saw his Afterwords at first time, I was really interested that it can use both the cloth and table. Afterwords which is table skirt, is very very fun and unconventional thing. Moreover, I was surprised about his Burka because it can be bic issue in the world. He changed Burka which is religion of a country, strong belief and ceremony resolutely as fashion.
ReplyDeleteI think afterwords can look fashion because Chalayan made the skirt and we could see it which was worn by model on runway but Burka it isn't fashion I think. it is just expression of belief or rule like law. People who don't live Iran or don't have same nationality, can't understand Burka and it can't be fashion to them. I think Burka disturbs our expression of fashion and individual freedom, instead.
I also think that his works are still art. Even though his works used as business purpose, when people see his works if they feel good or fun it can be art. Moreover if he considered about some essential elements esthetically, his works can be still art.