The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Style
Thursday, February 9, 2017 — 5
As far as style goes, January
2017 is the month of the man. The
fashion industry raked in millions
after shows in Paris, Milan, New
York, Florence — you name it.
The farthest reaching fashion
media
feeds
gave
menswear
its due, Vogue publishing its
usual glorious photo slides of
each collection and hundreds of
articles were published raving
over or criticizing this season’s
batch. Yet as relevant as it may
be, I simply haven’t kept up with
men’s fashion, really at all in
comparison to the way I keep up
with women’s fashion. The most
I’d seen or paid attention to it was
in unisex collections or styles
because simply put, androgyny is
in.
But before scrolling through
the slides of the most popular,
recent runway collections whose
designers I’d at least heard of, I
made a number of assumptions
about my expectations for modern
menswear, namely in comparison
to womenswear. It would be more
practical, less flashy and, above
all, boring (sexist, I know). But
upon finally thinking about it and
scrolling through the collections,
I wondered why I hadn’t at least
viewed
men’s
fashion
week.
From a personal standpoint, I
buy plenty of men’s clothing at a
thrift store and would agree the
men’s section has infinitely better
sweaters.
Entertainment-wise,
the spectacle of menswear runway
shows rival the finesse, detail and
extravagance exhibited in any
women’s runway collection. The
men’s fashion industry currently
stands valued at $440 billion and
incredibly famous and acclaimed
designers like Raf Simmons and
Marcus Wainwright made their
debut in menswear.
So here are a few thoughts of
my favorite menswear collections
of the season, interpreted by an
almost completely blank slate.
Nick Graham, apparently the
maker of some of the greatest
suits to walk the earth, debuted a
Mars-themed collection for New
York Fashion Week, hosted by,
you guessed it, actually probably
not: Bill Nye. The patterns and
colors were bold and inventive
but just understated enough to
maintain the integrity of a dressy,
professional suit. I completely
agree with the hype.
Raf
Simmons:
because
of
his work with Dior and Calvin
Klein, this is biased in his favor.
His
recent
immigration
and
succession of Calvin Klein has
garnered plenty of attention.
Regardless of whether or not his
menswear collection expressed
any of the recent uproar in regards
to American immigration policy
or sentiment about his new status
as a U.S. citizen, the collection
was unmistakably themed with
pieces like an unforgettable “I
heart New York” sweater and
working class overcoats donned
by especially thin models. His
work was oversized, occasionally
cinched with caution tape and
plastic belts emboldened with
trademark New York sayings.
Much of it included exciting
graphics and a remarkably unisex
appeal.
Hugo Boss, unfortunately, was
what I expected to dislike about
menswear. Everything was clean-
cut but nothing remotely exciting.
Maybe I’m simple-minded or
misinformed for wanting some
color, any color.
My
brief
encounter
with
menswear forces me to conclude
that I’ve been missing out. As
womenswear
and
menswear
continue to collide and mix,
menswear
just
might
reign
supreme one of these days.
JOHN VARVATOS
New York Fashion Week
2017: Men’s in review
Men’s Fashion Week in New
York was an eventful time — with
shows representing every designer
from Fear of God to Vetements
(seriously, check this one out).
While there are many shows worth
discussing, I want to focus on
NYFW:M on a broader scale:
Raf Simons
Raf unveiled his Fall 2017 Men’s
Collection in New York this past
week. Having recently moved to
New York for his new position at
Calvin Klein, he seemed to draw
from the feel of New York City,
combining boxy and checkered
topcoats with “I heart NY”
sweaters. “I wanted to go back to
how I experienced New York in the
beginning and combine it with how
I experience it now. So this fresh
young direction to the city and
everything it stands for—and what
is happening now,” Simons said
when asked about his inspiration for
the show in Vogue. In reference to
the current political climate, Vogue
asked Simons if President Donald
Trump’s election has influenced
his work, and while he says it has
not, his desire to represent the
rich history of the city and all of its
people is an inherent celebration
of the immigrant narrative in this
country. “Ask me do I think that
you should stand up against what
is happening in this country, then I
say yes,” he also added.
While Simons gave credit to
the beauty of the city and its rich
history, it wasn’t the NYC sweaters
that stood out to me. The detail
that made many of the looks was
the cinching on the outerwear. It’s
something that has become a staple
of many Dries van Noten shirts, and
it really allows some outerwear,
that could otherwise be viewed as
somewhat plain, to shine.
Simons’ coverage in the news
has not been exclusive to his
eponymous line, though. Calvin
Klein has also been making waves
these past few weeks, giving the
Belgian designer a jam-packed
schedule. Coming off of showing
his first designs since taking over
as Calvin Klein’s Chief Creative
Officer, where they announced
that customers could schedule
appointments for made to measure
clothing, the fashion house recently
took to Instagram to let the world
know that they have changed their
logo. This is all in anticipation for
the Fall/Winter 2017 ready-to-
wear collection which is set to show
on February 10th in New York.
