New York Kids, The Hottest Commodities

There’s just a look and attitude that comes with being a New York kid. I can’t describe it with words, but when you meet one, you just know. The New York experience and aesthetic are sought for and imitated by many, particularly the kids who come from the suburbs or money. They try to become the New York kids they see in videos and pictures. There is nothing wrong with an appreciation for this culture, but if you aren’t truly about the culture, there’s no way to pretend. The kids who really come from these subcultures and experiences see right past it.

What’s shitty is that the kids with money are the ones with the resources and connections to succeed, to become the “tastemakers”. It’s a cycle of privilege and nepotism that brings these kids to the spotlight and to the powerful publications. The kids that get left behind are the real city kids, doing the real work. On the rare occasion of a real city kid being spotlighted by publications, the city really has his or her back. All brands love to be a New York brand, but are they really using or supporting New York kids, or just their corny friends? I feel like an asshole for writing this, but witnessing the behind the scenes irks me. New York does not belong to anyone.  There are a million New York experiences happening at once, who's to say one experience is the end all be all?

Everyone wants to be a New York kid, but no one wants to deal with the New York bullshit. They claim New York when it is cool and convenient, but leave when it gets too tough, returning to their comfortable lives. You can't get one and leave the other; if you’re really for the culture, you have to be down for both. Very rarely does the narrative feel real. Fashion and streetwear love the word authentic, but no one in the industry knows what the fuck it means. Nonetheless, we must continue pushing and making shit for the sake of it. There are artists and brands that I still look up to and think are truly producing amazing work. I have faith that good work and talent will still shine through. This gives me hope in a sea of cornballs and shitty brands.

With that being said, thank you everyone that helped put my soul to life. Thank you to Casey for the images, Danel, Stella, and Via for repping the tribe, Justin for the video, and Chris for the amazing tags.

Kimberly ZhongComment
What is the Real Motive for Images?

What is the Real Motive?

By Kimberly Zhong 

The term image by definition is a representation of the external form of a person or thing in art. The earliest images were made by mankind 40,800 years ago, cruelly depicting animals and handprints on the walls of a northern Spanish cave. It will never be known for sure what were the motives of these early humans. Some believe it stems from the early humans needs to record and represent their understanding and experiences of the world. These cave drawings predates the first written language by thousands of years. However, in turn these reminiscences would shape the human understanding of its development on earth. Images have never lost their main purpose since the dawn of time. Through history, the image has been used to capture a moment in time. These images reflect our experiences of that moment. In history textbooks, there is always an iconic painting or photo associated with a major event. Mentions of George Washington’s crossing of the Delaware River always draws to mind Emanuel Leutze’s painting, Washington Crossing the Delaware (1851), while discussions of the Great Depression draws to mind Dorothea Lange photograph, Mother of 7 Children (1936). However in turn these photographs shape our understanding of these historical events. These images reflect a narrow historical narrative of America. It starts to brings up the question of who’s truly in charge of the point of view of these images. These images are the only way people can understand events without having to be there first hand. These moments captured shape our understanding, which in turn shape our future decisions and events. Decisions and relations are altered. Our understanding of the world are based on past images, hence the paradox: are our future images dictated by preconceived notions, or do images truly reflect our pure understanding of the world? If the first, are images then just used to reconfirm our original beliefs?                                                           

The purpose of an image is to communicate an experience or thought to an audience. Landscape paintings capture the view, the essence and beauty of a nature scenery. The artist aims to capture what the eyes sees onto a canvas, whether it be the rays of sunlight or the stems of leaves. J. M. W. Turner, a brilliant romantic painter in the nineteenth century spent his life capturing the essence of experiences in the natural world. Turner’s works were greatly shaped by his experience with the subjects of his work. He placed himself in front of incidents and tried to stick the image in his head. When the House of Parliament caught fire, he rushed to the scene to frantically sketch the image before turning it into a painting. During a snow storm at sea, he recounts, “I did not paint it to be understood, but I wished to show what such a scene was like: I got sailors to lash me to the mast to observe it; I was lashed for four hours, and did not expect to escape, but I felt bound to record it if I did. But no one had any business to like the picture.”(218) Turner did not just witness the storm, but experienced right in the eye of it. While tied on the mast, Turner was forced to witness and be in the action first hand of the storm. The feelings of the cold, the night, and the water were all so real for Turner. His paintings are special because they encapsulate the intangible feelings into a canvas. His artwork is directly affected by his first hand experience of the world. The images Turner creates are direct representations of his experiences and views of the earth. It is raw and unfiltered.

