
Just a brief introduction to stretch looking at generic garments, this week the t. I was thinking about the generic grading of such garments and when they cease to become that which they are named. Is it simply the shape or is it a familiarity and a comfortability that make them their name sake. Given an opportunity to alter their finishing techniques was a simple way of skewing their 'correctness'. I was thinking of the t as a whittled down garment, stripped of all its adornment, formality, refined and simplified to the point of almost neutral. Is it a good idea to build something up once again? adding 'design' to something already so assimilated perfectly into society. Or is it important to constantly reevaluate such things, can their function still waver when at such a point?
I considered simple things like hem and ribbing width. Using the idea of purposly screwing up their perfection, turning them into failed t- shirts, the ones that didnt quite make it into the basket. This rather than adding design, although this is an inherent by product hopefully.

susan cianciolo t-shirt
Hi Blake,
ReplyDeleteinteresting comments re: t shirt. This post would be enhanced with more images from your investigation - toiles, material studies that further illustrate your point. Also these in relation to your conclusion in regards to the T shirt.