We are taught to believe that less is more. In the post-war  Western World of the 60s and 70s, when it started to form, minimalism made all the sense in the world. And it continues to do so in harsh economic times such as these, even if out of necessity more than anything.

In art, minimalism refers to a work that favours “impersonality, simplification of form, and the use of often massive, industrially produced materials for sculpture, and extended its influence to architecture, design, dance, theater, and music” (source). Nowadays, we favour minimalism not only in art, but in our lifestyle as well.

The less we buy, the more we save. The less we eat, the thinner we get. From “4 ways to wear it” to “20+ looks from only 10 pieces” we are turning our cluttered closets into capsule collections. The cropped tee of the late 80s, early 90s is also making a comeback this summer. Maybe because this is said to be the hottest summer in the last 130 years, according to NASA experts. Might it also be because less fabric equals less production costs? And not to forget the industrial side of minimalism, mostly everything we buy is mass-produced.

In architecture, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe translated the concept of “Less is More” by making the same element serve more than one purpose. Similarly, Dieter Rams was working by the notion of “Less but Better.” So, having this in mind, I have to ask is less really that much more? I am not saying that downsizing is not good for us, as well as the environment. Yet what we are downsizing to is really the best that we can have? More specifically, is our less really better? Or are we just settling for fewer instead of better?

I understand that we need to have fewer things, but that doesn’t mean our new basics should express less of our personality. Less of what we have should never translate into less of who we are.

I’m wearing a cropped b&w cotton tee from Gryphon, which is one of the buys from NY, has two golden chains made out of tiny stars attached to the shoulders.

With a vintage black skirt made of silk that was I tucked in at the waist as it was a bit too long for the outfit I had in mind.

The black open-toe wedges are Kelsi Dagger and the hair accessory is from an H&M in Helsiki.

*Romanian translation* Stiu ca trebuia sa fac asta de mult, de fapt de la inceput, dar mai bine mai tarziu decat niciodata, nu? 🙂

Suntem invatati sa credem ca mai putin inseamna mai mult. In lumea vestica de dupa razboi a anilor 60 si 70, cand a luat nastere, minimalismul avea tot sensul din lume. Si continua sa il aiba in vremuri economice dure ca acestea, chiar daca mai mult din necesitate decat orice altceva.

In arta, minimalismul se refera la o lucrare care favorizeaza “impersonalul, simplificarea formei, si utilizarea cel mai des a unor materiale masive si produse industrial pentru sculptura, si si-a extins influenta in arhitectura, design, dans, teatru, si musica” (sursa). Astazi, favorizam stilul minimalist nu numai in arta, dar si in felul in care ne traim viata.

Cu cat cumparam mai putin, cu atat mai mult economisim. Cu cat mancam mai putin, cu atat mai mult slabim. De la “4 modalitati de a o purta” la “20+ tinute din numai 10 piese” ne transformam dulapurile dezordonate in colectii capsula. Tricoul scurt de la sfarsitul anilor 80 si inceputul anilor 90 revine de asemenea vara asta. Poate pentru ca se spune ca aceasta va fi cea mai calda vara din ultimii 130 de ani, potrivit expertilor NASA. Ar putea fi si din cauza ca mai putin material inseamna costuri de productie mai mici. Si ca sa nu uitam de latura industriala a minimalismului, aproape tot ce cumparam este produs in masa.

In arhitectura, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe a tradus conceptul de “Mai putin e mai mult” prin a face ca acelasi element sa serveasca mai multor scopuri. In mod similar, Dieter Rams lucra dupa notiunea de “Mai putin, dar mai bine.” Asa ca, avand acestea in minte, trebuie sa intreb daca mai putin este cu adevarat mult mai mult? Nu spun ca reducerea consumului nu este un lucru bun atat pentru noi, cat si pentru mediu. Totusi lucrurile la care reducem sunt intr-adevar cele mai bune pe care le putem avea? Mai specific, este mai putinul nostru si mai bun? Sau doar ne multumim cu putin, in loc de mai bun?

Inteleg ca avem nevoie sa ne reduce la mai putine lucruri, dar asta nu inseamna ca noile nostre lucruri de baza ar trebui sa exprime mai putin din personalitatea noastra. O reducere a ceea ce aveam nu trebuie sa insemne o reducere a ceea ce suntem.