Critics have described Turner’s work with the underlying theme of violence and death. John Berger’s essay Turner and the Barber Shop analyses Turner’s work as elementary violent. Turner expresses the violence through what he chooses as subjects, often gravitating towards disasters like storms and fires. Berger believes Turner’s childhood in the barber shop and living through the “apocalyptic aftermath of the British Industrial Revolution”(216) affected the themes of his work. Art critics have identified death as an underlying theme. Turner is described by Berger as,“He felt himself to be alone in history.”(217) Turner lived a desolate life with his mother committed to an asylum, when he was only 24. He didn't have friends and struggled with depression through his life.  Because of these influences and preconditions of Turner’s life, it in turn affected how and what Turner painted. The way Turner lived his life and his notions of the world dictated what art Turner created and what auras he reflected. His style embodied his attitude and struggles, described by art critic Matthew Collings as, “one of almost sheer effervescence. Details disappeared, even horizons, together with all sense of whether you are at sea or on the land in a fog. A romantic, generalised, misty glow took over.” He had “global visions which words were inadequate to express and which could only be presented under the pretext of a practical production.” Although Turner was representing his true experience of disasters in his art, he still struggled with underlying notions of the world that were impossible to separate. Turner’s personal struggles casted a len on Turner’s view of the world, which warped and became the reality for his art.

Although Turner’s work featured a large underlying theme of violence and death, his work received some commercial success in Britain. The public is drawn to violence even though it is frowned upon. Fast forwarding to the 1970’s, violent images still easily draw the public’s attention. The public has always been attracted to the fantasy and thrill of violence rather than the blood shed itself. Turner’s work provide this virtual experience, a fantasy of violence for viewers without having to face real danger. Shocking headlines and gruesome bloody photographs on the new stands have become the norm. These bloody photographs “arrest” readers for a moment. They are forced to acknowledge the blood and the war outside of their doors. The photos are taken to record and to capture the reality of the war. There is a double purpose for the inclusion of these images in the paper. Photojournalists take these photos with the intentions that these photos will cause reactions for their viewers. However, the way our society functions and works shapes the images we see. The purpose of these images are to inform viewers about the war, but at the same time there are agendas to get people to feel as they need to contribute and help with efforts. In John Berger’s essay, Photographs of Agony, he analyses the true purposes of these photographs in our society. He introduces his essay, by giving the context of the political environment he’s writing in. America has just been concluded 270 raids in northern Vietnam the day before, but no photographs from Vietnam were in the papers. The reactions these images pull on will never be the adequate response. The experience of those in the photos will never be fully translated through an image; “The camera which isolates a moment of agony isolates no more violently than the experience of that moment isolates itself.”(213) The response and the intent of the photographs will never match up. Berger believes the mismatch in reaction will either cause viewers to shrug it off or to feel the need to make some kind of penance to alleviate responsibility. However the true intention of war photographs should make us question the political system that support these war. Instead, many viewers focus on their own moral dilemma or start to become numb to these images. The blood from war becomes desensitize and an expected. Viewer’s understanding of war and the world began to be reshaped by these images. The photographer’s understanding and intentions of the photographs are misunderstood and began to shape the world differently than intended. Donald Mccullen, a war photographer, bitterly acknowledges this disconnect with his photographs with the caption, “I only use the camera like I use a toothbrush. It does the job.”(213)

Images of war in theory should make us more cautious and thoughtful for the next one. Images capture a moment, otherwise forgotten by the next generation. Images along history textbooks are often taken for granted. Most of the images of American history features prominently white subjects. History is often told from the oppressor’s point of view. In Bell Hooks’s essay, In our Glory, she discusses the importance of images for black folks. Throughout history, the images of black folks were usually by the production of white folks. Black folks did not have any control on their perceived image or representation in society, until they took control of the camera. Roger Wilkins emphasizes the lack of control as, “the greatest power” held by the oppressors, “the power to define reality where blacks are concerned and to manage perceptions and therefore arrange culture to reinforce those definition.”(449) Bell Hooks describes the relationship with camera as, “Cameras gave black folks, irrespective of class, a means by which we could participate fully in the production of images.” (448) Images of Black folks were always produced under the whiteman’s understanding and perception of black folks. Bell Hooks describes this perception as the “white supremacist gaze”. In turn these images of black folks shaped the perceptions of how other whites and even black viewed themselves. These images were reflections of a white man’s understanding, rather than an accurate portrayal of black folks. Much of the earlier images were only in the context of slavery. Images have always played a crucial role in shaping the understanding of events and subjects. Racist beliefs and attitudes can be reaffirmed with the creation images with agendas. For black folks, internalized inferiority also comes in play, with the only depiction of themselves are as slaves or in a negative light. White folks created the images they wanted to see, rather than capture an accurate picture. Cameras offered a chance for black folks to take charge of the process. They were able to capture their own moments, and even at time over capture to over compensate for the loss history. The change has offered a more accurate and complete picture of the lives of black folks. However, along with the new freedom, there was a pressure to disprove the white man’s perception. Bell Hooks explains how this led to the “erosion of oppositional black subcultures” and “notions of essence and identity that ultimately restricted and confined black image production.” The dominant movement becomes revolved around maintaining a clean image of black folks, which masks the unique subcultures that don’t fit the mainstream image. These subcultures are what makes a group vibrant. The masking of these scenes just continues the censoring and constructive narrative dictated by preconceived notions of black folks, but this time by black folks themselves.

Photographs capture the essence of human life. In 1995, the exhibit, Family of Man by Edward Stiechen drew large crowds to the MOMA. The exhibit showed five hundred and three “beautiful” photographs of subjects of all categories from around the world. Seventeen years later, another exhibit in stark contrast would draw those crowds again. However, Diane Arbus’s work did not showcase the beauty of mankind. Diane’s work was darker and less accessible, centering around an anti humanist theme. The contrast of the two exhibits was perfectly summed up by the writer Susan Sontag, “Steichen’s choice of photographs assumes a “human condition” or a “human nature” shared by everybody. Arbus's photographs suggest a world in which everybody is an alien.”(221) Diane’s work captures a raw and flawed view of the world. Her subjects were “freaks”. She photographed those that were normally ignored by the camera. Our society admiration for beauty and warmth, subconsciously dictates the type of images produced. People want to see subjects that make us feel good. Diane’s images were different, they ignored those preconceived desires. Many critics describe the work as frank, showing the experience and subject for exactly how it is. However, Diane’s prospective in her work was definitely shaped by her perspective of the world. She battled with her demons throughout her own life, ultimately committing suicide in 1971. Diane anti humanistic attitude was shaped by her depression. Her understanding of the world in turn shaped her images, but her understanding of the world was unique from those of mainstream society, creating an unique lane of her work. For those fortunate to have never experience depression, Diane’s work provides a unique perspective of the world Diane calls reality. Just like Turner’s, Diane’s reality of what she captures is reshaped by her mindset dictated by her depression.

Do images reflect our understanding of an experience or subject, or are they created to reaffirm our preconceived notions? Motives are intertwined greatly with preconceived notions. Each artist had a different motive in their creation of their work, which determined their voices. It is difficult to separate both act, since they always lead back to one another. I believe there can not be one without the other. Our understanding of the current world is built on building blocks of the past. Every person has a point of view, a narrative that is inescapable in his or her creation of images. Although these voices may be inescapable in our works, they can be changed and shifted in the engagement of others’ works. Engaging in works outside of our own narrative allows us to break from the chains of our preconceived notions. We will always be unable to experience the world as anything but ourselves, but we can try to understand it from others’ projection of these experiences through their work. We can not change our race or force depression on, but we can acknowledge and embraced that these are factors that change our experiences in the world. We are not doomed by our prejudice, but challenged. If we start to looks at these prejudices in the context of images, they can be used to see and understand the world differently with a new lens of emotions, mindsets, and eyes.


Works Cited

Berger, John. "Photograph of Agony." The Broadview Anthology of Expository Prose. Ed. Don LePan, Laura Buzzard, Nora Ruddock, and Alexandria Stuart. N.p.: Broadview, 2017. 211-14. Print.

Berger, John. "Turner and the Barber's Shop." The Broadview Anthology of Expository Prose. Ed. Don LePan, Laura Buzzard, Nora Ruddock, and Alexandria Stuart. N.p.: Broadview, 2017. 214-18. Print.

Collings, Matthew. "JMW Turner: Master in the Making." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 18 Sept. 2009. Web.

Hooks, Bell. "In Our Glory." The Broadview Anthology of Expository Prose. Ed. Don LePan, Laura Buzzard, Nora Ruddock, and Alexandria Stuart. N.p.: Broadview, 2017. 445-54. Print.

Sontag, Susan. "Freak Show." The Broadview Anthology of Expository Prose. Ed. Don LePan, Laura Buzzard, Nora Ruddock, and Alexandria Stuart. N.p.: Broadview, 2017. 220-24. Print.

