Anon 8:47: "Outside of this blog, very few people are going to notice or care."

True. But to be fair, outside of this and other Project Runway blogs, very few people notice or care much about Irina herself.

She won a reality show. She made an oops by violating copyright. PR blogs were on fire for a few days. The rest of the world shrugged. And now she needs to prove herself as a designer if she wants to be successful, because the fashion world hasn't had much interest in former Project Runway contestants.

So it might be a good idea to dial back her arrogance and learn to play the game (i.e. don't copy something and claim it as yours and then get pissy when people call you on it). That might be something she should watch around potential clients. Because frankly? This makes her look entitled and bratty, even if it could be argued the blogosphere overreacted.

Absolutely GORGEOUS!! Every single piece! I have to admit, I didn't read the intro first, just looked at the collection. So, TLo, I didn't get what you meant by Tupperware. When I went back to read the intro, it was very interesting to me because I saw nothing that was gimmicky, weird, or plastic-like in Irina's garments. I think this collection is a masterpiece. Bravo, Irina!!

5 & 10

Love the collection, especially the last dresses. Great job, Irina!

FUCKING GORGE

Ellen M: "I'm sure most writers/publications would have been happy with an attribution. That, or a tiny percentage of the sales of the t-shirts."

Disclosure: I work at a large college library, and the issue of copyright violation is huge with us library folk.

OK, here's the thing. It's not for the person stealing the copyrighted material to decide how flattered the creator might be, or what percentage to give, or how to attribute the work. That is to the discression of the owner of the work. You can't walk into someone's house and take their things and decide it's OK because the owners should be flattered you like their taste in tchotchkes or because you left $10 in their mailbox.

Copyright violation is a theft. And no, that's not overstating the issue--that's what it is. You can't take something someone else owns and claim it as yours and do whatever you want with it. And profit has nothing to do with it. Irina didn't need to make a penny off her shirts for it to be a copyright violation.

In this case, the owner was a magazine that was simply bemused by what she did. It ended up being no big deal to them. But Irina could have easily stolen the words from an author who would not want their creation on a t-shirt in a reality show. It's not Irina's call to make.

Bottom line is she took a creation that was copyrighted and didn't belong to her and used it for her own purpose, all while implying it was her creation. Bad form. I give her the benefit of the doubt that it was a mistake. But mistake or not, profit or not, flattering or not, what she did was wrong.

To begin with, why drag S6 in to this? Maybe, just maybe, the talent level was not as bad as so many of you thought (the talent (or lack there-of) of PRS7 being a good example).
Any one doubting Irina's talent was surely fooling themselves.
That said, this collection is odd in a number of ways. Who really is the target customer? I live in a upscale neighborhood, work in an upper-scale business, I know no one who wear these clothes, young, or old. Who wears fur in these times? Well made as they are, none of these clothes are innovative, imaginative, or forward thinking.
In an era of downsizing, scaling back Irina has flown in the face of that with a Reaganesque collection of over the top, conspicuous consumerism. Well made, but...... who will really care?
As far as the f-u t-shirt, as TLo back pedals from its previous 'got ya', it, the question of ethics (or lack there of, don't forget Irina sure was quick to point out if she thought someone copped her ideas), and the furs shows Irina couldn't care less what you think.

nothing about this is in the least way good to me. the feathers make most of the pieces look cheap, not that they were stunning to begin with. it looks like she visited a zoo/department store and took one of every piece. those last three make me think of a cheesy movie where they have turkey pixies. if all she can do to make her designs different is slap some feathers and fur on there, then i'm not going to waste my time looking at her stuff again.

Very impressive collection.

Anonymous said...

To begin with, why drag S6 in to this?

Uh...maybe because she was the Season 6 winner? Just a guess.

Anonymous said:

"Also, I don't think the extinction of a species is such a serious problem. Most of the animals that play a truly crucial role in environmental equilibrium (like bees) are very numerous and will likely never become extinct. Most others play a role that can be easily fulfilled by other species."

As an animal lover, I cringe at people who think like this. How incredibly selfish can some people be! "Oh, it doesn't matter if an entire species goes extinct as long as it doesn't effect ME"! Our world is an amazing, astonishing, breathtaking place, and it is because of our wildlife. Each different form of wildlife is precious, and if we start thinking that it doesn't matter if everything dies off, imagine what our world will be like 100 years from now. We will be a big, smoggy, machine choked earth devoid of things green and beautiful.

ohh...so THIS is why she won Project Runway. This proves even though season 6 was horrible, it managed to produce one of the best designers. She's up there with Christian Siriano, for me.

This is simply stunning.

I don't get where the tupperware plastics come through. Are they in that big white skirt?

stunningly gorgeous, Irina makes up for her color adversion but churning out some exquisite neutrals.

Don't like her, but this is an incredible collection, and I'd wear most of it without question. Those final two dresses are spectacular.

Hey Tom & Lorenzo:
I was there and it was a really stunning collection! A real wow--even the Tupperware.
http://therecessionista.blogspot.com/2010/02/tupperware-takes-flight-irina-shaybayas.html

Wow. I'm surprised and love what she sent down... it's kind of Euro-trashy in a really awesome way. Great knits, great pattern.

I looked at the photos before anything else, and my first reaction was "What a great Bird-of-Prey-themed Superhero collection!" [From me this is a positive - I adore clothing-as-costume.]

Heidi: "If she is in the USA, HOW is she getting away with using real fur and feathers? In this country, we love our critters and highly frown upon using such animal products."

Get off your high horse - have you visited a slaughter house in your "loving" USA lately?

To those hoping it's faux fur - remember that some so-called "faux" is raccoon dog, obtained through skinning these lovely creatures alive. Fetishization of fur leads to cruelty.

I think she took the "flight of fancy" thing a little too literal. The feathers in some of the pieces are overkill.

Did she use a plus-sized model on one of the designs? If so, then a big KUDOS to her!

Beautiful! Irina is quickly becoming one of my favorite PR winners.
I hope this is all faux fur, though.

To sum it up three of six seasons:
Shoe-Gate, Seamstess-Gate, and Shabayeva-Gate!

