A lobster, a divorcee and a dress: the complex relationship between fashion and art
London, United Kingdom
It seems quite surreal to say that many histories of the relationship between art and fashion start with a lobster, a divorcee and a dress. Then again it wasn’t just any lobster and it wasn’t just any divorcee because the divorcee was at the centre of the biggest scandal to hit the British monarchy in the 20th century and as for the lobster - that was drawn by one of the most famous artists of the age, surreal indeed. In 1937, the socialite Wallis Simpson was engaged to the recently abdicated Edward VII who had chosen to give up the crown to marry her. She was perhaps the most famous divorcee in the world, deeply unpopular in Britain due to her role is Edward’s abdication. That is why in May of that year she found herself posing for Cecil Beaton for a feature in vogue - she wanted to send a signal she symbolised a bold new way of thinking compared to the traditionalist British establishment that rejected her. The dress she chose to wear was in many ways just as bold as the two time divorcee that had brought down a monarch, it was a collaboration between the legendary Italian fashion designer Elsa Schiaparelli and the great surrealist painter Salvador Dali who painted the lobster onto the white dress - Wallis Simpson would make it iconic. Along with Picasso’s costume designs for the Ballets Russes, Dali and Schiaparelli’s collaborations are the most iconic and perhaps the best of the collaborations between art and fashion in the first half of the 21st century. The shining example of how, when combined, art and fashion can create pieces which blur the lines between the two disciplines to create pieces that would be as suited to a museum as to a catwalk.
“But the collection itself was a bastardisation of Mondrian, whilst it paid tribute to the art itself it failed to respect it’s message”
Since then more and more collaborations between fashion houses and artists have proved commercial successes, some too have produced clothes just as iconic as Dali’s dress. Alexander McQueen’s 2013 collaboration with Damian Hirst, Marc Jacobs collaborations with Daniel Burren & Takashi Murakami for Louis Vuitton and Kanye West’s collaboration with Vanessa Beecroft were all groundbreaking in their own right and earned praise in both the fashion and art worlds. Artists have long inspired fashion designers none more so than Andy Warhol whose work was further immortalised by Gianni Versace’s pop art collection in 1991. But here too can lie a problem art often tells a story and has a message - think Picasso’s Guernica, collaborations between fashion houses and artists allow for clothes to be produced that honour the artistic integrity of the artist, pieces inspired by art can often undermine it. One of the most successful and iconic collections inspired by art is Yves Saint Laurent’s 1965 collection of six summer dresses adapted from Piet Mondrian’s grids. The ‘Mondrian Collection’, Saint Laurent’s homage to Piet Mondrian, is amongst his most famous designs and most successful shows so much so it led to him being named “the king of Paris'' by WWD and the dress being labelled ‘the dress of tomorrow’ in Harper’s Bazaar, American Vogue’ perhaps summed it up best calling it simply “the best collection.” But the collection itself was a bastardisation of Mondrian, whilst it paid tribute to the art itself it failed to respect it’s message. Mondrian believed art could free the world from a growing dependence on disposable objects, Saint Laurent created them. Mondrian lived an austere life, he saw value in simplicity, Saint Laurent designed luxury clothes, he was the pinnacle of high fashion, his Mondrian collection respected the art itself but not it’s message.
“Fashion on the other hand is defined by trends, in many ways the word itself has become synonymous with trend, fashion is seasonal, often temporary, disposable as clothes themselves go in and out of fashion”
Here lies the great tension between art and fashion, artists hope to create pieces that are timeless, works that will hang in museums or houses long after the artist is gone, they are not interested in following trends or setting them in fact as Kelly Grovier puts it their purpose is to create work “that transcends trend.” Fashion on the other hand is defined by trends, in many ways the word itself has become synonymous with trend, fashion is seasonal, often temporary, disposable as clothes themselves go in and out of fashion. Yes fashion just like art is often worn to be admired but it is first and foremost made to be worn. Thus when art and fashion come together you are often left with a tension between form and function, between artistic integrity and commercialisation. That said, in recent years modern art has increasingly embraced transience, artistic prints can be mass produced like clothing collections in a way that simply wasn’t possible a century ago. Graffiti is often defined by its impermanence. Pop art has blended high art and popular culture and revelled in the mass production of its work, so much so that Versace saw Warhol as his soulmate due to their shared obsession with popular culture. So in an age of fast fashion and commercialised art it is perhaps no surprise that we are seeing more and more collaborations between artists and fashion houses yet the question of whether fashion diminishes art, if it renders the timeless temporary will remain.
By Samson Royston, April 2020