Wilford, John Noble. "Cave Paintings in Indonesia May Be Among the Oldest Known." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Oct. 2014. Web.




Kimberly Zhong
Is Fashion Modern?


   Is fashion modern? The time-old debate has been revisited by the Museum of Modern Art with its new exhibit titled under the same question. Items: Is Fashion Modern is an offshoot of the 1944 MoMA exhibit, Are Clothes Modern, which attempted to answer the very same question. 73 years later, the new exhibit focuses on a hundred and twelve items that the institution believed “have had a strong impact on the world in the 20th and 21st centuries—and continue to hold currency today.” (“Items: Is Fashion Modern?,” 2017) The museum curator, Paola Antonelli, described many of the items as “stereotypes”. The descriptions and categorization of these items brings to notice the Western gaze on the rest of the world. Western civilization has often taken a dominant position in setting standards and norms. Is fashion only modern under the Western eye? Many of the items in the exhibit considered revolutionary or modern in the context of the Western world were often very traditional in another culture. Many like to view the turning point of Western fashion with the Rei Kawakubo’s and Yohji Yamamoto’s 1981 debut in Paris. The designers’ Paris debut featured impeccable tailoring, unfinished hemlines, darkness, and new silhouettes; it left the European audience in shock. These new characteristics in clothes were never seen before on the runways. It was unimaginable, it was everything Western fashion was not until that point. However, modern in the eyes of the West for defying all of their norms, Kawakubo and Yamamoto garments carry heavily traditional Japanese cultural traits on their sleeves. Fashion in the West is only seen as modern against what contrasts on its back-drop. The concept of modernity across different geography is best explained by Kishore Mahbubani: “The Western interpretation of Modernity is associated with far out thing like Andy Warhol, but modernity in Asia is associated purely with the achieving the basic material necessities of life….It’s things like flush toilets, clean water, electricity, a roof over your head, all these things the West takes for granted, Asians haven’t had for a long time.” (“Kishore Mahbubani: How do you define modernity?,” 2012) This nuance more importantly illustrates the clear differences in values in the West and the East that extends into aspects of daily life.

    Fashion in the Western hemisphere historically has centered around designers and their fashion houses. Charles Frederick Worth, who was the first designer to have his label sewn, would lay the foundation for the fashion industry and its social ties. The industry in the early 19th century had connections to the Parisian royal family. Fashion was reserved for the rich, focusing on the couture, which was often very ornate and extravagant. Aligned with the times, fashion was identified with restrictive gowns, silhouettes, and styles that promoted the Western idealized proportion of the women’s body. However as the period progressed, some designers began to experiment with new silhouettes, aligned with the new expression of women’s freedom in society.

     In 1981, Rei Kawakubo and Yohji Yamamoto’s first joint Paris collections would startle the fashion world. They completely disregarded the “accepted Western practices based on sexual difference, sexual commodification, and sexual exploitation” (English, 2011, 69). There were many characteristics of the collection that stood against the conventional characteristics of a typical Paris show. The garments were dark with impeccable tailoring, but unfinished with raw hems. The silhouettes were new, with the shape of the body often hidden or warped. In contrast, the Western brands of the period featured bold colors, sharp silhouettes, and often excessiveness. Even beyond the clothes, the beauty standards of the West were questioned. The models had makeup less faces, unkempt hair, and flat shoes. Critics were confused, with some describing the collection as, “post-nuclear glamour” or “ Hiroshima Chic”. However, Kawakubo and Yamamoto did not come to Paris with the intentions to revolutionize fashion. Rei is quoted, “I only came to Paris with the intention of showing what I thought was strong and beautiful. It just so happened that my notion was different from everybody else's.” (“The Misfit,” 2005) It just happened that the characteristics of Eastern culture contrasts so strongly against the West, that it was seen as them disrupting the scene. The characteristics of the Eastern culture were the norms for these designers. The harsh difference of cultural traits ingrained in these garments allowed for the West to view them as modern because of their far-outness from the Western definition of normal.