"Elise said: And this is also a great quote by Steve Kopperud (a meat industry consultant/anti-PETA advocate): “There’s enough understanding in the industry now of what PETA’s capable of to put the fear of God into many executives.”"




Yes, what they are capable of is, essentially, terrorism.

--GothamTomato

SusanID said...
"HLB, I would like to refute your comment point by point, but it is so over-the-top in its obtuseness and ignorance that I can only applaud it as a first rate example of Stephen Colbert-esque satire."

If I'm wrong, correcting me can only do good. I would just appreciate it if you cut down on the insults, especially since what I'm saying is neither ignorant nor over the top.

A couple of years ago I did research on clathrate hydrates of natural gas and while doing literature review I read about the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum which is believed to have been caused by decomposition of methane clathrate hydrates in the ocean floor. That, in turn, caused massive global warming and extinguished, if I remember correctly, around 30% of deep ocean species. I don't have the source from which I took the other figures available right now but there's some information in this page: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/extinction_sidebar_000907.html. I can't vouch for its reliability (I found it after a quick search) but it looks ok.

My point with this is that life goes on. We can do literally nothing without disturbing the environmental equilibrium, but new equilibrium states are continuously being re-established. In the past not just one species, but entire families of species have been wiped out from the Earth with relative suddenness and were simply replaced. "Nice" as you may have found it, bees are a good example of species that have a fundamental relationship with the environmental processes that sustain life in the planet (but if you don't like them there's also most autotrophic bacteria, for example the Rhizobium genus) and their extinction would radically change conditions in the biosphere.

On the other hand, there are many other species (humans included) that could disappear and most environmental processes would go on unaffected. I think foxes and mink are in that group but if you know differently then I'll gladly admit I'm wrong.

I mentioned all of this because, as I suggested I have heard animal rights activists argue that the death of any animal (whether endangered or not) causes a serious environmental impact in its respective ecological niche (IIRC they talked about how killing a single rat causes plagues to proliferate and ruin crops) and that if any species becomes extinguished the quality of the environment becomes affected forever. That is wrong. I'm not saying that nobody should give a damn, but it's just not true. That is the misconception which I attribute to misinformation from environmental and animal rights groups that only seek to sensationalize environmental issues.

From a scientific point of view, it doesn't matter if one species disappears. With enough time, the Earth will provide another equilibrium state and other species will gain dominance. It is in OUR best interest to exploit animal resources sustainably; I'm not advocating otherwise. I'm just saying I don't think that suggesting that the extinction of foxes or minks would be much more than just unfortunate makes for such a strong arguement. That, coupled with the fact that there's much greater cruelty in other kinds of industries is the reason why I'm undecided about how I feel about the use of furs in the fashion industry.

I would love to hear from someone with another point of view in order to resolve that indecision. That's what discussions are for. I would not enter one if I was the type that believes that people with other opinions are just ignorant idiots, that there's nothing to learn from trying to understand another person's views or that nobody who disagrees with me is worth talking to other than to mock them. Far be it for me to tell you what to do, but since you seem to have very little patience with what you perceive as misinformed people, then maybe it would save you a lot of frustrations if you did the same.

HLB

Super love. For a while I couldn't decide if it was heinous or genius, but by the end, I would give several limbs and organs to have it alllll. Gorge.

Well done, Meana. Gorgeous collection- I recant all previous opinions.

For those who were confused by the watches on the T-shirts, I think they might be aeronautical instruments? Maybe?

HLB, you are correct that life goes on, but the question is whether we want to continue destroying the earth, killing plants and animals in a major extinction event that may even be the downfall of our own species.

After we've destroyed this planet for some species, will it be a consolation that "life goes on" for other species? We could kill billions of human beings and life would go on - human life - but that doesn't mean we should do it.

You may not think it matters if foxes and mink go extinct, just because they are not producers, but it matters to the foxes and mink.

I disagree with your assertion that humans could go extinct and "most environmental processes would go on unaffected." If humans went extinct, we would see reforestation on a huge scale. Some endangered species would probably bounce back because they would get their habitats back. Predators especially would rebound, I believe.

I find this statement disturbing: "That, coupled with the fact that there's much greater cruelty in other kinds of industries is the reason why I'm undecided about how I feel about the use of furs in the fashion industry." We know that fur causes death and suffering. If you think there is "much greater cruelty" going on, does that justify or excuse the death and suffering of the foxes and the mink? Does not buying fur contribute to that much greater cruelty you are concerned about? Would you go around punching and kicking random people, just because there is much greater cruelty happening in the world? It's so easy to avoid fur, why would anyone intentionally cause death and suffering?

Like some others, I wanted to dislike this collection because I'm no fan of Irina's, but wow, this girl has talent. This was so much more innovative and forward-thinking than Christian's show, sad to say. Some of those garments straight-up excited me and I wasn't expecting that at all. Very little of what came out of last season caught my attention in the slightest. It's a nice surprise to see that there was truly gifted designer buried under all of those safe, boring garments.

Hey Kalyn!!! is it just me or was she wearing 2 outfits in that photoshoot? she a quick change artist eh?

TLo, I would like to respectfully point out that Irina is not of Russian, but Georgian (see heritage.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irina_Shabayeva ) heritage. This may have already been said, but i didn't see it in any above comments. I realize this may be seen as splitting hairs, but given the recent political climate between the countries, Irina may appreciate the distinction. =)

The last dress reminds me of the whole Alexander McQueen rip-off debacle with Kenley Collins in season 5's wedding dress challenge. It looks remarkably similar to that McQueen dress in question.

HLB, we've been out celebrating Valentines Day, and I am sleepy and stuffed with Szechuan food and chocolate, so I will make this short. And I am not sure how far Tom and Lorenzo are willing to go with all the arguments going on today (PETA, cruelty to animals, fur and feathers, and mass extinction) since this is a fashion blog.

You said: "I don't think the extinction of a species is such a serious problem. Most of the animals that play a truly crucial role in environmental equilibrium (like bees) are very numerous and will likely never become extinct."

And in your follow up you said: "From a scientific point of view, it doesn't matter if one species disappears. With enough time, the Earth will provide another equilibrium state and other species will gain dominance. It is in OUR best interest to exploit animal resources sustainably; I'm not advocating otherwise. I'm just saying I don't think that suggesting that the extinction of foxes or minks would be much more than just unfortunate makes for such a strong arguement."

And, "My point with this is that life goes on. We can do literally nothing without disturbing the environmental equilibrium, but new equilibrium states are continuously being re-established. In the past not just one species, but entire families of species have been wiped out from the Earth with relative suddenness and were simply replaced."




Your attitude seems unduly cavalier. Species being numerous (such as Passenger Pigeons) or ecologically important, like bees, is no guarantee that they won't become extinct. I thought bees were an odd example since they are threatened by Colony Collapse Syndrome.

I take issue with you when you say that species are "simply replaced." They are not replaced on a human time scale. If, as you say, we should be wise and should take care of the earth then shouldn't our default position be that we need to protect all species - rather than the reverse.

I can't speak for the people you have known who argue that killing a rat causes a plague, but the people I know, who know the most about this topic (research biologists) are also the most concerned about it.

I thought she deserved her win, and this confirms it for me. While I do am not a fan of fur and/or feathers, it's a visually stunning collection.

@ SusanID and Vegan

"I take issue with you when you say that species are "simply replaced." They are not replaced on a human time scale."

That's why the focus of environmental issues largely falls on a "how does it affect us?" kind of mentality. In OUR lifetimes, the consequences of messing with the planet can noticeable, but for the actual environment/planet it's pretty much inconsequential. Millions of species have disappeared in the course of the planets history as a consequence of natural forces like the physical conditions and selection. Mayor extinctions had to happen for us to emerge as a species and it is only likely that many will disappear if, as per natural selection, we take our resposibility to ensure our own proliferation.

"If, as you say, we should be wise and should take care of the earth then shouldn't our default position be that we need to protect all species - rather than the reverse."

The thing is I don't believe that's possible. For example, it's impossible to mantain the current equilibrium while at the same time allowing humanity to grow unchecked. What should we do then? Should we put the planet first and stop giving medicines to sick people or limiting the number of couples that can have children? Or should we put humanity first and allow the planet to find a new equilibrium accepting the fact that some species won't be able to cope? I really wouldn't know.

The good news is that in replying to you both I have realized I'm wrong. So thank you. I still think that extinction is a natural consequence of selection and therefore can't be avoided. But it just be avoided as long as possible. It is true that some species are redundant but that doesn't mean that we should allow them to disappear without good reason. Fashion is not a good reason. If it is done sustainably then maybe I guess it's ok but I agree with whoever said that the best alternative is for artists to just phase it out of their aesthetics.

HLB

I posted at 7:34, but I thought I'd post a comment re: PETA. I stopped taking them seriously when I realized that they advocate for the breeding out of existence of pit bulls because they have a bad reputation. I'm over-simplifying their point, but they basically think that because so many instances of people who suck raising/abusing pit bulls have saturated public awareness so all pit bulls should be spayed and neutered until they are extinct. What is Ethical about that?

G-Force! (AKA Battle Of the Planets).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Planets

Absolutely beautiful was my first reaction. Uggh, those are embellishments from dead bodies was my second.

Jesus Joan - get over it. And all the rest of you still bitching about the "plagiarism" bull shit. WHO CARES! That is so last season. What, are you going to hold that against her for the rest of her life?! Irina has moved on - and so should you. AAAAAMMMMAAAAZZZZIIIINNNNNGGGGG COLLECTION! the best collection any pr winner or contestant has done post show. Just breath taking! It's pure art!

Paige on 2/14/10 at 2:32 PM said..Obviously, it is well-tailored and she certainly has a designers eye, but c'mon! Who is going wear this stuff?

No one is going to wear this "stuff" as presented on the runway. As Michael Kors always says...."C'mon people, this is a show!". Even for very very high end RTW all of this "stuff" will be toned down, the outfits broken down, sold as separates and worn as separates.

TampaBay

Jesus Anon 8:15 - people are talking about the copyright thing because Irina addressed it in this collection. If she's going to refer to it, of course people are going to talk about it. Maybe you should tell her to get over it?

Also, you seem a lot more wound up about it than anyone else. Chill out.

One thing you left out was that she got a sponsor in such a tough economy. Kudos to her.

I'm not a fan of feathers, in general. The painted on feathers look too much like southwest kitsch. Still, Irina knows here way around coats and knits. I hope we see more and more and someday, a collection that relies less on attention getting gimmicks and more on looks that we will all want to wear. S

Aren't their at least 21638762486347584576587 message board on the internet about PETA and animal cruelty and fur use and whatnot? Why not take the arguments there and leave us to analyzing this collection on its design and fashion merits?

As to the poster who said he/she didn't know who would wear it: come join my circle of friends. I may not wear feathers with feathers but there are so many amazing separates that I can be set for the fall just shopping her collection.

Yes there are a lot of wings and feathers but remember that she has to please her sponsor, so take away the plastic wings and doo daahs and you have great jackets, great sweaters great pants great skirts and dresses, everything immaculately made and feels very luxurious. Just looking at the photos, you know how great the fabric's texture would feel.

Considering her age and her relative inexperience, I'd say we have a lot to look forward to.

@Anon, 8:59am. There is no way to discuss "this collection on its design and fashion merits” without also discussing the animal cruelty so loudly on display, which is a
very focal point of the design aesthetic.

@GT – Again, agreeing to disagree.

She's mean...
She uses fur...
say what you will about her, but the bitch has got talent.

I've been seeing both shows (Shabayeva and Siriano) covered in fashion forum, and Irina is really making an impression. I think she's really smart too, and very focused, so I could see her really making this opportunity work for her. The thing is that her clothes don't seem to fit very well with the current economic climate and so, but hey, if her potential clientele is the Russian and Chinese elites, she could do well for herself. I liked the definition someone gave it: Eurotrash but in a good way.

She's mean...
She uses fur...
say what you will about her, but the bitch has got talent.

I've been seeing both shows (Shabayeva and Siriano) covered in fashion forums, and Irina is really making an impression. I think she's really smart too, and very focused, so I could see her really making this opportunity work for her. The thing is that her clothes don't seem to fit very well with the current economic climate and so, but hey, if her potential clientele is the Russian and Chinese elites, she could do well for herself. I liked the definition someone gave it: Eurotrash but in a good way.

Gorgeous. I hated her, hated her season, but damn. I must have that black dress with the white stripes. Good for her. Now if she can only ditch her family....

"I hate the painted feathers, and there are a LOT of them. They look like the kind of cheap mass-produced souvenirs you get in the Southwest. "

Thank you! Also, somebody else commented about uber-cheesy wolf t-shirts.

These 2 comments are EXACTLY what came to mind when I looked at this collection. Take them off or tone them down A LOT and I'd love the collection.

I'll take real fur/feathers/leather any day over the fake stuff. The fake stuff is just not as yummy. =)

I love the wing/feather motif and really love that it never goes down that sappy angel wing road that you see everywhere. She really did a great job applying her idea to clothing in an interesting way.

Love Love Love. I want to wear it all :)

Sorry, you may see a 'gorgeous' collection, I see a tacky Russian parody of fashion. I won't say she's not talented, but I definitely think she is overrated, and this collection proves it.

And yes, the Tupperware thing IS something to sniff one's nose at. *sniff* *sniff* *sniff*

TLo said: ...you've got to play the corporate game at all levels of the fashion industry. For people at the top, it's American Express and Moet Chandon. For those trying to make a name for themselves, it's Tupperware and Payless. We see no need to be snotty about it.

Damn right. In fact, that's how I feel about the whole post. She was in a different league than her competitors in Season 6.

Irina is my new favorite designer. I would love to wear any of her jackets!

A very stunning, impactful and memorable collection. Project Runway or no Project Runway, this is a collection that will get noticed.

A nitpick, I wished she would have swapped out some of the feather outer garments for knits.

The closing look is a little Kenley McQueen, no?

I think it's gorgeous and lush and I don't mind the fur or feathers, at all. But then, I also eat meat, wear leather, and adore pearls.

Not my taste, but definitely striking!

Irina is thinking of the economy. Costuming will already be done when Hollywood makes sequels for THE BIRDS and DR. ZHIVAGO.

Lord god, what one misses with a few days away from this blog!

I enjoyed this collection. I LOVED the pale blue color she used, I liked a lot of the clothes. I thought the dress, 3rd row up from the bottom was truly beautiful.

I wear leather and occasionally eat meat, and I thought her use of fur beautiful - I might not buy it but it'd be hypocritical of me to criticize her for it. (And at my price point, I'm positive that a TON of my belongings are made under near-sweatshop conditions & I'm sure that's true of many of us, so I have no moral ground to stand on on any consumer issue whatsoever and I bet I'm not alone).

And, again, lord god. She didn't come off as the most likable contestant ever - but you know, driven people often are not. And she's textbook driven. Where all this venom comes from puzzles me.

I realize this is not a bio blog(!), but I just have to address this statement from SusanID: "I don't think the extinction of a species is such a serious problem. Most of the animals that play a truly crucial role in environmental equilibrium (like bees) are very numerous and will likely never become extinct."

Multiple documentaries and papers on CCD (colony collapse disorder) and the importance of pollinators to agriculture gives the lie to your statement. We live in and rely on ecosystems where connections between species, even the rare ones, may be more important than they appear at first glance. Remove one and you can throw an entire system out-of-whack.

Getting off my soapbox now,
-Anon1

Anon 1 said: I realize this is not a bio blog(!), but I just have to address this statement from SusanID: "I don't think the extinction of a species is such a serious problem. Most of the animals that play a truly crucial role in environmental equilibrium (like bees) are very numerous and will likely never become extinct."

SusanID did not say that - HLB did. Read VERY LONG posts above. SusanID is saying the same thing you are.

Sorry - I just feel so strongly about this issue I can't let it be misunderstood.

there is tupperware used in the white finale dress (white tupperware wings trimmed with white feathers), as well as in four other pieces. also, all the "feather" jewelry is made from tupperware.

p.s. irina is lovely in person and a doll to work with. i didnt watch PR but have see bits and pieces. lets be honest, it's so easy to edit out all the other bad things pple said and make one person the bad guy. it makes for good TV.

I am opposed to any use of sentient beings as property, so I do not wear leather, fur, silk, wool, or feathers. I also do not eat any animal products including meat, dairy, eggs, and honey. This is also known as living a vegan lifestyle.

I do not support PETA for the simple reason that they use misogyny to draw attention to their actions. I am opposed to all forms of hierarchical biases such as sexism, racism, speciesism, and heterosexism. I am certainly not alone among animal rights advocates.

I say all of this because I have read many strawman descriptions of animal rights advocates here and elsewhere on the internet, so I like to at least speak up that there are those of us who don't suffer from the moral schizophrenia that often informs the American perspective on animals.

Regarding Irina's collection, I do like many of the visual elements but wish she could design in a cruelty-free way.

TLO suggest that it was a "fuck you," and you all take the bait. Maybe Irina liked the idea of the screenprint, learned from her mistake, and used it again. The judges did compliment her on the use of the t's in her PR collection... I get the biggest kick out of the hyperbole in the comments section of this site.

Anti-fur people...how many of you are wearing leather shoes? Drove to work in a car with leather seats? Use any cosmetics with collegen? Animal products are all around us. If you're not ready to purge it all, then complaining about fur is hypocritical.

Many established designers use fur/feathers _ hello McQueen? Why single out Irina?

http://sports.espn.go.com/olympics/winter/2010/figureskating/news/story?

U.S. figure skater Johnny Weir says he received threats from anti-fur activists that made him fear for his safety, causing him to scrub any plans to stay at a hotel while in Vancouver for the Olympics.

"I felt very threatened," he said Saturday. "I'm not allowed to say how everything got through, but my agent got letters and faxes and e-mails. I got letters at the ice rink, somebody found my phone number.


