Jeremy Scott, Moschino, & the 90s: The Line Between Tacky & Fun


I’m a goofy girl, to be sure.  I rushed to American Apparel when they released a tee plastered with Cookie Monster’s mug a few years back, and I’ll be the first to incorporate anything Star Wars related into my wardrobe (my R2-D2 iPhone case is a case among cases).

But even though everyone and their sister/manicurist/gay best friend is talking about Jeremy Scott and Moschino (the 38 year-old was named creative director of the fashion house in October), I can’t seem to get on board with the designer’s recent line that debuted this week in Milan, overflowing with spunky iconography, snack food, and references to 90s pop culture.

Is it because I don’t like Sponge Bob?  Is it because the combination of red and yellow instantly makes me want fries and ketchup (thanks a lot, McDonald’s)?  Or is it because I’m mildly to moderately put off by underweight models donning frocks with junk food they don’t appear to have eaten since the decade for which the line is plainly reminiscing?

Who can tell?  All I know is, this girl feels stuffy and out of touch for not falling all over herself in response to a cow spot dress and jacket with the words “CASH COW” printed on back, or a Moschino “M” a la McD’s iconic golden arches.

But in an industry where “pretty” and “classic” still dominate, it really is the unique and fun that makes a splash.  And reminds us that fashion is, after all, fun.  And creative.  And expressive.  And not always overly serious–or serious at all.  We can thank people like The Man Repeller for reminding us of those things in recent years.

It’s also what reminds me how wonderful it is to appreciate style even if it isn’t my personal style.  Give me Lacoste knitwear and Marchesa evening wear any day–but it’s stuff like Jeremy Scott’s Moschino line that keep us standing with one foot outside the box, in that peripheral space where we ultimately learn to love fashion more and more.

All of that being said, the line does have its critics, and I’m just as apt to (in fact, more easily do) agree with them.  The Gloss points out that the line is “tacky for the sake of being tacky,” something that would be more forgivable if it wasn’t for the considerable price tag.  It can be argued that something meant to be kitsch and fun can easily turn to snide and elitist when stamped with a price tag of $1k.  Ironic, considering the brand’s Ronald McDonald version of the iconic Chanel skirt suit, the epitome of class and a uniform of the elite.

Alas, it’s however you choose to look at it; fashion as fun, or fashion as “I have so much money I can afford to wear a $1200 sweater that blatantly says I DGAF.”

One comment

%d bloggers like this: