Showing posts with label fashion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fashion. Show all posts

Buy NAU before it's gone!

Tags | | | | |

When Nau came onto the fashion scene a few years ago, it appeared to be an even higher end, more exclusive PataGucci-type urban-outdoor hybrid fashion house, with an emphasis on urban style and sustainably sourced materials. Those of us who went to the compostmodern conference this year remember hearing Mark Galbraith, VP of Product Design, answer tough questions about why they grew their organic cotton in Turkey and manufactured their clothing in Thailand. (It turns out that Turkey is the world's largest supplier of organic cotton--a burgeoning industry initially launched by demand from companies like Nike and Patagonia--and that Thai textile companies were the first to develop ways to process organic cotton.)

What I wondered from the beginning, though, was whether Nau could survive with sustainability as its only real point-of-view. They attempted to come out with some unique designs, but weren't innovative enough in this department to justify the cost of their products. They sat the fence between functionality versus style, and with the slowing economy this ambiguity is likely a major cause of their failure to generate sufficient operating revenue.

Lucky for us, this means you can buy Nau's high-quality clothing made of recycled polyester and organic wools and cotton at half-off the original price, until they sell out. They only sell through their retail stores or online, so don't bother looking for their products at REI or Nordstrom.

In other eco-fashion news, Patagonia has uploaded the Footprint Chronicles, an interactive and informative module that provides transparency on the design, manufacturing and distribution of their products.

Art vs. Design

Tags | | | |

In Loic Prigent's documentary "Marc Jacobs and Louis Vuitton," the fashion designer, an avid art collector, is quoted as saying something to the effect of, "I am always so inspired by what these artists are doing. Fine art is like a higher form--I think of fine art as being up here [indicating a level with his hands], and fashion as being down here."

Which brings back that hairy, age-old question of the distinction between art and design. The borders are fuzzy, and now Jacobs has applied a hierarchy to the two areas of practice. Perhaps what he is getting at about fashion (and, presumably, other design practices as well) being "down here" is the fact that it is constrained by the consideration of use, whereas art is free of such constraints. Yet from an interaction and product designer's perspective, fashion is far closer to art on the scale of art to design than the type of work I dabble in on a daily basis--and I do consider myself a designer. After all, much of what you see in haute couture is barely wearable, primarily expressions of an artistic mind (or a team of minds) that happens to make use of the human body.

At first I resented the fact that Jacobs' statement implied the subservience of design to art, but now I understand that both coexist is this hierarchy to serve different purposes. Design is functional and for people, and art is commentary on or reflections about people, for whoever wishes to engage with it. In my world of design, if it doesn't work--and, increasingly in our socially-conscious society, if it doesn't last--it doesn't matter how beautiful it is, it's not good design. In Jacobs' world, whether it works (is wearable and a manufacturable) is less important than whether it effectively and aesthetically conveys the thoughts and feelings of a particular person at a particular moment in time.