[+] EnlargeMatthew Stockman/Getty Images
Johnny Weir, who sealed his Vancouver spot with a third-place finish at nationals, said he was threatened by anti-fur activists.
"All these crazy fur people."

I think it's kinda awesome she stuck with her PR model. :)

Thank You VeryNot, and the various anons and others who (like me) found this to be literal, derivative, and very one-note as a collection.

To the person who suggested I should "think" before I post:

de gustibus non disputandum est.

Google-translate it if you don't read latin.

Geez, there's a fundamental error of logic in several of these posts.

Okay, kids, animals that are farmed--for whatever purpose--are NOT animals in danger of extinction. You may hate factory farming or consider the use of animals for fur morally wrong, but farming minks and foxes and using their fur DOES NOT endanger the species.

If anything, farming animals pretty much guarantees the survival of a species. There is, after all, no shortage of cows.

The argument that the wearing of any fur creates a market for the furs of rare, exotic animals is just specious--the slippery slope fallacy. People who eat cows aren't, as a result, eager to eat mountain lions. I eat arugula, doesn't mean I am thus tempted to eat thistles.

As for bees--bees are not endangered. The issue is with European honey bees--there are hundreds if not thousands of other bees that fertilize plants. Part of the issue with colony collapse is that we may have become overly dependent on a single (non-native) bee species, which are overused and stressed, leaving them vulnerable to collapse.

By the way, Jonathan Safran Foer didn't write a brilliant book--he wrote a book from a very urban perspective--yes, factory farming is ugly--but it's of fairly recent advent and isn't necessary to produce food. But then, I don't think Foer really understands food except from the consumer perspective. I'll take Michael Pollan--mistakes there, but it's a more nuanced discussion of the issues.

The issue is one of monoculture. Which, for all you veganism-will-save-the-world types, is a big environmental issue. Corn's a vegetable, but too much of it has created a huge number of issues. Eating eggs from chickens in your backyard may not be vegan, but it's easier on the environment.

I was rooting for her all during her season, but I never thought I'd say this; I liked her collection better than Christians.
it was so different than what she did on the show (and so much better than that butterfly crap she did for Spring) but so strong yet sooooo amazingly beautiful. The makeup was stunning was even stunning.
I didn't love her last dress it was also a little Alexander McQueen/Kenley wedding dress (as were the two before it) but her seperates were to die for, thats definitely her strong point.

I love the two similar dresses in white and black with fur, but I think most of the pieces are too much "animal"... As a whole it's very interesting collection.

Anonymous 3:16 PM: TLO suggest that it was a "fuck you," and you all take the bait. Maybe Irina liked the idea of the screenprint, learned from her mistake, and used it again. The judges did compliment her on the use of the t's in her PR collection... I get the biggest kick out of the hyperbole in the comments section of this site."

Well, they were at the show, so could be they're making assumtions, but why would anyone think they'd "bait" their readers?

Also, I've seen no hyperbole, simply people how copyrights work. Calling what she did copyright violation and explaining why it wasn't OK for her to do what she did isn't hyperbole, it's simply fact.

"Erica said: I am opposed to any use of sentient beings as property, so I do not wear leather, fur, silk, wool, or feathers. I also do not eat any animal products including meat, dairy, eggs, and honey. This is also known as living a vegan lifestyle."



What do you do if a mosquito lands on your arm?

Just wondering.

--GothamTomato

Good for Irina. It's nice to see a PR contestant (and a winner!) making the most of it. I always worry about how effective PR actually is as a launchpad for these young designers. I'm glad to see when it works. And the collection is lovely. Good job, Irina!

I may be overstating this but I have to say that of ALL the PR contestant's collections I've seen since the beginning of the show, this is by far my favorite.

Fabulous work, Irina!!
I just wish she was on a "better" season so more people would appreciate what a wonderful designer she is - personality nonwithstanding.

a lot of these looks are derivative. pretty but derivative.


the last look is kenley collins and she accused of IP theft from Alexander McQ

Nice silhouettes but the fur and feathers are too gaudy. The whole vibe is so developing country noveau riche.

I got reeeeally tired of the feather motif.

LOVE it (would prefer if it is fake fur and feathers).

I truly believe her PR runway show was 10x better than any of the collections you posted from this season.

She would have won this season too...

TZF108 said...
She would have won this season too...

Oh, no doubt about that.

I've read somewhere that some (not all? i'm not sure.) of the feathers were fake. I don't remember reading anything about fake fur, though. Ah, well. Here's hoping Irina does the shift to faux soon. Doesn't make the collection any less beautiful.

I also thought it was very sweet that she was still using Kalyn, and in the stellar role.

Beautiful collection... She's really in to fur and T-shirts.. She just proved that she is her season's winner. I hate her before but now I'm starting to love her when I saw this. She knows what she wants, she really have a vision and sophisticated style.

GothamTomato said...
"Erica said: I am opposed to any use of sentient beings as property, so I do not wear leather, fur, silk, wool, or feathers. I also do not eat any animal products including meat, dairy, eggs, and honey. This is also known as living a vegan lifestyle."



What do you do if a mosquito lands on your arm?

Just wondering.

--GothamTomato



Blade Runner? The protagonist has to" VK" suspects to find out if they are replicant or human (by measuring their physiological responses to ethical dilemmas). He asks "What would you do if a bee landed on your arm?" And she answers without hesitation, "I'd kill it."

odd, i hated about 85% of the feather prints. like something pulled off a boardwalk t shirt. did the folks that loved them think the were ironic or genuinely pretty. i loved the ones that that were sharp, graphic. black and white though.

@Glammy said: "By the way, Jonathan Safran Foer didn't write a brilliant book--he wrote a book from a very urban perspective--yes, factory farming is ugly--but it's of fairly recent advent and isn't necessary to produce food. But then, I don't think Foer really understands food except from the consumer perspective. I'll take Michael Pollan--mistakes there, but it's a more nuanced discussion of the issues."

Did you read JSF's book? Your assertion: "factory farming is ugly--but it's of fairly recent advent and isn't necessary to produce food" was one of the biggest points of his book. I'm confused with what you're taking issue with.

