SHOWstudio: Blog: FLOWERS FOR KATE: Kate Speaks...Poetry!

Gareth Pugh creates a dress LIVE
20, 23 and 24 November 2009
11:00-19:00 GMT

LIVE STUDIO: FRIDAY
BRITISH VOGUE, ROBIN DERRICK, LISA ELDRIDGE

Submit Your Videos

FLOWERS FOR KATE Kate Speaks...Poetry!

By SHOWstudio, 17:52 Fri 11 Apr 2008

Nick Knight's 360 degree 'time slice' shots of Kate Moss, captured on our shoot for V last December, may still burn on your retina. But now let the voice of Kate Moss ring in your ears! For the the film they were destined to create is now complete and ready for viewing. With the magazine on the newsstands, this final flowering has come at an opportune time. Flooded with swirling, luminescent colour, hypnotic silhouettes and with Kate's spoken soundtrack of Roddy Lumsden's poem 'Bloom' that he composed on set, horticulture has never seemed quite so fascinating.

View this project

Comments (35)

Comments are also posted to the Blog Comments Forum

I getting so tierd of that chin-up-pose from Moss...

By Tor Erik at 13:54 Sat 12 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Kate sounds so lovley and sincere. encharnting and heart felt. fucking beautiful.

By maria n at 14:48 Sat 12 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Visually this film is absolutely stunning and one of the best of the 3D scanning pieces Nick Knight has done to date. I'm pleased NK pursues this type of experimental work rather than just relying on safer and less adventurous formats of image making.
This is the first time I got a chance to look at the film-there's always something on Showstudio to keep me happy-Thanks for sharing!

By Turbo at 14:48 Sat 12 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

It seems that nothing seems to gel on this one, music, poem, effects, voice over.

By marko at 00:11 Sun 13 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

I agree that the abstract poetry and visuals are quite arkward in some places but the links betwwen the words,shapes and colours are stunning. roping root and stem is my fave.

By maria n at 02:01 Sun 13 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

I know that the 60s 70s is very fashionable at the moment, but why choose to make a visual statement using updated phycadelic imagery, there are some parts of this film that make me feel nauseas due to the effects used. The reading of the poem is very flat and dry, and also lacks any engagement with the words that are being spoken: does not bring the poem to life. I have directed RADA trained actors in the past, so hearing Kate was an assault on my ears. The whole production has a cold and mechanical feel to it. I do not know why people sent in flowers for this project if they have all been processed out of oblivion. , plus I cannot fathom why someone would want to base a production on a poem that lacks sophistication or depth.

By marko at 10:05 Sun 13 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

I personally feel Roddy Lumsdens poem Bloom is beautiful.
I don't think we can ignore the uniqueness of the fact that it is Kate Moss reading it and i think her delivery is a pleasant surprise, tender and charming.
This is a project with no parallel, flowers being sent ,the shoot being broadcast live , the use of a time slice for fashion imagery, the interpretation of this seasons floral theme from the collections, the photographs in V magazine, original poetry being written live in response to fashion,and now this film . I cant understand how anybody would want to complain ,it is not happening anywhere else and none of us are getting charged a single cent for this unparalleled intimate access!

By harley at 12:03 Mon 14 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

STUNNING

By saint at 12:43 Mon 14 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Nice.
Not sure about the film though, was expecting a little more..

By lee.colwill at 14:18 Tue 15 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

I think there's no win situation when Kate Moss is involved, there will always be those who think it's an easy choice and it's intriguing mainly because her notoriety overtakes everything. Do you think it's just as powerful if another unknown model participated in this project?

By KaWai at 18:46 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

But it is all about it being Kate.The whole project is based on Kate and what she represents. Of course it would be different if it was somebody else. For example if Amy Winehouse sings a song it gives it a totaly different meaning and perspective than if say Kylie sings it.

By harley at 19:20 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

What does Kate Moss represents? What she represents might have nothing to do with how she is in real life.

By KaWai at 19:30 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

and the same can be said of anybody in the public eye from barak obama to britney spears. so what?

By harley at 19:35 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Kate Moss rarely speaks in public, she doesn't tell people what she thinks, her points of views, she only models. There's a difference between her and Britney and you can't compare a politician with a model who doesn't speak her mind to the public.