The Runway Gets Political
There has never been a more
fitting time for fashion shows to be
in New York than this past week.
While President Donald Trump’s
proposed immigration ban was
sending
shockwaves
through
the country, there were dozens
of fashion houses with foreign
designers, foreign employees and
foreign models showing their
collections for, among other people,
Americans. To me, it perfectly
encapsulates the point that many
people have tried to drive home
over the last week: Our country is
strengthened by all of the people
from all over the world who come
here to have an impact. While most
of these designers will soon return
to their respective countries, they
did not waste any time to voice
their opinions (both on the runway
and off).
Detroit-raised designer John
Varvatos told the New York Times,
“Half the people in my company are
from someplace else” in response to
Trump’s executive order, echoing
the fears of many people in this
country, especially as we await the
court decision on the ban. Of the
most on-the-nose demonstrations
on the runway, Nick Graham
welcomed Buzz Aldrin and Bill
Nye to his Mars-themed show,
where Nye addressed those who
deny climate change. Meanwhile,
Robert Jamesmade statements on
the immigration ban, with models
sporting signs with messages like
“Made in a Sanctuary City” or
“Bridges not Walls.” Both can be
seen here.
Fashion, like other forms of art,
can be a powerful way to send a
message. There are thousands of
people who go to the shows, write
about them online and end up
purchasing the items when they
hit stockists. For many people in
the United States and around the
world, this is a tumultuous time,
and it’s reassuring to see designers
using their platforms to express
their discontent, even at the
potential cost of customers.
An outsider on menswear
Style writer Sarah Agnone explores Men’s Fashion Week
piece by piece taking a look at designers, costs and clothes
SARAH AGNONE
Daily Arts Writer
STYLE REVIEW
NYFW designers consider political implications of fashion
DAILY FOOD COLUMN
There are no quick & easy
shortcuts in the kitchen
Don’t be mislead by those Tasty videos — fast and good are
mutually exclusive according to the Daily’s food columnist
When it comes to cooking,
fast and good are generally
mutually exclusive. By fast,
I’m not talking about the
impossible rate at which Iron
Chef contestants chop carrots
(At the speed of light. Don’t
fact check that). I’m talking
about clickbait articles like “10
Cooking Shortcuts Everyone
Needs to Know” or “30 Dinners
in Under 30 minutes.”
Fast and easy are often used
interchangeably, but lists of
tips and tricks that boast speed
are the ones to look out for. Yes,
maybe some recipes are more
easily and quickly prepared
than others, but by nature, not
by method. If you’re taking
more than several minutes
to fry an egg, you’re probably
doing something wrong.
As food and cooking have
becoming increasingly present
online and on social media,
the
discussion
surrounding
them has changed. We’re a
technologically driven society
obsessed with what’s fast and
easy. We don’t have time to
dedicate to cooking — we’d
rather have our Apple Watch
make our dinner for us or
watch someone make dinner in
a Tasty video instead.
“Drunk Uncle” digression
aside, I’m here to tell you (in
my very professional opinion)
that in cooking, as with life,
there are no shortcuts. That’s
right, call your mom to tell
her she was right. Alert the
press. Or just tweet about
it. There are no shortcuts.
Stop microwaving your eggs
and putting frozen chicken
straight into the pan (it has
to thaw first, c’mon). While
some shortcuts are kitchen
experiments executed at the
hands
of
desperate,
time-
crunched cooks, others are
much more nefarious. Into the
latter category fall clickbait
disguised
as
time-saving
hacks.
Less
experienced
cooks fall victim to these
hacks, shaping their culinary
experience with two-bit tricks
designed
to
garner
views
rather than inform readers.
Growing up, I frequently
visited my grandmother for the
sole purpose of learning how to
make her signature rugelach.
They were fluffy, oozing with
a rich chocolate filling and
sprinkled with a sugar, butter
and flour mixture that turned
golden brown in the oven. They
bore little resemblance to the
dense, dry cookies of the same
name sold in many grocery
stores and even traditional
bakeries.
They
were
an
entity of their own, stealthily
categorized
in
the
same
group of recipes defining the
traditional Ashkenzi pastry.
The process of making these
rugelach-sweet
bun
hybrid
was nothing short of involved
(mostly on my grandma’s part
as I was only seven or eight
at the time of my interest in
making these treats). To save
me the anticipation of waiting
for the dough to rise — I was,
predictably, quite impatient
during the whole ordeal —
my grandma would make the
dough the night before. To this
day, I still don’t know how she
made it.