Remember when Tim had dinner with her family during the finals. Her mother said something (translating loosely here) about if Irina didn't win she shouldn't bother to come home. Later Tim commented that that woman was NOT kidding. I'm assuming this collection keeps her in good graces.

Wow, I really like this collection. It's beautiful, if a bit safe (mostly). I actually don't hate Irina anymore!

The text on the t-shirt, though? No, not feeling that at all. (And yeah, she DID plagiarize, but whatevs.)

I love fashion and subscribe to all the magazines, donating them to waiting rooms when I'm finished. When the fall/winter collections are shown I put anti-fur stickers in the magazines...on ads, fashion spreads, etc. To belittle those who speak out against the frivolous use of animal products says volumes about the writer's attitude toward living creatures.

That said, and even if the fur were fake, this is a derivative collection; typical of Irina.

"anon said: Blade Runner? The protagonist has to" VK" suspects to find out if they are replicant or human (by measuring their physiological responses to ethical dilemmas). He asks "What would you do if a bee landed on your arm?" And she answers without hesitation, "I'd kill it.""



I've never seen Blade Runner, so I'm guessing that the correct answer has something to do with panic.

--GothamTomato

Elise,

I've read parts of Foer. Yes, factory farming is ugly--but Foer, in my opinion, makes the jump that yucky and gross equals immoral. I think the issue of food is a lot more complex than that.

You can dislike factory farming and not oppose using animals for food and clothing. You can realize that there are crops that are raised in a way that may not shed blood, but are bad for the environment.

I find Foer's ooh-yucky school of argument simplistic.

@Erica : I am also vegan (stating the obvious)! I posted a very long comment that was very similar to what you wrote, but it somehow disappeared. I also refuse to support PETA because of their objectification of women.

@Glammy : The extinction debate did get a bit off track, but regardless of whether an animal is wild or endangered, killing that animal to use him for fur, food, vivisection etc. is wrong. The fact that use and domestication are a guarantee against extinction does not justify the exploitation.

@Anonymous 2/15/10 3:30 PM : And isn't it hypocritical for someone to take their cat to the vet while eating a hamburger? Instead of criticizing people for taking a step towards compassion, praise them for it while encouraging their journey toward veganism. Instead of criticizing people for taking their cat to the vet (or protesting fur); tell them why they shouldn't eat meat (or wear leather). We want people to be *more* compassionate; not less.

@GothamTomato : I find that if I blow on the mosquito, they fly away.

And I agree with the numerous commenters about the similarity between Irina's last dress and Kenley McQueen's dress!

@Glammy : Back yard chickens are not the answer. We don't have enough land to keep 300 million egg-laying hens in back yards. Yes - that's how many egg-laying hens are in the U.S. right now. The answer is veganism.

And if you're opposed to monoculture, you should be vegan. It takes much more land to feed a meat-eater because of the 10-16 pounds of grain to produce a single pound of feedlot beef.

Grass-fed beef is not the answer - thousands of wild horses in the American West are being displaced right now to make room for grass-fed cattle, and only 3% of the cows raised for meat in this country are grass-fed. And the Amazon rainforest is being deforested to create grazing land for pasture-raised grass-fed beef.

Yay on the tee and her Russian heritage, but still.... fur and bpa? Humph, this type of designing is what gets the nods of approval, but I think this collection is not only ugly, but toxic and maybe cruel.

I hate Irina, hate if she used real fur, but must say - Wow!! I liked it a LOT more than Siriano's collection, which absolutely shocks me!! It really has beautiful jackets and separates. Really nice work.

Still can't stand Irina.

I hate Irina, hate if she used real fur, but must say - Wow!! I liked it a LOT more than Siriano's collection, which absolutely shocks me!! It really has beautiful jackets and separates. Really nice work.

Still can't stand Irina.

@Glammy, thanks for your response. We must have had a very different impression of what Foer was trying to say. My read was that this book went FAR beyond the “ooh-yucky” school of argument. Foer incorporated lots of different viewpoints, including first-hand accounts from those that support Farm Factories, as well as first-hand accounts from those who support sustainable agriculture like Farm Forward (http://www.farmforward.com/). In fact, according to Farm Forward’s website, “novelist Jonathan Safran Foer has begun the most important discussion about food and farming in a generation.” To me, this book represented an indictment of animal cruelty, as opposed to a simplistic “yucky/gross = immoral” argument.

OMG. This is so gorgeous. I can't even handle it. Wow.

I wasn't a fan of her on the show, but dayum that girl is talented.

-E

Vegan wrote: "@GothamTomato : I find that if I blow on the mosquito, they fly away. "

Really you must have strong breath; because some biting flies will stay on me despite shaking an arm, blowing or even trying to shoo them.

"tell them why they shouldn't eat meat (or wear leather)."

TELL THEM - oh that sounds arrogant

Vegan,

It is your opinion, not an absolute, that using animals for food is "wrong".

If eating animals guarantees your survival is it "wrong"? For whom and by what standards?

If eating meat guarantees your child's survival, is it wrong?

This is the situation you're dealing with in subsistence regions where you can't grow crops year round.

So, let's take it up a notch--is it evil to feed my child meat if doing so confers a better chance at survival?

Is it evil if I eat meat because I'm anemic if I don't? I know a number of former vegetarians who ended up eating meat again while nursing--making milk takes a real toll on some women.

Veganism is not and has not been a viable healthy diet for most people without a dependency on large-scale agriculture. I'd rather eat a local chicken than a soy bean raised in Brazil on what was once rain forest.

Humans are omniverous by nature--you may choose to be a vegan, but as a species, we are designed to digest a variety of food--yes, including meat, we have two stomach acids made for doing just that. In addition, our large metabolically demanding brains are the result of a relatively high-calorie diet. Yep, the hunter part of hunter-gatherer.

I am disinclined to believe in the innate evil of our species. I don't think our killing of animals for food need be more innately evil than other top-of-the-food-chain animals killing animals for food. Because we are sentient (and, boy, not all animals are sentient) we can have empathy and we can choose not to be cruel or wasteful.

To me, alas, our environmental problems aren't simply a case of diet--but of there being just too many people on the planet.