By KaWai at 19:52 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

you really think you are hearing what politicians think???!
it is all written for them,you are hearing spin doctors and speach writters.
in any case kate did a long and more importantly LIVE interview here on showstudio, check it out in the archive

By harley at 19:57 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Amy Winehouse is all about telling her stories, her guts through songs, Kate Moss just poses in clothes and represented other products,she shows split moments of emotions for the sake of making pictures but that's no glimpse into her mind and points of view.

By KaWai at 19:59 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

just poses in clothes! if she just did that she wouldnt be the most sought after model in the world now would she?

By harley at 20:04 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Does it matter what Kate represents then, she is just the subject the project was based upon, but since she rarely gives interviews, she has certain mystic to the public, people could project any feeling they have on her, she doesn't dictate how people should feel about her, whereas politicians and entertainers, they want to control how people view them.

By KaWai at 20:06 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

She does poses, that's the main job of a model is to sell the products, she has to show the clothes, has to project the right emotions for the sake of making pictures, really great models do this really well, they know how to use their bodies and gives the right emotions, they know their best angles, but they have to know how to show the product well, that's the main thing they never forget that.

By KaWai at 20:09 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

sorry feel like i am losing the sense of where this is all going

By harley at 20:13 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

A great model comes alive in front of the camera, she transforms, all her energy becomes more focused, her face would move ever so slightly to catch the light and gives the best angles, and she would exude expressions and emotions which she knew the camera would capture. But she would always knows not to cover up the product, it's a little bit of acting, posing, but it's all about selling the product, especially when shooting for ads and catalogs.

By KaWai at 20:17 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

just read on google that showstudio are putting up another film with kate in it on 3rd may. something to do with agent provocater. i think he director mike figgis did the last one, i can't wait.

By harley at 20:43 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

I think the fact Kate Moss is very inspiring to people is a very interesting thing, when what she does in front of the camera is no different than some of the really good models, somehow she has something that's inspiring.

By KaWai at 21:21 Wed 16 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

yes! This is something that really interests me and something that seems to be a fundamental ingredient 'successful' fashion.
Does anyone have any ideas of what it is?

By Karl Fuler at 10:04 Thu 17 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Yes that is true ... I somehow see her in a way as the only present old Hollywood school glamour. Remember the story of Greta Garbo ? But from the moment she became less enigmatic to the public then things changed in her career .
Ms Kate Moss is very wise to keep her enigma going, the public wants that. Of course we are in a different time and she is a modern woman as far as life goes, I think, but nevertheless people WILL ALWAYS want someone who can inspire them ... the chemistry.... it is all about the chemistry....

In any case this pic of hers has something Dietrich-sque & Monroe-sque combined ... the air about it .... absolutely glamourous!
I cannot really understand the negative reactions about this project ... just consider that Nick Knight, I think, was trying to experiment by combining poetry , visuals, voice and glamour ... that in itself is quite something that deserves some recognition . After all he's the first one who has tried that .... as far as my knowledge goes....

By Galileo's Universe at 06:29 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

What do you see as the differences between glamour and romanticism?

By Karl Fuler at 10:08 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Romanticism was a reaction against the order and restraint of classicism and neoclassicism, and a rejection of the rationalism that characterized the Enlightenment. ..... and Glamour is the attractive or exciting quality that makes certain people or things seem appealing or special ..... but to answers your curiosity, I personally believe that 'glamour' as we see it today is totally deviated from the actual meaning .... I think that in Kate Moss' case .... yes it is a kind of Romanticism that makes her unique ... because, as I see it , glamour doesn't exist anymore in the real context as it did in its hay days ... the meaning has been hollowed, it only applies today to the superficial , the packaging, rather soulless .... as far as I see it.

It is indeed emotional the connection as I see it .... and Kate does seem to be able to make the link, she not only inspires the public but she does seem to move them emotionally, for whatever reason .... while most of the 'glamourous stars ' can and have achieved the title by the grace of the press .... but lack the emotional connection in general .... I think ! :)

Look at that pic !!!... it says so much more ... it is not just a pic of a model posing... it is a pic with a soul and individual character.... and that is very difficult to catch !.

Glamour is also poetry ... you have it or you don't ! ... if you can understand what I mean ...