    The same cultural traits deemed as modern in the West stem from traditional Japanese values and customs. In Japanese culture, the same sensibilities applied to the arts are applied to everyday life. During tea ceremonies, old, irregular, and worn drinking vessels are used. The Japanese saw these characteristics as reflection of individuality and the humanistic spirit. The Japanese view is in complete contrast with the West’s, which often looks down upon the characteristics of age and irregularity. The disconnect in the reaction to the characteristics of age and use explains some of the reactions to the debut collections. Critics quickly labeled and pushed the collections under the umbrella of the “aesthetic of poverty”. In the West, newness is valued over all. Wealth and status is shown by being able to have the newest things and to constantly afford to replace, reflecting the capitalist nature of our society. These elements of the Japanese values are translated to the garments with ragged edges, tears, knots, uneven hemline, and silhouettes. It was unthinkable to place garments with these characteristic up on display, especially in Paris, where the fashion industry has historically been a symbol of exuberance and wealth.

    Fashion has been the symbol of the upper class and excess in the past, often embodying the beauty standards of the periods. Dresses were made with corsets or padding to reshape the female body to rigid standards. The Japanese designers of the period broke away from the conventional models of glamour. They viewed and understood the concept of beauty completely different from the West. Issey Miyake, another brilliant Japanese designer, revealed his Beautiful Ladies Collection in 1995. The collection used six models between sixty two and ninety two, substituting the youthful models for much more mature ones. Age is valued by Miyake, set against the backdrop of the industry and the West, whom are notorious for their obsession with youthfulness. Rei Kawakubo works often questioned the traditional proportions of the body. One of her most monumental collections The Body Meets Dress, Dress Meets Body of 1997 created new silhouettes for the human body never seen before. The collection featured dresses with lumps and bumps made of paddings, aesthetically referencing the image of tumors on the body. The body was accentuated with bumps on unusual parts of the body like the stomach, back, and waist. This new silhouette of a women challenged the pre made silhouette set by Western society, which normally centered around small waists and the accentuation of more traditional parts like the bottom or chest. Why is one considered beautiful, while the other is considered “strange” and “disgusting”? Rei told Vogue, “It’s our job to question convention, if we don’t take risks, then who will?” (“Renegades and Radical Bodies in 3 New York Exhibitions,” 2017) The social and intellectual environment Rei Kawakubo grew up in, as a daughter of a professor and a student at Keio University during the 60’s, must have had Kawakubo aware of the intellectual debates relating to women’s status and positioning within Japanese society. Although in interviews, Kawakubo has been quoted in the past, “ I am not a Feminist.” (“Rei Kawakubo: ‘I Am Not a Feminist’,” 2009) The term feminism has a Western connotation, despite the ideals being universal. Feminist is a term many fashion critics and journalists have frequently attached to Rei’s work, despite her rejection of that identification. Rei’s garments were modern in spirit, designed for the new women that did not come to please, but to assert her personality. Although she does not identify with the term feminist, Rei embodied a new generation of women with independent and strong personalities, those that disregard past patriarchal notions. She holds a rebellious spirit that can not be left unacknowledged; “When I was young, it was unusual for a female university graduate to do the same job as a man. And of course women didn’t earn the same. I rebelled against that … I never lose my ability to rebel, I get angry and that anger becomes my energy...”. (English, 2011, p.69) Even when the West does try to compliment Rei, it is on their terms and labels. Why are the groundbreaking ideals of Rei’s clothings automatically labeled under a Western ideology? The ideas of women equality and strength are universal. It can come from an Eastern standpoint, independent from the West. Once again, the prevalence of the Western gaze is visible.

    Yohji Yamamoto had his own unique relationship with designing for a new women. He was raised by a widowed dress maker, who worked tirelessly to support him. When Yamamoto attended Bunka to study fashion, he was greatly outnumbered by young women. He explains, ‘I don’t know any woman who doesn’t work. Between my mother and Bunka, this completely formulated my outlook on women.” (English, 2011, p.70) He saw making clothes as honest work, as a job that supported his mother and him. Making clothes for Yamamoto was not glamorous, but it was a skill that was necessary for the survival of his family. Yamamoto resented many of his mother’s dress clients, categorizing many as wealthy status driven women. This formative understanding of the status of women in society, will dictate Yamamoto’s direction in fashion. He describes his purpose in fashion: “I may be making fashion in the sense of craftsmanship, but I hate the world of fashion. Fashion is more about helping women to suffer less, to attain more freedom and independence.” (English, 2011, p.70) With this understanding of the working women, Yamamoto stood out greatly from the haute couture designers that dominated Paris at the time. The haute couture designers of the time did not care to make garments to embody the working women, but worked to cater to customers like Yamamoto’s mother’s dress clients. These Western designers lived in a disillusioned bubble of fantasy and wealth. The contrast in values and purpose, translated to the stark contrast in aesthetics on the runway. Up until then, the fashion industry did not design for the working women in mind. The industry mainly catered to the wealthy elitist women. With the emerging prominence of the independent empowered working women, Yamamoto pushed boundaries to what fashion could be. Along the way of attempting to destroy the classicism of the old industry, Yamamoto reshaped the participants of fashion.

