“A frog in a well cannot discuss the ocean, because he is limited by the size of his well. A summer insect cannot discuss ice, because it knows only its own season. A narrow-minded scholar cannot discuss the Tao, because he is constrained by his teachings - Zhuangzi
I am a fashion enthusiast, I love colors, weaves, drapes, patterns. but my knowledge is very limited. with all this struggle I entered into the middle age with no acquired knowledge in my favorite subject. when I opted to join this course I didn't know anything about MOMA, I thought that 'fashion as design means they might teach fashions and designs, like a crow with one eye view I saw two words fashion and design and jumped into this course. but here the scenario is entirely different. I did my Ph.D. and post-doctoral in literature, I am a freelance journalist and writer. so it is very much obvious for me to have enthusiasm in history. exactly there this course connected to me. how much I enjoyed this course I cannot explain in words.
MoMA by giving its hand helped me to come out of my well. prepared me to see the sea. what I truly appreciate MoMA is its nature of rebellious progressive attitude . in each and every seminar I observed that the resource persons are from various corners.
in India, I usually observe suppressed communities wearing suits either occasionally or when to address very simple gatherings where that is very unusual to upper classes . recently I had to watch a movie. the protagonist in that movie is from the lower caste, he always wears a coat even in sultry summers ..when a person questions about this he answers that there is much difference between Gandhi wearing kollayi ( simple khadi fabric to wrap around) Ambedkar wearing a suit. this difference is all about the caste equation. likewise, designer Kerby Jean- Raymond, in his PowerPoint presentation when he googled ''a black in hoodie '' the pictures that appeared on the internet really made me get shocked.
The fifth-week topic lifecycle also made me aware of the truth that how much pollution these garments manufacturing industries are making especially the truth that jeans can occupy an increasingly problematic space. and the awareness that 80% of women labor is receiving very low wages is heart-wrenching. and designer and scholar Pia Interlandi's invention ''little black death dress'' is really thought-provoking. this is an unending list actually because the topics picked by MoMA are truly amazing.
now coming to the point -a reflection of my wardrobe, I would like to explain how my perception has been changed by Hari Neff's approach of unisex fashion and gender binary. before listening to Neff I always chose my clothes with feministic enlightenment . in India modesty and culture bearers are always women. men from every corner of India wear only pants and shirts unless they are from very remote areas. on the contrary to male dressing patterns, women use to carry their culture on their shoulders with various types of dressing, and undetachable ornaments. as a thorough learner of feminism, I thought that wearing a traditional saree is really feminine, it controls movement and it shows sexuality. instead of saree I preferred women to wear pant shirts.. yes under the influence of bra-burning feminism. but now after reading ''the unisex project and Le smoking '' I came to a big realization that what we were thinking about these masculine pant shirts, suits are really not unisex they were taken the form of men's wear, adapted for women's wear. finally, I caught the point that Hari Neff talked about ... it's true if a woman gains power, dominance from dawning a man suit then how sustainable is that a power source? it is true clothes are just for 'clothes ' sake. what we have to do is'' looking at the people in the clothes, and what they are doing ,. a gesture, a personality ''and finally what our bodies are doing in those clothes. finally like Hari Neff I gave up the thought of whole clothes thing. what I am wearing is not important, how much confidence I have as a woman in this male dominant world is more important.
one another thing that touches deep down of my heart is Bernard Rudofsky's statement of 1944 - '' the female figure is redesigned from time to time, like furniture or automobile bodies. I do not look like how I was twenty years back, not even two years back. it keeps on changing irrespective of my hard efforts to be in the shape that the fashion market implies to be. the urges and cravings of certain foods and toughest decisions of not consuming them are really horrible day to day wars. I have a few favorite dresses from two years back . to fit into them I am fighting to suppress my hunger pangs.but if we closely think about this it appears what Rudofsky said is true and as the sun rises in the east that female figure is redesigned from time to time. when I think in this context kawakubo 1997 spring/summer collection ''body meets dress, dress meets the body - and become one '' appealed to me a lot. yes we are not for dress, the dress is for us, for our comfort.
finally, I am very happy to acknowledge the truth that I have enjoyed this course very much, and it changed my perception towards so many issues, it made me get enlightened, to get aware. thanks a thousand times to MOMA.thanks a lot.
We need enlightenment, not just individually but collectively, to save the planet. We need to awaken ourselves. We need to practice mindfulness if we want to have a future we want to save ourselves and the planet.--Thich Nhat Hanh