Architecture after Couture ?

Couture was once an expensive system in fashion that illustrated wealth and difference for the elite, which separated them from the masses. But as times progressed and changed, class distinctions were ‘blurred’ as Varnelis stated, and couture became overindulgent and uptight. Class distinctions became less visible and a bit less important, and as the Varnelis said, “difference is no longer a property of the elite”, meaning that it now became possible for the masses to remix and create accessible fashions that could make themselves different, though not in the amount of money the possessed, rather as a group of shared interests/identity (fashions of subcultures). This same change, he says, must happen in architecture. Similarly to couture, the grander the piece of architecture, the grander the person (or their wealth) must be, separating the wealthy elite from the rest. This will, as happened with couture, eventually become unimportant and not sensible. This is the reason that architecture must find a way to allow accessible difference to the masses, in order to maintain any importance. The architectural equivalence of couture can only be one sphere in the realm of architecture.