Powered by Blogger.

Monsieur Louboutin`s calendar Fall 2014 - Surrealism or just plain nasty?

~ ~

How to even begin this post? With my personal statement on this subject or?

Lets start from the beginning. Yesterday Monsieur Louboutin`s calendar Fall 2014 look book came out. And everybody has an opinion on how gory or brilliant this is.

I came across this subject via Style.com where they, as I understood it, went on the pro side, mentioning their source of this hot potato theme - The Telegraph. Ms Kate Finigan took the other side of the road labelling the famous "shoe whisperer" and this look book revolting. But I did loved the mention of French photographer Guy Bourdin.

When I first saw the photos, I didn`t get upset or revolted. Maybe I should`ve?

To me these legs look more like they "came" from some mannequin than that the photographer and the designer in question wanted to present chopped off legs. Maybe I am wrong?

In all the media, first thing they mention (relating to this calendar) is Louboutin`s statement from 2011 how his shoes are not meant to be comfortable and how he hates comfort.. yadda yadda - we all know it. Well the guy needs to sell his story and his shoes and whether it is true or just good/quirky/revolting/smart/odd/surreal marketing trick - I don`t know.

I like this calendar. It is a bit quirky but it doesn’t make me sick. Should it? Am I insensitive of some bigger/social issue? I do see how some could bring this calendar into reference to amputation and disabled persons, but I don`t see blood or any indication of mutilation. We all have those finger-to-elbow-arm-shaped jewellery stands at home and nobody questioned manufacturers for their not so appealing products. OK, I am lying. I don`t have that thingy at home. I find it ugly and revolting, so there. Double standards.

From an aesthetic point of view, these legs are beautifully arranged in luxurious sets. The whole set/angle of the photo compliments the shoes and follows the whole story of high class merchandise.

Expensive. I wonder could I at least afford the boxes? or A box?

And in the end, I totally understand why he went this way. Maybe he did want to appal, draw more attention or whatever, or maybe that didn`t even crossed his mind; but I know this - seeing the product on "someone", or at least to see how a shoe fits and goes with the leg (foot, calf) is somewhat a defining and deciding moment for some buyers. Sometimes I see a shoe and it looks so ugly, but then seeing it on mine or someone else’s leg - it can be seen in a different light and look WAY better.

Then again, that can (and usually does) go the other way too.

What do you think?

Surrealism or gory and revolting?


MateaTPol said...

hehehe pa malo je cudan, ali zapravo i nije :D

Post a Comment

Thank you for visiting and leaving a mark...