    The values of the East with the emphasis on the working women and maturity explain the shift of creative importance placed on prêt-à-porter (ready to wear) and not haute couture. There is a sense of humbleness embodied in these garments. The characteristics of deconstruction on the garments were not meant to elicit “a deeper sociological message about poverty or oppression” (English, 2011, p.130), that many Western fashion journalists were quick to conclude in reviews. This once again shows the fundamental difference in cultural traits of the civilizations.  For these designers, the traits of deconstruction and signs of wear on garments were just used to communicate their artistic ideas and convey a new visual language. Although there is influence by the ideas of poverty and oppression touched upon, those influences were not translated in such literal interpretations. The characteristics of age and deconstruction are not necessarily associated with just poverty and oppression, but part of the everyday life and culture of the East. The West’s unfamiliarity with this way of thinking reflects in their categorization of the new aesthetic with poverty.

     What was truly modern about these Japanese designer’s works was the more honest and rooted reflection of the world presented on the garments. Fashion up until then was for the rich and the famous. Collections in the West did not touch subject matters that were deemed to be frank or dark. Topics like poverty, gender norms, and social structures were questioned and used to shape the Japanese garments. The introduction of these designers would change the fashion industry forever. The environment of the 90’s, was prime for the prominence of the new aesthetic. The new aesthetic “was attuned with the political and cultural upheaval of the era from techno to grunge, to Chernobyl to the economic crisis.” (“Anti Fashion”, 2012) Clothes were shifting from something worn to wow others to something worn to feel good. The new wave of designers that include Helmut Lang, Alexander Mcqueen, Raf Simons, Jil Sanders, Rick Owens, and Martin Margiela, would emerge and take over the 90’s. These designers would all credit Rei and Yohji for paving the path.

     The West and the East have developed in vastly different fashions. Historical and cultural events of each hemisphere resulted in divergent values and traditions, which in turn lead to contrasting views on culture and its resulting cultural products. However, the West has always had the greater power to judge and label, despite its clear misunderstanding of foreign cultural context at times. The misunderstanding of these foreign nuances results in a skewed understanding of foreign products. Fashion from the East has historically been viewed as new and groundbreaking, but not without negative first reactions. The innate negative first reaction from the Western fashion press on Yamamoto’s and Rei’s debuts illustrates inherent unfamiliarity with these concepts. Despite concepts being historically ingrained, the West’s unfamiliarity has the power to label it as new. The West is often the decider in what is modern and what isn't. However, it is important to take in consideration the dynamic of both hemispheres before taking the West’s labels as definite truths. The MoMA display of culturally traditional garments like item #080 the sari or item #097 the tabi boot as modern becomes questionable upon closer examination in a different context. Items: Is Fashion Modern answers the question strictly under the Western eye, ignoring the cultural context of other countries. As the question is revisited in the West, it draws on larger cultural questions and a zoom out of the Western lens for a more complete and objective answer.

Works Cited

English, Bonnie. Japanese Fashion Designers: The Work and Influence of Issey Miyake, Yohji Yamamoto and Rei Kawakubo. Berg Publishers, 2011.

“Items: Is Fashion Modern? | MoMA.” The Museum of Modern Art, MoMA,

“Kishore Mahbubani: How Do You Define Modernity?” Kishore Mahbubani: How Do You Define Modernity?, Big Think, 23 Apr. 2012,

Kourlas, Gia. “Renegades and Radical Bodies in 3 New York Exhibitions.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 4 Aug. 2017,

Nicklaus, Olivier, director. Antifashion. ARTE FRANCE/LALALA PRODUCTIONS , 2012.

Odell, Amy. “Rei Kawakubo: 'I Am Not a Feminist'.” The Cut, NEW YORK MEDIA LLC, 9 June 2009,

Thurman, Judith. “The Unsettling Vision of Rei Kawakubo.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 10 July 2017,

Walker, Harriet. Less Is More: Minimalism in Fashion. Merrell, 2011.







Kimberly ZhongComment
Summer Thoughts/ Kids in the City

Summer has been weird. Eighteen is a weird age. You think you’re grown, when you’re still a child. Growing up in the city is an unique and strange experience. Drugs, booze, and sex are all in an arm’s reach, if you really want it. There are so many vices, it is so easy to get lost. 