My point about chickens is that it can be more environmentally responsible to eat eggs and chickens than to be a vegan. You don't need a backyard to raise a chicken, by the way. You certainly need less room than you do for raising corn or wheat.

Elise,

Foer didn't tell me anything I didn't already know--but I find him glib as a writer anyhow--overly impressed with his mental peregrinations.

I say this as someone who eats homegrown things (despite a small lot) on a daily basis--and helps tend a bunch of chickens once a week. I'm one generation away from people who grew their own food because that's how one survived the Depression. Foer seems to have little knowledge or connection to the earlier agragarian way of life in the United States--and I think that limits his perspective.

I love TLo's readers/commenters.

:)

@Glamy – I can understand finding Foer glib. His irreverent style is one I respond well to, but I can see that not being the case for everyone. However, it seems to me that you cherry picked parts of his book without giving it a fair shot. That’s fine – I just don’t like to see someone putting down an entire book without having read the entire book. Again, Farm Forward (http://www.farmforward.com/), a group that is all about the connection to an “earlier agragarian way of life in the U.S.”, not only lauds this book, but the founder of FF, Aaron Gross, played a huge role in its creation. Let’s be honest, the “earlier agragarian way of life in the US” is (sadly) all but dead. ~99% of all the meat we consume comes from factory farms, and that is a huge problem. Foer is making the argument to move BACK to that earlier way of life, not away from it.

I also take issue with some of the straw man arguments/questions you’re posing to @Vegan. In terms of health, according to the ADA: “Vegetarian diets are often associated with a number of health advantages, including lower blood cholesterol levels, lower risk of heart disease [which alone accounts for more than 25 percent of all annual deaths in the nation], lower blood pressure levels, and lower risk of hypertension and type 2 diabetes. Vegetarianism tends to have a lower body mass index (BMI) [that is, they are not as fat] and lower overall cancer rates [cancers account for nearly another 25 percent of all annual deaths in the nation].”

I agree with you that there are many causes of environmental devastation. However, according to the UN, the environmental effects of the meat industry “is one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global…” Many other well-respected groups say the same.

In terms of “subsistence regions where you can’t grow crops year round,” we live in a global economy. Most of the food we eat (for better or probably for worse) doesn’t come from where we live. Given your background, I’m sure you’re well aware of this fact.

In terms of survival, I think it’s again important to be honest. For most of us in the U.S., survival tied to starvation is not a realistic argument for eating meat. And, within the developing world, some have actually vaunted the utility of moving toward a more vegetarian lifestyle given the health and life promoting benefits of “going veg.”

Finally, choosing to become vegetarian or vegan is not an all-or-nothing thing that completely precludes one from hypocrisy. However, “Compassion is a muscle that gets stronger with use, and the regular exercise of choosing kindness over cruelty would change us.”

I hate birds.

HATE THEM.

While I appreciate the unique and interesting designs, I cannot get past my bird hate. Yuck.

Bitter Kitten said:

The whole vibe is so developing country noveau riche.

After looking at this collection a second time, I'm in agreement with this comment. It gives off that "I'm rich, I can afford big, splashy clothes" attitude.

Somehow Irina and fake fur don't seem to go together. I think it's real, which makes me wish it wasn't such a well-designed, lovely collection.

Erica said...

I am opposed to any use of sentient beings as property, so I do not wear leather, fur, silk, wool, or feathers. I also do not eat any animal products including meat, dairy, eggs, and honey. This is also known as living a vegan lifestyle.

I do not support PETA for the simple reason that they use misogyny to draw attention to their actions. I am opposed to all forms of hierarchical biases such as sexism, racism, speciesism, and heterosexism. I am certainly not alone among animal rights advocates.

I say all of this because I have read many strawman descriptions of animal rights advocates here and elsewhere on the internet, so I like to at least speak up that there are those of us who don't suffer from the moral schizophrenia that often informs the American perspective on animals.

Regarding Irina's collection, I do like many of the visual elements but wish she could design in a cruelty-free way.

Erica, please. Get off your soapbox for a second and do a little research. Your only problem with PETA is that it uses "nude" celebrity photos as ads? Really?

For someone who seems to revere animals you sure love a misleading, bloody "non-profit." Ingrid Newkirk is bathshit insane, and founded PETA as a vanity project so she wouldn't have to get a real job. Not only does PETA kill all the animals that come into them (roughly 21,000 between 1998 and 2008), but they opppose the use of animals for any reason, including pets, farming, testing (which I agree with). She even had a seeing eye dog taken away from his owner. She is not concerned with the animals themselves - only humans having nothing to do with them, which yes, includes rescues and the interference of humans to sustain endangered species.

Never mind the fact that PETA hires fur-loving celebrities (like Pamela Anderson, Dita von Teese, and Jenna Jameson) for their pointless fucking ads. Never mind that PETA, a non-profit itself, gives donations to arsonist/terrorist groups like ELF and ALF.

People hear "ethical treatment of animals" and automatically think it means something warm and fuzzy. To Ingrid Newkirk, it does not. PETA is very much an extremist organization, and people who really care about animals know this, and certainly don't support their goals for more reasons than "misogynistic" celeb titties. (Ridiculous. Please go burn your bra now.) Sounds like someone "suffers from the moral schizophrenia that often informs the American perspective on animals" without even knowing it, since she's too busy patting herself on the back for not eating eggs. What a hero.

www.petakillsanimals.com

...actually, fake fur is extremely environmentally unsound. It takes huge quantities of oil to manufacture fake fur. I hope there's a human, environmentally friendly fur solution out there, waiting to be found.

Hey, why is everyone so against fur but I was the only one who was shocked enough to comment by Armani (was it Armani? I can't remember) doing those moon clothes out of ostrich skin? What's the difference between an ostrich and a mink dying for fashion?

Oh, people think that mink are cute, and that leopards are beautiful, but ostrich are downright ugly, so we don't care.

Have to agree with Erica's point that PETA are hugely, disgustingly misogynistic. They care less about women than animals - or rather, they care less about women than the idea of a vegan, animal-liberated utopia (as others have pointed out, there's an awful lot of evidence that they don't really care for animals).

