您现在的位置: 纽约时报中英文网 >> 纽约时报中英文版 >> 风尚 >> 正文

四大时装之都的时代结束了吗?言之过早

更新时间:2015-8-16 10:58:01 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

Are New Fashion Capitals on the Rise?
四大时装之都的时代结束了吗?言之过早

One of the thorniest questions in fashion today is brand nationality.

在当今时装领域,定义品牌的国籍成为了最棘手的问题之一。

Tom Ford just won the Menswear Designer of the Year award from the Council of Fashion Designers of America — but his brand is based in London, and he shows on the British fashion calendar. So is his brand British, or American?

美国设计师汤姆·福特(Tom Ford)前不久赢得了美国时装设计师协会(the Council of Fashion Designers of America)颁发的“年度最佳男装设计师(Menswear Designer of the Year)”。他的品牌总部在伦敦,他按照英国的时装秀档期参展。可是这样说来,他的品牌是英国的还是美国的呢?

When Marques’Almeida, also based in London, won the LVMH Young Designer’s Prize last month, I called the label a British brand — even though both its designers are Portuguese — and some readers felt that was misleading. Yet again, the brand is based in and sells in Britain.

Marques’Almeida同样如此,上个月,这个品牌的两名设计师赢得了“路威酩轩年轻设计师奖(LVMH Young Designer’s Prize)”。当时,我说这个牌子是英国的——虽然设计师都是葡萄牙人——有些读者觉得被误导了。不过,该品牌总部的确设在英国,并且在英国市场销售。

The Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week Tokyo, held in March, is one of many such fashion events around the world. Here, the runway show for Facetasm, designed by Hiromichi Ochiai.
3月举行的梅赛德斯-奔驰东京时装周是世界上众多此类时装秀中的一个。图中是设计师落合宏理(Hiromichi Ochiai)的品牌Facetasm。

The problem is that, historically, the big four economic centers of the industry (New York, London, Paris and Milan) have been the place to be for a designer, no matter his or her nationality. If you’re not based there, or showing there, you’re, well, risking being overlooked.

问题的关键在于,从历史上来看,无论设计师的国籍是哪里,时装产业的四大经济中心(纽约、伦敦、巴黎和米兰)才是他们的归属。如果你不在这些地方工作,或者不在这儿参展,那么你就有被忽视的风险。

Which is why a new exhibition at the Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology is interesting. Global Fashion Capitals opened this week (through Nov. 14) and posits the idea that other cities are now on the rise as fashion centers, so designers have more options when it comes to work sites that match their identities. And that the process by which the New York, London, Paris and Milan axis was born is repeating itself elsewhere — like, for example, Sydney, Australia; Tokyo; Lagos, Nigeria; and Mexico City, among 19 others in the exhibition. Most of which, by the way, have their own fashion weeks. (These days every country on the map seems to have a fashion week. Some, like Brazil, have two.)

这就是为什么在纽约时装技术学院博物馆(Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology)举行的新展览这么有趣的原因。这个名为“全球时装之都”(Global Fashion Capitals)展览上周开幕,将持续到11月14日。它假定了一种想法:一些其他城市正在作为时装中心崛起,设计师因此可以在更多的适合自己身份的工作地点中选择。纽约、伦敦、巴黎和米兰这个中轴的形成过程正在别处重演,如在澳大利亚的悉尼、东京、尼日利亚的拉各斯和墨西哥城,以及本次展览包括的其他19个城市 。对了,这些城市大多都有自己的时装周。(这年头地图上的每个国家似乎都有个时装周,而其中有一些,比如巴西,有两个。)

Could the dominance of New York, London, Paris and Milan be threatened? Will they fall? All empires do, in the end. But I’m not convinced we are there yet.

纽约、伦敦、巴黎和米兰的主导地位会受到威胁吗?它们会衰落吗?帝国到最后其实都会衰落。不过我不觉得我们已经走到了那里。

There’s a stamp of approval that comes from being part of the inner clique — in some ways, fashion is not that different from high school — and that clique is the big four.

打入主导的圈子就像获得了一枚表示认可的图章。某种程度上,时装界和高中没什么区别。时装界的主导就是这四大中心。

We constantly speculate, for example, about what the first big global brand to come out of China will be. Yet every time I speak to a Chinese brand, I am told that Chinese consumers want the patina of Paris on their products, so the first thing a Chinese brand needs to do is make it in Europe.

举一个例子。我们一直猜测,从中国脱颖而出的全球品牌会是什么。可是每一次我同中国品牌的人交流,得到的反馈却是,中国顾客喜欢让产品上有点巴黎模样,因此,中国品牌要做的第一件事是——去欧洲。

It’s why, for example, back in the day, the Antwerp Six came to Paris to show; ditto Yohji Yamamoto and Rei Kawakubo of Comme des Garçons. It’s why Manish Arora, who has garments in the exhibit and who is from India, still shows in Paris.

这也是为什么从前“安特卫普六君子(Antwerp Six)”要到巴黎展览;山本耀司(Yohji Yamamoto)和创建Comme des Garçons的川久保玲(Rei Kawakubo)要到巴黎展览;在这次展览中有作品展出的来自印度的曼尼什·阿若拉(Manish Arora)要到巴黎展览。

Though we often write about the proliferation of fashion weeks, aside from the axis, they remain, in terms of influence and coverage, quite local.

虽然我们经常就时装周的大量涌现写下种种文字,在四大中心组成的轴线侧面,这些新兴时装之都的影响力和覆盖范围其实都非常局限在当地。

To really threaten the big four, an emergent fashion capital would need not just the designer and infrastructure buy-in, but the consumer buy-in, too. I keep harping on this, but fashion, despite the fact that it likes to think it is edgy, is actually a very conservative, stuck-in-its-ways industry.

要想真的撼动四大时装之都的地位,新兴时装之都不仅需要买入设计师和基础设施,还需要买入消费者。在这个想法上我总是滔滔不绝。可是,时装界尽管总认为自己处在前沿,但其实是一个非常保守、固步自封的产业。

Besides, the axis has a vested interest in maintaining a lock on the industry: The economic benefits of being a fashion capital are not lost on the respective municipal and national governments. Which is, in turn, partly why other countries have woken up to the fact that being a fashion capital might be a financially and culturally beneficial idea. Follow the money.

四大时装之都在维护行业地位上占有既得利益。地方市区和国家政府不会看不出成为时装之都的经济好处。这也部分解释了为什么,同样地,其他国家也已经意识到成为时装之都是一个经济上和文化上都可以获益的设想。一心向钱。

Personally, I think it will take a drastic upheaval in the form of the show system itself — maybe its entire dissolution and reconfiguration — to redefine the meaning of a fashion capital, or subvert it entirely. In the meantime, however, the exhibition is not a bad place to start.

我个人觉得,秀场体系的形式本身需要剧变——或许是完全瓦解或重置——这样才能重新定义“时装之都”,或者干脆完全颠覆这个概念。与此同时,要开启这个过程,这个展览其实是个不错的选择。

“全文请访问纽约时报中文网,本文发表于纽约时报中文网(http://cn.nytimes.com),版权归纽约时报公司所有。任何单位及个人未经许可,不得擅自转载或翻译。订阅纽约时报中文网新闻电邮:http://nytcn.me/subscription/”

相关文章列表