“I Mean…What?!?” – Abe Gurko

After my heartfelt Woodstock moment yesterday, I am breching (vomit in Yiddish) from the lead story in Women’s Wear Daily, Woodstock at 40: Fields of Fashion. First of all, the writer Sarah Haight (no doubt hired for the whole Haight-Ashbury coincidence) has very little to say about the cultural, societal phenomenon; rather, she is quick to hone in on the “unfolding of the hippie chic look”…which correct me if I am wrong…is an oxymoron. The Hippie movement rose and fell as a rebellion against the stats quo…if not, status in general. Thankfully, Valerie Steele, chief curator F.I.T., points this out. The dynamic youth movement of the 1960’s, with their collective voice, may never be heard again, in our easily placated society. It was about anti-conformity, which proved to be a watershed moment in the 20th century. We helped to end the Vietnam War, damn it. We were doing anything not to look like our parents. Now, our youth culture (also an oxymoron) is the complete opposite scenario, case in point, the little prepsters on NYC Prep (talk about breching). As long as they can wear designer clothes, all is well in their little Glocca Morra.

Take a look at the images from this story. Would you say “inspired by” or simply “bad knock off”. These look like stills from a bad, made-for-television movie. No Hippie chick would ever know about a Douglas Hannant, or dare shop at What Goes Around Comes Around, where $400 concert T-shirts are sold. Every time a designer does something Hippie-inflected, they should think twice about the gall of their price point, which is an insult to the movement, rather than an homage to its Hippie chic-ness. Call me a kvetch, but the purity of the Hippie movement, and Woodstock, and the Summer of Love has less to do with style, and much more to do with anti-style. Just so happens that anti-style was ten times more fabulous than the conservative look that still pervades our culture.