The city can be a wonderful place, but it’s also fucking terrible at times. There’s this creative energy you’re not going to get anywhere else, but at the same time there’s something sinister and consuming. There’s always a feeling of competition and negativity. Everyone is on the come up and there are so many people that leech off of the city and others.  

In some aspects streetwear, skate, and rap culture has a negative underlying tone. They come from the streets. Excessive drinking and drug use are glorified in these cultures. Skating is literally pushing on a piece of wood, destroying public property, making loud ass noises, and hurting yourself. In a strange way there is something attractive about it, about not giving a fuck about if you get hurt or if you’re annoying pedestrians on the street. Maybe I hang out with only bad kids so this is all I know. Most of these New York kids I talk to are depressed, especially the kids with clout. Non of that shit really means anything. Shit, all we do is try to flex on each other and try to get one over one another. Everyone is depressed or high out of their mind to hide it.

I wanted to drop some new tees for the summer. They were just some ideas I had in my head that happened to share an underlying theme of delinquency and the city.  

Graffiti is an overused concept in streetwear, but it’s so closely intertwined in everything. You can’t miss it if you grew up in a city. People really live and die for this shit. It’s territorial and it’s everything they have to show for. A quote I love from an artist is, “there will always be laws, but that doesn’t mean everyone will follow them”.  The city is kind of a lawless environment to us kids. At times, it feels like we forget there are actual laws till a buddy gets busted. It’s crazy how much shit goes down at the city parks. Washington Square Park has been THE SPOT for kids, skaters, druggies, and the crazy. (Tompkins too! but Quatersnacks already did a sick tee) It’s the first spot I’ve ever smoked at and many weird nights have ended in the fountain. It’s just a spot where the kids have always gravitate towards The look book was shot by me and Ian Vasquez and huge thank you to Chris and Miguel for repping the tribe.

Kimberly Zhong Comments
Styletribe Feature on Diss.

Many people think the streetwear scene is becoming too commercial. They are right to a certain extent. None of the big brands are unknown and streetwear has become a huge culture – it is hard to describe it as niche nowadays. It began as a counter culture movement but has become arbitrarily mainstream. This was not how it was supposed to be. Originals who built the scene were wearing Supreme and Palace before you even heard of it. For me, that is the essence of the community. Helping smaller designers achieve their dreams and simultaneously expressing yourself though clothing. A mutual, unspoken agreement between yourself and the brand is made. 

You don’t need Bape, Gosha, or Supreme. There are many under the radar brands that allow you to truly be you, and express yourself via the medium of fashion. Rather than succumbing to the pressure to dress in the most hyped brand’s tracksuits, there are independent brands that are holding up the culture itself and preventing it from becoming almost ‘too hyped’. 

Our weekly focus on some of our favourite under the radar streetwear brands is helping you once again break away from the fray. It also provides some of the most talented designers a platform to show off their work and hopefully turn you into a fan. 

This week we focus on Styletribe –  founded by Kimberly Zhong (@kim.berle)


Tell us a little bit about yourself? 

So I was born in Manhattan, but raised in Brooklyn my entire life. I grew up as a city kid. Since 12, I had the independence to explore the city with my friends. I’ve always loved art and have been taking drawing classes on and off since seven.

Who is the most influential person in your life?

I wanna say two people, my mom and Tyler the Creator. Haha My mom because she always made me value art and supported my creative endeavours. She came from a small rice village to the states to make something for herself. Her work ethic is crazy and I model mine after her’s.  Seeing her work on the technical side of design (she’s a pattern maker), made me look and value design as a complex and beautiful process. Tyler the Creator, because as a freshman in high school, what he was saying in interviews really stuck with me. I remember he said something like if you love something learn everything you can about it. I took that to heart and tried to learn everything I could about fashion.   


Tell us the most interesting thing about yourself.

I want to learn about everything, even things that have nothing to do with fashion. Everyone described A$AP Yams as being an encyclopedia of knowledge of the internet and that really stuck with me. The richer your bank of knowledge, the richer your life becomes. I love having like hour long conversation just picking at people’s knowledge and interests. 

How has your interest in fashion shaped who you are today? 

Fashion, especially streetwear, has traits of defiance, brashness, and independence. These are traits that I have adopted to describe me as a person.


Why did you want to start a streetwear brand?

