It's All The Same On The Other Side
A comment on TikTok inspired this article, actually, and it's quite a bold statement. The commenter (I fail to quote them verbatim) said something along the lines of "it seems that nowadays being ugly is worse than committing the most heinous crime." How many times have we seen in the past few years, if we disregard moral judgment and the severity of crime for a second, that people online are quick to defend, even just jokingly, criminals with pretty mugshots, but righteousness stays intact when the criminal is looking 'expectedly ugly?'
In the fashion realm, there has been a pendulum swing, with haste and force, towards 'ugliness' recently. Thanks and no thanks to Prada, 'ugly chic' has really cemented in new fashion lovers' minds as they relearn their relationship with the grotesque and repulsive through Miuccia Prada's bold and courageous moves. Perhaps it's not Prada alone, the fashion culture seems to be once again looking to desperately redefine everything around them, in search of the undiscovered emotion that can rejuvenate their overstimulated minds. But what is ugly? Is there a universal definition of what ugliness is? Should there be a definition? Even when the scale of judgement is subjective, is there a level of ugliness that a very large group of us can agree upon? It is certainly worthwhile to discuss. When 'ugly-chic' first happened, there was a statement to be made as Prada SS96 shocked everyone's minds. Why do clothes need to be aesthetically coherent all the time? Aren't we tired of the expectedness of 'beauty'? What about the other side of the coin that everyone is so scared to look at? Miuccia was not afraid; I suppose she was never afraid, a very headstrong and dedicated designer of our time. That collection confused a lot of them, but it is now serving as a unique point of reflection. With limited media coverage and, due to the small number of players in the industry vying for the spotlight, Prada's philosophical collection repelled the non-believers and gave fans another reason to strengthen their admiration.
The same cannot be said if Prada decides to show this ugly chic collection today. And against all odds, she actually did.
Prada's SS25 was quite well received; it reminded everyone of Pierre Cardin's 'Space Age' fashion, which, in its own right, was teetering on 'ugly chic,' but fashion was going through a transformative stage in the 60s, so the main narrative wasn't its aesthetic quality, and instead, how revolutionary it was. A discussion for another time. Prada's very quirky SS collection was an instant hit, even with buyers and existing Prada customers coming out later on confessing that it's not a wearable collection at all, the fashion community really liked how different it was, and while the purposefully hideous combination of colors and shapes is obvious to us all, ugliness didn't concern us. This is quite peculiar, isn't it? The same idea, executed at different times, yielded a drastically different result. In my essay commenting on fashion people's unquenchable thirst for originality, and my recent invention of the term 'Fashion Zoochosis' (legitimized by this CNN article, by the way :D), it seems that 'ugliness' is the fashion crowd's newest venture. The pendulum swings to the other side, as I said. The reaction to Prada's collection was promising evidence that we are more open to ideas that were previously forbidden. This is only natural, I suppose, with how much we know nowadays, it's inevitable that we would want to experiment with and question our boundaries, but questioning 'ugliness' with the purpose of seeking beauty seems counterintuitive. Even when Prada did it with grace and conviction, and my acknowledgement that this is a healthy practice, it still raises questions within me. The late Lee McQueen was obsessed with the grotesque, the macabre, the dark and twisted, but these themes are more historied and easier to understand; it wasn't confusing. Ugliness, however, is a feeling that universally repels people, and exploring it is confusing.
Prada isn't alone here, there is a resurgence of the 'skinny jeans' conversation, not solely from a place of love, but from a place of hating the increasingly tiring baggy jeans trends. Hedi Slimane fans have never left, they have always been around, and when the conversation about skinny jeans came back, it gave them a great reason to resurface their love for Slimane's transformative indie rock image. Slowly and steadily, more and more people are indoctrinated into the skinny jeans love, something that was previously clowned on and was the butt of jokes of menswear for at least the past 10 years. Something that was deemed 'ugly.' I can't help but once again question this sudden sway towards skinny jeans. The same can be said of Duran Lantink's Jean Paul Gaultier debut collection. Abhorrent, but respectable. I've spoken on the collection, noting that Duran Lantink executed a courageous debut, as it is refreshing to see that he did not overtly rely on archival referencing, while many designers would have when debuting at a storied brand. Unlike Prada's neo-ugly-chic and the skinny jeans love-hate situation, Duran Lantink's questionable designs were disliked by most.
Are we forcing ugliness to be pretty? Are these efforts to explore and embrace the beauty within ugliness just glorified angsty attempts at going against the current? I don't think they are landing very well.
Coincidentally, this situation reminds me of the pauperist style made famous by Comme des Garçons. The same way looking pauper isn't for the poor, ugly chic isn't explored by those who society deems ugly. No matter how courageous you are and don yourself head-to-toe mismatched colors and funky prints, the societal value of your face and body serves as the initial litmus test before the effect of your chicness. It was supposed to be inspiring, but it's being snuffed out by how extreme the beauty standards are, which are also getting worse. So how can they encourage people to rediscover the definition of 'ugly,' while on the other front trying to convince us that pretty isn't pretty enough anymore? Fashion right now is fascinated by ugliness, and it has a respectable starting point, but its hidden requirement kind of renders it obsolete.
This sudden courage to explore the ugly feels reactive, and it's a false sense of liberation when it's only for those who have the societal assets to cushion the risk. These reactive trends (e.g., ugly chic, skinny jeans, swag era comeback, etc.) will remain unsustainable, which will lead to another inevitable trend burnout, and when that happens, the pendulum swings to the other side once again; it will be just the same.