Do forgive me if my explanation doesn't seem to make any sense ... but that's how I perceive it :):) ...

By Galileo's Universe at 11:00 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Thanks GU.
You seem to have a very strict perception of romanticism. I was thinking more of our personal romanticism – romantic vision;
“(usually initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a style of literature and art that subordinates form to content, encourages freedom of treatment, emphasizes imagination, emotion, and introspection, and often celebrates nature, the ordinary person, and freedom of the spirit”

Glamour and romantic vision are products of our personal imagination – they both have much to do with fantasy don’t they?
Your points about hollow, superficial glamour – I think this has much to do with our culture’s increasing trend to reject the romanticism of the individual. Imagination is not encouraged. Now I’m struggling to make sense.
I think there is a confusion of ‘romantic’ and ‘glamorous’.

By Karl Fuler at 11:24 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

On the contrary it makes sense and ...... your statement fits well in the project of ' FASHION POLITICS ' , as I see it personally ! ...

Harnessing the power of the imagination is not exactly what 'THEY' want .... but now I must be careful where I'm trading on ... because if I understand well the POLITICS OF GLAMOUR, we have then been fooled along the way :);) ... and I prefer, personally, the ' romantic' vision of glamour ....:) a contradiction in the end ....:), therefore I would like to quote the following... knowing in my understanding how much you may be interested in the subject without the 'dream' attached to it ...

'Glamour is absolutely not to be questioned and analysed but simply claimed and marvelled at. Glamour emanates in locations where the grand entrance, wealth and beauty reside, properties and qualities about which one simply does not speak in deference to the implicit/complicit decree of silence. '

"Glamour is thus a technology of radical visibility. And as with all technologies and archives of visibility the access to glamour is politically, economically and culturally regulated. Who or what is 'glamorous'and for what reasons? Who determines and defines what at a certain place and at a certain time has earned the title 'glamorous'? Just what work and exactly what knowledge is invested in the production of glamour? In order to answer these questions we have to treat glamour as an historically evolved and determined category of the capitalist aesthetic "

Ref: Aussehen, auftreten, abblitzen. Glamour as work and knowledge "Doing Glamour"-
Conception: Tom Holert
Coordination: ith - Institut für Theorie der Gestaltung und Kunst an
der HGKZ, Zürich

" ... our culture's increasing trend to reject the romanticism of the individual. Imagination is not encouraged." ...... great quote ! ...

PS. I hope I'm making some sense :):)

By Galileo's Universe at 13:02 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Thanks very much GU! I'm off to do some more investigating & enquiring on this.

p.s. I think this is getting to a paradox which concerns those with an interest in fashion - conflicts of the romantic vision of glamour and art, and the more unconcious needs to prove ourselves (to gain respect)or to be 'accepted' ???

By Karl Fuler at 14:37 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Kate's inspiration to the public is more than Garboish, she has an element of tragedy, I think, since the scandal, the fact that she was in pictures that looked seedy in that recording studio, and that's very contradicting to glamor, how the press hounded her, even investigated by the Scotland Yard(Tang Wei was singled out in China by the gov't, because of her nudity and the not too anti Japanese position in Lust, Caution, I found similarity in the UK Scotland Yard singled out Kate Moss, the Chinese gov't was afraid that Tang Wei's success would open a flood gate to all the mainland Chinese women,who would get the suggestion that selling their bodies to get rich is the way to go, Kate Moss singled out because the Scotland Yard said her influence on impressionable young people, that they would just copy whatever she does, similar mentality, different subject matter) all that, added the extra element of darkness to her, that in this day and age of politically correctness, is very attractive to think about.

By KaWai at 22:47 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Kate's voice was fine reading the poem, of course it's a different feeling when not a theatre trained person recite, but as long as the feeling and honesty are in it it's still authentic.

By KaWai at 02:51 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

You are very welcome!!

By Galileo's Universe at 14:56 Fri 18 Apr 2008 | reply to this >

Beautiful and intelligent editing, it is a pleasure to see a film so sensitively handeled. It is so rare to see such gentle and emotional work in fashion. Fashion has tended to become so brash and overtly sexual.Well done Ruth Hogben.

FLOWERS FOR KATE Kate Speaks...Poetry!

Comments (35)

Add a comment