A Quote by John Galliano

Fashion is above all an art of change. — © John Galliano
Fashion is above all an art of change.
Art is not fashionable. That's why fashion and art are two different things. Fashion can never be art because fashion deals with whim, what is temporary, what changes, what is transient, what is now and not now. Art has to deal with issues that are timeless, that never change.
There are many more important things in life than fashion. But fashion, to me, is part of pop culture. And I'm an art collector. I'm obsessed with art and pop culture. And I say that there is fame, fashion, art, music and entertainment, including celebrity, that really moves the needle in society.
Art is not supposed to change the world, to change practical things, but to change perceptions. Art can change the way we see the world. Art can create an analogy.
All truly great art is optimistic. The individual artist is happy in his creative work. The fact that practically all great art is tragic does not in any way change the above thesis.
Fashion is not art. The aims of fashion and art are different and there is no need to compare them.
Fashion rests upon folly. Art rests upon law. Fashion is ephemeral. Art is eternal. Indeed what is a fashion really? A fashion is merely a form of ugliness so absolutely unbearable that we have to alter it every six months! It is quite clear that were it beautiful and rational we would not alter anything that combined those two rare qualities. And wherever dress has been so, it has remained unchanged in law and principle for many hundred years.
We can use our art to become political, to become something you want to talk about. We make clothes, but we have the chance to change a generation as well. We have to remember that fashion changed the roles of men and women: When Yves Saint Laurent was putting pants on a woman, he was not only doing that - he was assuming the fact that a woman can wear pants like a man. It's all the codes that I think fashion pushed so much to change the world, and today it's what I'm trying to do in my own way.
I absolutely consider fashion a form of art. Of course, there is some fashion that is not art at all - it's utilitarian, made for the purpose of covering up. And there are a lot of people out there who put a lot of effort into looking awful. But there are also people putting the same amount of energy into making bad art.
Moving fashion used to be one of my chief goals. It's not necessarily any more. Fashion needs to change when life changes. You only need to move fashion forward when there's a reason to move fashion forward.
There is in fact no such thing as art for art's sake, art that stands above classes, art that is detached from or independent of politics. Proletarian literature and art are part of the whole proletarian revolutionary cause.
The difference between fashion and art is that fashion is art in movement.
Art is exalted above religion and race. Not a single solitary soul these days believes in the religions of the Assyrians, the Egyptians and the Greeks... Only their art, whenever it was beautiful, stands proud and exalted, rising above all time.
Fashion is not art. Fashion isnt even culture. Fashion is advertising, and advertising is money. And for every dollar you earn, someone has to pay.
The fashion world is 10,000 times more superficial than the art world. Fashion people are so much crazier than art-world people. They are constantly trying to leech from the art world, but they will never be able to do what we do.
Can art change the world? Maybe... we should change the question: Can art change people's lives?
Can art change the world? Maybe ... we should change the question: Can art change people's lives?
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!