The New Yorker is known for its covers. Without resorting to a rotating list of celebrities, the magazine has become iconic for it’s brilliant drawings, often with tongue-in-cheek references to current events. The one recurring figure (besides New York) is Eustace Tilley. The dandyish character (kind of yesteryear’s metrosexual) first appeared in 1925 and is featured every year on the magazine’s anniversary cover. Over time, the New Yorker has allowed for several interpretations of Eustace Tilley to be depicted on the cover. And it fits, because New Yorkers are anything but a monolith. They may be cultured or self absorbed or snobby or downright NASTY.
This year, for the 90th anniversary, Mr. Tilley is showing up in multiple personalities like only a New Yorker could. Nine artists were chosen to present their interpreation of Eustace Tilley. The artists given the honor of altering everyone’s favorite dandy are: Kadir Nelson, Carter Goodrich, Anita Kunz, Roz Chast, Barry Blitt, Istvan Banyai, Lorenzo Mattotti, Peter Mendelsund, and Christoph Niemann. And it only fits.
Check the gallery below for the covers. All images taken from the New Yorker website.
It’s not just in Old Navy Ads that fashion is being eyed as art. The Cut (the fashion section of New York Magazine ) has a great article and slide show on how fashion has taken over the museum scene and populated exhibits everywhere.
And why not? On an aesthetic level, fashion is one of the few places that most people have a choice in creating a personal statement of their own on a daily basis. This holds true even when you think about how much influence fashion labels and magazines exert on the average person.
Several aspects of fashion turn it into wearable art: the cuts of clothing, the color choices, the intersection of graphics with material type and volume and social consciousness . The aesthetic and politics that informed Charles James is definitely different from the aesthetic and politics of a Vivienne Westwood. So why not view it in the way that one would take in a Rembrandt or a Pollack.
So, art is not dead. Not in the least. Especially not when you curate an entire exhibit based on shoes. Check out the article here.