Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The bolded I can agree with. These are objective/quantitative and can be measured.
When it comes to manufacturing, output, or consumption, I understand.
But the underlined I feel is subjective and based on opinion. Just because one has the means to buy something, does not mean they are fashionable. And a well dressed populace? subjective.
Whats fashion to you could be atrocious, feminine, or silly looking to me and vice versa.
Ultimately, however, there's a clear distinction with what's fashionable and what's not because of the brand image that the company has established.
For example:
Burberry is a designer brand.
I don't care where you are, what you think, or who you are. There is no way you can tell me that clothing by some no name designer who makes clothing for K-Mart is more fashionable than clothing from Burberry.
There are several fashion brands that are universally considered fashionable. I'm not talking about the more up-and-coming ones which may be more questionable.
And these leading cities are usually home to flagships of these brands and lots of people who wear them.
Ultimately, however, there's a clear distinction with what's fashionable and what's not because of the brand image that the company has established.
For example:
Burberry is a designer brand.
I don't care where you are, what you think, or who you are. There is no way you can tell me that clothing by some no name designer who makes clothing for K-Mart is more fashionable than clothing from Burberry.
There are several fashion brands that are universally considered fashionable. I'm not talking about the more up-and-coming ones which may be more questionable.
And these leading cities are usually home to flagships of these brands and lots of people who wear them.
So wearing a certain name brand determines if youre fashionable or not?
The bolded I can agree with. These are objective/quantitative and can be measured.
When it comes to manufacturing, output, or consumption, I understand.
But the underlined I feel is subjective and based on opinion. Just because one has the means to buy something, does not mean they are fashionable. And a well dressed populace? subjective.
Whats fashion to you could be atrocious, feminine, or silly looking to me and vice versa.
Yes, just like Rosie O'donnell could be considered a more beautiful woman than than the Victoria's Secret Angels. LOL.
Unfortunately it doesn't work that way, fashion (like beauty) is more of a dictatorship in society.
Whether you agree with it or not, or whether its fair or not, society does dictates what is and what isn't desirable.
Labels like Chanel, Prada, Lanvin, Giorgio Armani, Hermes, Burberry, Louis Vuitton etc are seen as the absolute height of fashion by the general population so this caliber is what I'm referring to when I throw around "best" or "most fashionable". Vogue is seen as the absolute height in fashion journalism (just as a Rolls-Royce or Lamborghini is seen as the "best" car, a Vera Wang wedding dress is seen as "better" than a no-name one bought at the flee market, no matter how beautiful, Harry Winston jewels are "better" than generic brand jewelry, even if identical quality). This caliber of fashion is owned by NY/Paris/Milan and is considered "the best" whether you agree with it or not.
So wearing a certain name brand determines if youre fashionable or not?
Not necessarily. But if you are brand conscious, then most likely you're probably fashionable.
Someone who is not fashionable will not go buy a $700 suit.
Yes, just like Rosie O'donnell could be considered more beautiful woman than than the Victoria's Secret Angels. LOL.
Unfortunately it doesn't work that way, fashion (like beauty) is more of a dictatorship in society.
Whether you agree with it or not, or whether its fair or not, society does dictates what is and what isn't desirable.
Labels like Chanel, Prada, Lanvin, Giorgio Armani, etc are seen as the absolute height of fashion by the general population so this caliber is what I mean when I call something "best" or "most fashionable".
LOL. Man the general population does not know nor care what those labels are.
LOL. Man the general population does not know nor care what those labels are.
They might not care about it, but you will not find a soul in the civilized world who would agree that Wal-Mart brand merchandise is better than Prada.
Most people do not know the names of the Victoria Secret Angels and couldn't care less about them either, but the general public knows they're more beautiful than Rosie O'Donnell.
Not necessarily. But if you are brand conscious, then most likely you're probably fashionable.
Someone who is not fashionable will not go buy a $700 suit.
If you are brand conscious, then most likely youre materialistic and probably not fashionable.
Someone who is fashionable may not go buy a $700 dollar suit either.
But what Im getting at is fashion or being fashionable, has nothing to do with money or namebrands. Thats a materialistic viewpoint of things which Im noticing the fashion industry is built around.
Fashion could be a thrift store outfit that someone threw together and they look good in it. Knowing how to accessorize. Thats Fashion to me or being fashionable. Not necessarily what namebrand you have on. But like I said, its all subjective.
If you are brand conscious, then most likely youre materialistic and probably not fashionable.
Someone who is fashionable may not go buy a $700 dollar suit either.
But what Im getting at is fashion or being fashionable, has nothing to do with money or namebrands. Thats a materialistic viewpoint of things which Im noticing the fashion industry is built around.
Fashion could be a thrift store outfit that someone threw together and they look good in it. Knowing how to accessorize. Thats Fashion to me or being fashionable. Not necessarily what namebrand you have on. But like I said, its all subjective.
...yea and Paris being a better city than Gary Indiana is also subjective.
Many things are technically subjective, but that's now how the world works dear.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
