Architecture and Fashion, "As One"
So do you think Fashion can be on Architecture??? Hmm… I’m afraid it could be. And it could be more perky and spry as what you imagine. But this is not as cheaper as what Rent the Runway do. Since architecture along with fashion is quite innovative and trendy in many ways. Anyway, here are some reasons why they could be-act-as-one as taken to grandtradition.net:
1. Architecture and fashion are heavily influenced by styles.
2. Architecture and fashion periodically revive and occasionally transform previous styles.
3. Architecture and fashion lie at the crossroad of utility and beauty.
4. Architecture and fashion can be expressive of human emotion.
5. Architecture and fashion can elicit human emotion.
6. Lots of people don't think about fashion on a regular basis; lots of people don't think about architecture on a regular basis.
7. Some people pay a lot of money for fashion; some people pay a lot of money for architecture.
8. There are recognizable levels of sophistication to architecture and fashion.
9. Some fashion is disposable; some architecture is disposable.
10. There are internationally renown fashion and architectural designers.
11. There are brand for architecture and fashion.
12. There are corporations that produce architecture; there are corporations that produce fashion.
13. Some people associate certain styles of architecture and fashion with morality.
1. Do architecture and fashion evolve the same way?
2. Why have historic periods of fashion and architecture produced similar aesthetics?
3.
1. For example, Baroque architecture and dress are both generally bodacious and frilly; modern architecture and dress are both generally rectilinear and plain.
4. Who decides what is fashionable in architecture and clothing?
5.
1. Are they the same people?
6. Clothing is not considered essential for survival, but shelter is. Does that make architecture more important than fashion?
Share your thoughts. Opinion are very appreciated here.
1. Architecture and fashion are heavily influenced by styles.
2. Architecture and fashion periodically revive and occasionally transform previous styles.
3. Architecture and fashion lie at the crossroad of utility and beauty.
4. Architecture and fashion can be expressive of human emotion.
5. Architecture and fashion can elicit human emotion.
6. Lots of people don't think about fashion on a regular basis; lots of people don't think about architecture on a regular basis.
7. Some people pay a lot of money for fashion; some people pay a lot of money for architecture.
8. There are recognizable levels of sophistication to architecture and fashion.
9. Some fashion is disposable; some architecture is disposable.
10. There are internationally renown fashion and architectural designers.
11. There are brand for architecture and fashion.
12. There are corporations that produce architecture; there are corporations that produce fashion.
13. Some people associate certain styles of architecture and fashion with morality.
1. Do architecture and fashion evolve the same way?
2. Why have historic periods of fashion and architecture produced similar aesthetics?
3.
1. For example, Baroque architecture and dress are both generally bodacious and frilly; modern architecture and dress are both generally rectilinear and plain.
4. Who decides what is fashionable in architecture and clothing?
5.
1. Are they the same people?
6. Clothing is not considered essential for survival, but shelter is. Does that make architecture more important than fashion?
Share your thoughts. Opinion are very appreciated here.
Comment
-
Comment by ® irgeorgellanespecore on November 18, 2009 at 6:56am
Follow
SERVICES
Loading
© 2013 Created by Rafael Marxuach.
You need to be a member of myarchn to add comments!
Join myarchn