![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
As I was waiting to fall asleep last night, I was thinking about ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
trystbat's comment that "art-to-wear" is a legitimate form, and not always twee. She's right, of course. I think my quibble with the the phrase is that the items Altered Couture seem to think of as "art-to-wear" are, to me, not impressive enough in their design and execution to be called art. Another friend of mine commented in a mail to me that the garments in Altered Couture seem to be undergoing "alteration for the sake of alteration, instead of a specific result".
( Hmmm, this gets a bit long. )
Maybe my being dismissive about the things in Altered Couture is because I know amazingly talented people who do these sorts of projects all the time, and with a better level of execution than what was shown in the magazine. For people who aren't already part of a vibrant and creative group of artists and designers, maybe this magazine is a glowing beacon. I don't know. What do you people think?
trystbat's comment that "art-to-wear" is a legitimate form, and not always twee. She's right, of course. I think my quibble with the the phrase is that the items Altered Couture seem to think of as "art-to-wear" are, to me, not impressive enough in their design and execution to be called art. Another friend of mine commented in a mail to me that the garments in Altered Couture seem to be undergoing "alteration for the sake of alteration, instead of a specific result".( Hmmm, this gets a bit long. )
Maybe my being dismissive about the things in Altered Couture is because I know amazingly talented people who do these sorts of projects all the time, and with a better level of execution than what was shown in the magazine. For people who aren't already part of a vibrant and creative group of artists and designers, maybe this magazine is a glowing beacon. I don't know. What do you people think?