data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/25993/2599339aa88fa48389ad5d3092cbda2dad312f61" alt=""
Fashion designer, K. Tyson Perez, recently objected to an Instagram post by American designer, Matthew Williams. Williams posted a picture of himself posing in a piece from his first collection for Givenchy. The piece is a black leather rodeo/bucket hat with a prominent zip on the crown.
The hat looks pretty much exactly the same as a hat designed by K. Tyson Perez in 2013 for his brand HardWear Style - as Perez points out.
K.Tyson Perez responded to Matthew Williams’ post, stating that,
“This type of appropriation & creative colonization done by major European brands to small black designers/brands is nothing new, but the **** needs to end.”
Fashion insiders will often talk earnestly about things not being so simple. The argument goes something like this - some copying or “inspiration” is in fact paying homage to an original designer, not stealing at all. Apparently, black designers should be flattered.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/336f3/336f363a1bcdf15003d9956f50bc1e689c4103c7" alt=""
No. To my mind, it is simple. To me, paying homage in fashion can only happen if:
the original is a well-known, instantly recognisable, cultural icon;
the creator of the original intended to commercially benefit from their design and did in fact commercially benefit;
the copying “homage” will be recognised as such by the audience to which it’s directed.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/00906/0090622f82dff54810748cbb5bf6dddbfd27c6b4" alt=""
To me, it’s just plain stealing if the:
original design is not an instantly recognisable, cultural icon;
the creator of the original design is trying to commercially benefit from their design;
the copying is presented as the copier’s original work; and
the copier has superior economic power and social status as compared with the designer of the original.
Kommentare