Overview
This March, the National Gallery of Victoria hosted a symposium to accompany the opening of its splendid 200 Years of Australian Fashion exhibition. Industry insiders, curators and commentators reflected on the question: 'What is Australian fashion?' — something we did too. It was a masterstroke on the part of symposium organisers to include the designers behind cult Melbourne label DI$COUNT, Cami James and Nadia Napreychikov. A more obvious choice would have been to invite the Australian scene's currently reigning faces — think Young Turks, Anna Plunkett and Luke Sales of Romance Was Born. Nevertheless, James and Napreychikov provided a level of insight about fashion that would come as no surprise to fans of their long running blog — but could have surprised a few industry figures.
Why? Why has DI$COUNT been so popular with their fans, but has been left out of so many Australian fashion conversations? We took a stroll through 200 Years of Australian Fashion to find out where this bold, highly original label sits in the Aussie design landscape.
THEY LEAPFROGGED FASHION WEEK AND MADE FRIENDS WITH THE INTERNET
A stroll through the NGV's seriously delightful exhibition reveals just how varied Australian fashion, particularly in the late 20th century, has been. As a result, the NGV symposium panel members were hesitant to spout generalisations. For James and Napreychikov, the notion of defining DI$COUNT in terms of national boundaries would be especially wrongheaded. Even before the pair had finished their studies at RMIT, they were receiving and disseminating ideas about fashion in a global context (thanks to that wonderful beast, The Internet). This interweb-fluency can probably account for DI$COUNT's rapid international success, despite the label having leapfrogged certain channels traditionally traversed by up-and-coming Aussie designers, such as presenting at Australian Fashion Week and being picked up by one of the big two department stores.
Indeed, given the nature of James and Napreychikov's designs, it's possible that avoiding the beaten path was a wise move. The spiciest part of the symposium came when the two designers noted (with appropriate disdain) that their wares have been featured in every international Vogue magazine — save the Australian edition. If only the symposium's audience (myself included) had had the cojones to question Vogue Australia's deputy editor, Sophie Tedmanson, who was a member of the next session's panel, about this curious oversight.
Then again, the omission by Australian Vogue (which seems to be in competition with its US counterpart for the title of Most Soporific Vogue) is unsurprising. The heavily sequined, badass imagery with which DI$COUNT has made its name is a world away from Australian fashion's Serious Designers — think Dion Lee, Toni Matičevski and (since his Spring/Summer 2015/16 collection) Michael Lo Sordo. There's no doubt that the work of these designers is exquisite, intelligent, and entirely deserving of the local fashion media's attention. Still, one wonders why there isn't room for coverage of both the beautiful and the brash in our local mags.
YouTube.
AUSTRALIAN VOGUE HASN'T FEATURED THEM, BUT THE ART AND MUSIC WORLD HAS
It's a relief that the Australian art world has picked up the local fashion establishment's slack.Within the NGV's exhibition itself, DI$COUNT is represented by a truly gorgeous trompe l'oeil beaded bodysuit, originally worn by Kimbra at the 2012 ARIAs. An adaptation of the piece was later created by James and Napreychikov for Katy Perry. The bodysuit is DI$COUNT at its exuberant, witty and glittering best. Perry's version (which the popstar wore on her Prismatic tour during renditions of 'Birthday') included sweet smiling balloons on her boobs, cake on the cooch and DI$COUNT's trademark (ahem, more on that later) eyes on the hips.
The ready-to-wear DI$COUNT line includes pared down versions of such couture-level creations. The label's loyal following and impressive sales come despite the few concessions made in their designs to the traditional notions of wearability that RTW supposedly demands (see for example the currently-stocked high cut briefs entirely covered in hand-sewn sequins).
Densely sequined garments constitute some of DI$COUNT's most recognisable designs. Of course, figural representation in beading isn't exactly new in western fashion history, and antecedents to DI$COUNT designs can be found in the work of Elsa Schiaparelli, Patrick Kelly, Geoffrey Beene, and Gianni Versace. Apart from their inherently satisfying tactile qualities, sequins bring to the table a lot of fashion baggage concerning conceptions of bad taste, camp and luxury. Crucially, these are ideas that James and Napreychikov have given plenty of thought to, and as designers they're really more Leigh Bowery than Bob Mackie. Incidentally, there was a moment during the symposium when James and Napreychikov mentioned that they will eventually move on from sequins. NO!
MTV.
THEY'VE BEEN ROYALLY RIPPED OFF
The problem, of course, for designers who focus on surface decoration (including beading and print) is the ease with which your ideas can be ripped off. This happened to James and Napreychikov most famously when Miley Cyrus (who had previously been a conspicuous DI$COUNT fangirl) performed with dancers at the 2015 MTV awards wearing evil eye-emblazoned costumes that MTV itself initially attributed to the Australian label (spoiler: they weren't DI$COUNT). This wasn't the first time that James and Napreychikov had dealt with this kind of thing. In 2010, the label twitter-slammed celebrity jack of all trades, Ruby Rose, for designing a pair of studded denim shorts for her Milk & Honey Collection, which bore a remarkable resemblance to a DI$COUNT pair she herself had previously worn.
A more cynical designer might have seen the Miley episode as an opportunity to gain valuable media coverage. Similarly, other labels might have judged it unwise to publicly accuse Ruby Rose of plagiarism, given her status as one of the few Australian celebrities who will even dip their toe in the pool of experimental fashion. Instead, James and Napreychikov's response to Cyrus' performance, via Instagram, included the lines, "The one thing you can't TAKE and get away with is someone's IDENTITY. We know it might be risky for us career-wise to comment on this, but if we didn't, it would mean that we stand for NOTHING." The highly manicured world of fashion seldom sees such raw emotions put on display for all to see.
THEY KEEP ON KEEPIN' ON, RIGHT INTO RIHANNA'S WARDROBE
Creative souls generally recover from such unfortunate incidents ("It is much more disheartening to have to steal than to be stolen from,"), and, indeed, James and Napreychikov continue to go from strength to strength. (Rihanna's wearing of their YOU DON'T OWN ME/ I WILL NEVER FEAR YOU dress, has to be one of the most moving pop culture/ fashion moment of recent times).
That the NGV recognised DISCOUNT, firstly by including their work in the exhibition, but also, and perhaps more significantly, by including James and Napreychikov in the symposium, elevated the discourse of Australian fashion. Despite the fact that their designs don't adhere to mainstream notions of elegance and beauty, James and Napreychikov are both extraordinarily talented and earnest about the very idea of fashion as an intellectual pursuit. So put em on your cover, Vogue, yeah?
Get a good dose of DI$COUNT in Kimbra's video for '90s Music'.
Top image: Miley Cyrus for DI$COUNT UNIVERSE by Terry Richardson.