Traditional Masculine Aesthetics, &c.
"Sharper, more traditional": Minimalist, "structured masculinity" balancing precision with opulence.
Thomas Adamson↱ explains, for Associated Press:
IYKYK, as such. It's a fashion article, so it generally makes little to no sense. Reporter Adamson, for instance, describes an "almost ethereal" staircase, while "one insider" described the thematic shift as "more grounded". To a certain degree, words mean very little in such discussions, and Adamson generally fails to describe any of the actual fashion while dutifully carrying the artistic and commercial themes: The staircase was "minimalist and angular — much like the designs themselves"; the tailored capes, "borrowed from Dior's women's couture archives, were reimagined sharply"; satin blindfolds, "playfully nicknamed 'bow caps' — brought a couture twist to otherwise restrained looks"; the "angular tailoring" was "softened" by duality; designer Jones himself says the collection "has elements that are graphic and angular".
But there is also some murmur and buzz about art and motive: "Rumors circulated," Adamson reports, "about whether this pivot was artistically motivated or influenced by Dior executives." And while Jones explains, "we wanted to say something about now" with the collection, the report suggests, "the pivot to a more traditionally masculine aesthetic may raise questions about whether this shift reflects Jones' creative instincts or external pressures to align Dior Men with more commercially viable codes".
It's not exactly pearl-clutching melodrama, but before trying to figure out what those rumors imply, another question stands out: What is this masculinity?
For instance, does the masculinity considered in Jones' new Dior catalog have anything to do with the masculinity of Zuckerberg's neck envy↗, or the incel outbursts, or the mgtow fits before that, or the homophobes before that, or family values and the promise of a rightful place for a man as head of household, &c., ad nauseam, all the way back to, what, John Adams, or maybe John Winthrop?
Which, in turn, reframes the question: What does anybody mean by what is masculine, vis à vis the politics thereof?
____________________
Notes:
Adamson, Thomas. "Kim Jones sharpens VIP-filled Dior men's fashion with a structured, masculine recalibration". Associated Press. 24 January 2025. APNews.com. 24 January 2025. https://apnews.com/article/dior-men-ligne-h-kim-jones-fashion-351325428ae84c01586a66819c4a9e43
"Sharper, more traditional": Minimalist, "structured masculinity" balancing precision with opulence.
Thomas Adamson↱ explains, for Associated Press:
Inside the historic Ecole Militaire, with the Eiffel Tower looming above, Kate Moss and Robert Pattinson joined a star-studded audience for Dior Men's show at Paris Fashion Week — a slight but noticeable departure for Kim Jones.
Renowned for his gender-fluid designs, Jones on Friday embraced a sharper, more traditionally masculine aesthetic this season.
Renowned for his gender-fluid designs, Jones on Friday embraced a sharper, more traditionally masculine aesthetic this season.
IYKYK, as such. It's a fashion article, so it generally makes little to no sense. Reporter Adamson, for instance, describes an "almost ethereal" staircase, while "one insider" described the thematic shift as "more grounded". To a certain degree, words mean very little in such discussions, and Adamson generally fails to describe any of the actual fashion while dutifully carrying the artistic and commercial themes: The staircase was "minimalist and angular — much like the designs themselves"; the tailored capes, "borrowed from Dior's women's couture archives, were reimagined sharply"; satin blindfolds, "playfully nicknamed 'bow caps' — brought a couture twist to otherwise restrained looks"; the "angular tailoring" was "softened" by duality; designer Jones himself says the collection "has elements that are graphic and angular".
But there is also some murmur and buzz about art and motive: "Rumors circulated," Adamson reports, "about whether this pivot was artistically motivated or influenced by Dior executives." And while Jones explains, "we wanted to say something about now" with the collection, the report suggests, "the pivot to a more traditionally masculine aesthetic may raise questions about whether this shift reflects Jones' creative instincts or external pressures to align Dior Men with more commercially viable codes".
It's not exactly pearl-clutching melodrama, but before trying to figure out what those rumors imply, another question stands out: What is this masculinity?
For instance, does the masculinity considered in Jones' new Dior catalog have anything to do with the masculinity of Zuckerberg's neck envy↗, or the incel outbursts, or the mgtow fits before that, or the homophobes before that, or family values and the promise of a rightful place for a man as head of household, &c., ad nauseam, all the way back to, what, John Adams, or maybe John Winthrop?
Which, in turn, reframes the question: What does anybody mean by what is masculine, vis à vis the politics thereof?
____________________
Notes:
Adamson, Thomas. "Kim Jones sharpens VIP-filled Dior men's fashion with a structured, masculine recalibration". Associated Press. 24 January 2025. APNews.com. 24 January 2025. https://apnews.com/article/dior-men-ligne-h-kim-jones-fashion-351325428ae84c01586a66819c4a9e43