I love all types of fashion, but streetwear has always stuck out to me. Well more in the past, but streetwear meant something. It was larger than just superficial aesthetics. It was kind of like a secret club. If you saw someone walking down the street in a certain tee, you probably knew they were in on the culture. The kid probably was into the same things as you were into. I also grew up in the Lower East Side, I went to elementary school there and my grandma still lives there. I was always surrounded and influenced by this downtown culture. Streetwear is the uniform of the youth, as corny as that saying has become, it’s actually true. It’s what kids actually wear. A lot of us aren’t rich enough to afford high fashion like that and we don’t really come from that world either.


When did you start Styletribe?  

I officially launched the brand maybe a little over a month right now, but I’ve had this idea for almost two years. 

How many collections do you have?

This is my first collection called The New Nine to Five. It’s idea of taking something out of context and putting it in our generation’s world. Basquiat would wear expensive Armani suits, but would have like paint on his bottoms and keep his hair wild. He wanted the bourgeois art world to react to the juxtaposition. I took unconventional fabrics and meshed them with classic silhouettes.


What distinguishes Style Tribe from all the other independent brands out there today?

There are so few streetwear brands for girls out there right now. I can list on my fingers all of them. There hasn’t been a female streetwear brand started by a kid that’s actually in the scene and is in touch with the culture today. Today, more than ever, more and more girls are getting into the scene and they really know their shit. Many new streetwear brands just hop on trends and don’t have much thought put into it. I respect the og female streetwear brands tremendously for paving the way, but I feel like a lot of them are corny and I want to continue to build and better this concept. Style tribe is coming from a genuine place, from a kid that is a consumer and a fan of streetwear. A lot these clothes are coming from older adults that are out of touch, causing these lines ending up feeling disingenuous.


Supreme often include controversial products such as the money gun (make it rain gun), the infamous brick, and even motorcycle helmets as a bit of a fuck you to consumerism. What’s the hidden or visible message that your brand aims to get across? 

The brand’s name, styletribe, refer to kids that dress a certain way to show their belongingness to a subculture. Growing up, if you don’t identify with mainstream culture, you tend to latch onto an alternative culture or subculture. I know a lot of people like to say the internet killed subcultures, but I don’t think that is true. There are still scenes, if you look hard enough. When you’re a kid you don’t really have much, but those around you. We find solidarity and support from our friends. We forms these bonds creating a tribe. Clothes can be used to show our values and attitudes. There is also the little catch phrase of dress nice be nice. What I mean by being nice is just doing you and embracing your steeze.


What are your views on the current streetwear scene? 

Streetwear has been saturated for a minute now. At least a couple of years ago, the hypebeasts knew a little bit more about the culture than the newer ones. I can’t wait for it to stop being trendy. I feel like today the whole aesthetic of streetwear is so far removed from the culture of rap, art, skate, etc. I don’t understand how kids can wear a vineyard vine tee on a Monday and then supreme tee on a Tuesday. You use to have to be in the know for streetwear, but now everyone and fast fashion has adopted the aesthetic leaving the culture behind that many kids found comfort in. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


What are the ultimate aims of Styletribe, where do you want it to be in 5 years time?

I hope for the brand to grow steadily and to build a solid base. There are brands that have consumers, and then there are also brands who have a real following that really ride for the brand like FTP. In 5 years I hope to have really created a unique space in fashion and have a couple of cool collaborations under my belt. The ultimate aim of the brand is to create clothes that kids want to wear to show the world what they represent.



Personal :

Kimberly Zhong
Inspirations and Behind the Scenes for Collection 1

Coming of age in a city like New York, you are always surrounded by those that push the boundaries. The youth constantly takes societal norms and reinvent them. It's idea of taking something out of context and making it something of your own. Growing up in the downtown scene, there is so much to see. New York kids are the influencers. We create the trends that you’ll see everywhere else a couple of weeks later. I’ve always been inspired by Basquiat. He would wear expensive Armani suits, but would have paint splatter on the bottoms and keep his hair wild. He wanted the bourgeois art world to see and react to the juxtaposition. I took unconventional fabrics and meshed them with classic silhouettes. Taking things out of context to put it in our generation’s world. 

Thank you so much to all of my friends and most importantly my mother that helped make this dream come to life. 

Look book shot by Sunny Ou (IG @urban_sun) and  Andrew Park (IG @apertureist)

Models: Via Pouget (IG @viapouget) and Dylan St Lawerence (IG @dylanstlawrence) 

Behind the scene photos shot by Ian Vasquez (IG @focvsd)  

- Kimberly (@kim.berle) 

Kimberly Zhong