It was just this magical,
massive ball of risen yeast
and flour that was revealed
in its enormous bowl under a
checkered towel every time I
arrived for our day of baking.
I was in awe of the bowl’s
contents. Somehow, by some
process of adding ingredients
and shaping them, my grandma
created the foundation for
what we would spend hours
assembling
and
baking.
It
was hard for my young mind
to grasp the actual work that
went into making something
like that, and looking back now,
I regret taking it for granted.
To assemble the rugelach,
we’d
carefully
roll
out
the dough and cut it into
triangles, slather each piece
generously
with
chocolate
spread (something mysterious
that came out of a plastic tub
with Hebrew lettering) and
roll them up before dabbing
them with melted butter and
sprinkling the crumb topping
over them.
Waiting for the rugelach
to rise again then bake was
agonizing. I would watch the
oven and try to will it to turn
the dough golden brown faster.
It was a trying several minutes
even waiting for them to cool
out on the counter once the
fragrant,
steaming
pastries
were removed from the oven.
This process took countless
hours of preparation, but it
was worth it. Not just for the
final result, but for the time
spent making them (however
impatiently
passed).
The
memory of making rugelach
is one that I hold on to dearly.
No shortcut could replace or
even resemble that. In an era of
increasing instant gratification
and dissociation from reality,
it’s easy to forget that cooking,
however
time-straining,
is
a grounding and nourishing
process. Using shortcuts only
detracts from its benefits.
Rather than following those
“lazy cooks” guides for “quick
and easy meals,” try making
your meal with a different
adjective. And please, please
stop using the microwave to
cook raw food.
SHIR
AVINADAV
Can we dig a six-foot-deep
ditch
for
ill-fitting,
light-
wash,
high-wasted
jeans?
Specifically,
those
that
resemble
something
your
grandpa would wear to senior
breakfast with a matching
pair of white orthopedic New
Balances.
While mindlessly perusing
the internet, I came across an
image of Malia Obama on her
first day of her new internship
with the Weinstein Company
in New York City. The image
was upsetting. First, because
it served as an unwanted
reminder that I still do not have
an internship for this summer
(yes, mom, I am working on
it). But primarily because she
was wearing a pair of jeans so
heinous your mother wouldn’t
even touch them. I’ve seen
these jeans walking around
every day, but this particular
pair heartily shoved me over
the edge. Their unabashed
ugliness served as a gamma-
ray machine, transforming me
from a mild-mannered style
writer into a green monster
seething with distaste for the
style.
If you have a pair of mom
jeans, I implore you to burn
them.
The appeal of mom jeans
lies in their rebellion. To my
knowledge, no one has ever
purchased mom jeans under
the impression that they are
good looking. What makes
them cool is their ugliness, and
the undaunted attitude that
accompanies wearing them. I
think this notion of “cool” is a
fallacy.
You have to have a semblance
of originality to be a non-
conformist. Mom jeans, once
bold and unique, have firmly
dug their gnarly toes into
the mainstream mud. Their
moment has passed. No one
is applauding your sartorial
bravery
and
distinction;
unfortunately,
because
the
trend has become so widely
adopted, you’re left looking
unoriginal.
I should clarify, my main
issue is not that they are
fundamentally
unflattering.
I
subscribe
wholeheartedly
to
man-repelling,
wearing
aggressive
and
eccentric
styles even if — especially if
— they are deemed ugly by the
opposite sexW. At the core of
man-repelling (a term coined
by Leandra Medine) is the
notion of dressing exclusively
for yourself based singularly
on your personal style.
My dispute with the pants
is that I perceive them as a
superficial imitation of this
stance. When I see a girl
wearing baggy trousers, I do
not view it as an empowered
statement, a declaration of
independence from a beauty-
oriented
style
of
dressing.
When I see a girl wearing them,
I view it as an appropriation of
a trend in an obvious attempt
to look alternative.
There’s nothing less cool
than trying desperately hard
to look cool.
However, I may be in the
minority on this. The article in
which I initially saw the image
lauded
Malia.
Comparing
her
outfit
to
something
that
Rihanna
would
wear
(primarily for her choice of
coat and shoes, but still). And
this was Vogue, no less. All
fashion is subjective if you
wear mom jeans and love ‘em,
you’re in your rights to tell me
to ‘eff off.
TESS TOBIN
Daily Arts Writer
Put away those mom jeans and defy the ugly fashion trend
Bad Jeans, Good Genes
STYLE NOTEBOOK
NARESH IYENGAR
Daily Arts Writer
STYLE REVIEW
When I see a girl
wearing them,
I view it as an
appropriation
of a trend in an
obvious attempt
to look alternative