Lots of thoughts. I like Irena's collection, but I see lots of birds and not much Da Vinci or Earhart.

The Tupperware talk had me hoping that there would be more unconventional materials, but if some of the feathers (maybe all?) are plastic then that's good.

Re: PETA
I fall somewhere between a vegetarian and a vegan. I don't where fur or leather. I grew up on a farm, so I think that supporting local farmers is important (and I know that at least in my home area animals are treated well).

So in theory PETA's agenda ought to fit with the things I believe in, but they often rub me the wrong way. They seem to use a lot of shock value, and I don't think that's the best or fairest way to win an argument.
-E

I also hadn't checked out the next page before posting my comments. I seem to have stumbled into a heated argument, which was not my goal.

"It's just fashion." Love, Santino

To anon at 2/15/10 4:44 PM, point taken. I meant "bait" in the sense that they threw out an idea, and we all jumped on it to second their opinion or debate it. That is not a bad thing.

My comment about hyperbole was more directed at the commenters who aren't up in arms over fur and feathers. In general, things like "i couldn't love you more if I tried" and "i literally spit milk out my nose after reading this" are just too over the top to be believed.

The overall feeling from this collection is like the inside of a German hunting lodge full of dead animals and stuffed birds and guns. Way overdone and reeking of smug arrogance and death.

holy CRAP!! that collection was amazing!!!! congratulations irina!! real or fake, that fur finally looks real and expensive: all her previous fur works looked cheap. such an inspired collection.

@ Glammy "Humans are omniverous by nature--you may choose to be a vegan, but as a species, we are designed to digest a variety of food--yes, including meat, we have two stomach acids made for doing just that."

First, I believe in evolution. I don't believe that humans were "designed."

The fact that we have evolved to be able to digest a wide variety of foods doesn't mean we should eat them all. We've also evolved to like fat and sugar, but that doesn't mean we should sit around eating chocolate bars all day.

"So, let's take it up a notch--is it evil to feed my child meat if doing so confers a better chance at survival?"

If you were a lion, it would be true and you would not be evil. But it's not true.

"Is it evil if I eat meat because I'm anemic if I don't?"

Again, the question contains a false assumption. There are plenty of vegan sources of iron.

Instead of making up hypotheticals, why not look at facts? "It’s very clear that the more meat you eat, the earlier you die." http://bit.ly/pT9n7 So, is it evil to feed meat to your child, knowing you are shortening his or her life, as well as exploiting the cows, pigs, chickens and fish you are killing? I believe so.

I totally agree that there are too many people on the planet! But that's not an excuse to eat meat.

"You don't need a backyard to raise a chicken, by the way. You certainly need less room than you do for raising corn or wheat."

And what are you feeding that chicken? Whatever you grow to feed that chicken is wasteful because the resources used to grow food for that chicken could instead be used to grow food to feed a person. It takes *much* more room to grow food for a chicken than it does to grow corn or wheat for a person to eat directly.

"It is your opinion, not an absolute, that using animals for food is "wrong"."

Yes, it's my opinion that murder, rape, slavery, robbery, domestic violence and animal cruelty are wrong.

Vegan - with ridiculous FALSE arguments and made up facts - you diminish the chance anyone can take you seriously.

Ignore "PETAKILLSANIMALS".

Many of us will not even bother reading your posts.

BTW anyone notice that Johnny Weir was getting threatened for wearing fur. And Evan Lysacek's outfit was covered in feathers.

Beautiful and identifiably hers. I especially love the feather designs painted on the coats. I prefer them to the actual feathers, aesthetically, and I hope she does more of that in the future, as the piled-on fur-and-feathers look is feeling somewhat used and tired to me, no matter how fabulous that last dress (and it's very much so).

Also, I find the ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED AND HORRIFIED expression that one particularly gamine model is sporting absofuckinglutely hilarious. I guess she doesn't like having her head eaten by an unknown yet decidedly furry animal.

While she uses some of the fur and feather very effectively, that much dead animal/dead bird covering one's body in this day and age is a bit like driving a Hummer: sure, the Hummer's a valid vehicle choice, and you have every right to spend all of that money on it and drive it, but while those who see you in it are going to be awed for a moment, they'll also label you a selfish, piggy asshole for having it. While the asshole effect with this much fur and feathers isn't as strong as it is with a Hummer, my personality is still not angelic/charming enough for me to recover from that sort of thing. It makes me uncomfortable; like when I'm overseas and suddenly realize I don't know whether or not I'm being unintentionally yet horribly rude to the nice people around me.

Michael Kors's collection at Fashion Week was a total rip-off off Irina and Althea. How embarrassing for him! Guess he was inspired.

Fur? Fuck you, Irina.

Just beautiful! Loved the collection.

BTW, she's from Georgia not Russia.

.......the shapes are interesting and nice, but...roadkill of the week much?

"It was a very cold night way over on the westside of town. Butterflies to Birds. "Whats next,small dogs"?

very nice. but you have to have long, stick thin legs to pull of most of these looks otherwise you'd look a mess

Absolutely brilliant work. I don't like her, and I don't like her aesthetic, but she has truly lived up to her potential. This collection has coherence, both materially and thematically. And the workmanship is extraordinary.

The color palette? Meh. Wearability? Nah. But as art, yeah, this kicks feather-butt.

This is kind of off topic but I find it funny that HLB said that bees will never become extinct when in fact there is a problem with the bees needed to pollinate plants disappearing.

I can't help but instantly loose respect for someone says they don't care whether real or faux fur is used.

I mean, not caring for animals obviously isn't despicable, but not caring that a living creatures is being skinned for ~fashion~ is. Quite.

Great job Irina! Congratulation!I love your collection. Finally Russian designer won competition.It's so great you bring our culture in your design.I love real fur and real things.I hate fake fur as a fake smile in this country. It's such big deal about real fur. Are you all people vegetarian??? Don't think so. So please all of you just SHUT UP!!! Rich people are still going to buy whether all you bitches complain or not. If you can't afford a real fur then shut !@#$ up!