Spring in Central Russia pleases with the “alternative”: frost and sun, a wonderful day, and another, colder than previous him. It’s time to talk about the new policy of the fashion house Armani.
The head of the fashion house and the famous fashion designer Giorgio Armani has recently made a statement that in the autumn of 2016 all the brands of the company refuse to use fur.
“I am pleased to announce that the Armani Group rejects the use of animal fur for clothing, – said the designer himself. – Technological progress in recent years, provides us with an alternative. Mark took the important decision to go ahead, paying attention to the protection of the environment and care for the animals, “- quoted by news agencies famous fashion designer.
The use of fur in the clothing industry and the fashion industry has been repeatedly raised in glossy magazines and in social networks, the problem of rising to the level of moral and ethical.
In social networks particularly in the course of the heartbreaking pictures of the process of manufacturing products made of natural fur, which consistently recruit thousands of likes, comments, and repost.
Apparently, the theme is catchy. But why?
For the average Russian human problem animals around torment and the search of artificial analogues fur often it seems far-fetched at all.
“It’s in California, you can advocate for animal rights, but they would try to fish fur coat on the train to wait,” – lamented one. Other reassure skeptical: “Coat! Ha laugh. Here you do not know on what would save more, to pay for an apartment, collect the children to school and does not swell with hunger, what the money was enough, even wear. ” “We have children in children’s homes are worse off than those in the zhivodёrne foxes, we must first create for people the human condition, and then to think about animals, we would have their problems,” – waving his hand third. And they are all in their own right.
Indeed, adequate analogues fur coats and shoes with natural fur are not that cheap, and in general a good life, and the protection of the rights of vulnerable sections of society, and the truth is poor in Russia. Against the backdrop of all these experiences and a common disorder it seems that fashion houses just so out of touch with real life, and even to discuss their decisions are not worth it.
However, such solutions to slowly change the world, even when taken only at the highest level of fashion. And I hope that for the better.
Matrony.Ru addressed the question of the wearing of furs to the stylists, materials scientists, historian costume, owner of clothing manufacture and the press secretary of the Yakut diocese (so she knows something about frost all!).
Roman Copper, stylist
Meh – very difficult to use and requires an individual approach. And mass production of fur products – this is not always very high quality. Armani frankly lost the other makes working with fur, and a waiver of that material will only benefit the aesthetics of the House, in parallel allowing the brand to patch a hole in the reputation. The ideological background is secondary, although it is now fashionable, and to raise the flag.
Nun Eugene (Senchukova), a spokesman for the diocese of Yakutsk
In the North, many have long switched to Jackets- “Alaska” – they can withstand temperatures down to -55 and lighter coats. This jacket, however, not suitable for women working in the formal structures with a strict dress code. But this is a question of image and social norms. In Yakutia, a high percentage of the population living in a conventional manner (includes hunting), so long as the idea of giving up fur for ethical reasons, special popularity is not found.
Personally, I get around the usual winter jacket, not even “Alaska” – she put on a vest of faux fur, and under clothing – termovodolazku. Natural fur try not to wear – do not consider myself a fighter for the humane treatment of animals, but, in my opinion, today the technology can reduce the number of murders of living beings. Yes jacket and less fur, which is also important.
Natalia Kotlyarevskogo stylist
This stereotype for thousands of years: the more expensive fur lady is, the higher its status. Therefore, in my dreams maidens, young and not so, mink fur coat is not the last place.
But we live in an age of simulacra: paper with numbers instead of gold, news and movies instead of life selfie as proof of personal happiness. Now the trend has reached and fur: Giorgio Armani himself will replace it with artificial counterparts. And the truth is: why kill the animal if it is possible to designate their status known logo?
It is usually assumed that the substitutes – it was a fake, and therefore bad. But if it saves someone from a painful death, then, maybe it’s for the better?
Natalia Permjakova, owner and head of the sewing production:
Modern heaters can work wonders. Thanks to technology, “Thinsulate”, “Hollofayber” and other membranes produced is very comfortable – light and warm – clothing. A special clothing for extreme conditions for a long time is only made of artificial materials, and fur in it is used only as a decoration.
I personally to natural fur clothing attitude is very good. Although heartbreaking pictures from the series “is someone’s mom” cling to the soul, and how. Natural fur, in my opinion, it is a luxury item, not warming. Luxury, status (possible), and a very special aesthetic.
To date, I have not met artificial furs, which would be close to the natural in appearance and quality. None of the plasticity, liveliness deep pile. Not to mention the tactile sensations. Even very expensive, for example, the Italian version (5000 p per meter at a width of 140 cm.) – Iron them, and still feeling cellophane, even very good. The creators of the modern heaters copied internal microscopic structure of fur and fuzz. They were able to repeat their brilliant in fact. But unfortunately we do not form. Still.
Nikolai Chicherin, a materials:
The main problem of artificial fur as any synthetic materials, – in a reconstruction of the pore system unique characteristic of natural fibers. The essence of any synthetics – is a polymer strand, which has greatly reduced water and air permeability. Hence, proper and all problems with wearing synthetic, including in regions with colder climates. However, at the moment the mass of scientists is working to make any polymer structure close to the original, and even add a couple of useful qualities. Now the most promising in this field is an artificial fluff that, firstly, the structure repeats natural bird down, and secondly, does not shrink or wrinkled, which greatly facilitates its use.
As for fur, the essential question remains – what sets this most fur. Natural fur animals is inseparable from the skin cover, and the skin, such as unique as fur fur-bearing animals, will always be present in products made of natural material. As for the artificial fur, we do not know of any basis cling polymer strands that mimic hair. And there is not even how good is this foundation, and what problems were at the fabric manufacturers, they laid this foundation, and in itself artificial hair, necessary for the cold climate quality – or not.
Mariana Skuratovskaya, costume historian:
I, first of all, costume historian, and always remember about the ugly side of the creation of the most luxurious clothes – whether early slepnuvshie lace, a seamstress with a sore back and the other in the same sad spirit. Oh and on furs and feathers, can not speak – for centuries birds and animals slaughtered in innumerable (or scary countable) numbers in order to make a fur coat or a box to decorate a hat or a fan. And while I still admire these things, but she continued to wear shoes made of genuine leather. But! If House was glorified Armani is working with furs, the historian in me would have sighed and said. “What a shame” However, the historian can rest easy – the fur is not the main specialization of the brand. Now, if Armani decided to abandon the elegant cut – it would be a loss.
Everything is bad when it becomes a cult. And the protection of animals, and the maniacal desire in that at all costs to get a coat as a luxury item and status of evidence.
Today we have freedom of choice. And if indeed you can choose, including and care of the planet on which we live, why not? I was right the little prince: “I got up in the morning, washed, brought himself into order – and immediately set in order his planet.”
Yes, in that order – first themselves, and then the planet.
And what do you think about the problem you? Eats, Blogs?