What to do with Evening Classes?

[meggo]

I'm really unsure about what to do in this situation or if I should have posted this in the main forum. Anyway.. I took an evening class in Fashion Journalism and Fashion Buying and Merchandising through Central St. Martins and the London College of Fashion, respectively. These are well known fashion schools based in London. these classes aren't for credit, they can't go towards a degree, they aren't for anything really other than your own personal enjoyment and to build skills in an area where they may be lacking. I took the first class in 2003 in my first year in the UK just for fun and to see how interested I was in fashion. The second class I took about 2 years later when I moved back to London to live and work full time, again to gauge whether that was an area of fashion I wanted to go into. These classes do issue certificates when you are done (basically just saying you completed the course) but I never bothered getting them at the time. I would like to put this on my law school app's because it helps substantiate that I am involved and passionate about fashion. However, last time I tried to get a re-issued certificate from CSM, it was a huge hassle, they archive old things from pre-2007, the person would have to go and fetch it for me, they promised they would, and needless to say it never surfaced. That was a year ago. I imagine it will be more difficult this time. I don't have a problem calling and pleading with them about it if it's necessary. Since these classes aren't for credit, don't go towards a degree, but are done by a university, how do they fit in? Do I just put this information on my CV/resume? Or do I need to somehow gets these certificates to LSAC? This one thing is really stressing me out so any advice would be appreciated!

[Ninja1]

I don't think I'd even bother bringing these classes up. Given that they basically never happened on paper (no grades, no credit, no degree), I don't believe they would matter at all in your application process. I mean, I'm not sure where you're going with it, but I can't really see how being involved with fashion can help your law apps in any way and these classes don't sound like they really counted for anything.

[TimMitchell]

I'm really unsure about what to do in this situation or if I should have posted this in the main forum. Anyway.. I took an evening class in Fashion Journalism and Fashion Buying and Merchandising through Central St. Martins and the London College of Fashion, respectively. These are well known fashion schools based in London. these classes aren't for credit, they can't go towards a degree, they aren't for anything really other than your own personal enjoyment and to build skills in an area where they may be lacking. I took the first class in 2003 in my first year in the UK just for fun and to see how interested I was in fashion. The second class I took about 2 years later when I moved back to London to live and work full time, again to gauge whether that was an area of fashion I wanted to go into. These classes do issue certificates when you are done (basically just saying you completed the course) but I never bothered getting them at the time. I would like to put this on my law school app's because it helps substantiate that I am involved and passionate about fashion. However, last time I tried to get a re-issued certificate from CSM, it was a huge hassle, they archive old things from pre-2007, the person would have to go and fetch it for me, they promised they would, and needless to say it never surfaced. That was a year ago. I imagine it will be more difficult this time. I don't have a problem calling and pleading with them about it if it's necessary. Since these classes aren't for credit, don't go towards a degree, but are done by a university, how do they fit in? Do I just put this information on my CV/resume? Or do I need to somehow gets these certificates to LSAC? This one thing is really stressing me out so any advice would be appreciated!

What are you going to specialize in, fashion law?

[Julie Fern]

I'm really unsure about what to do in this situation or if I should have posted this in the main forum. Anyway.. I took an evening class in Fashion Journalism and Fashion Buying and Merchandising through Central St. Martins and the London College of Fashion, respectively. These are well known fashion schools based in London. these classes aren't for credit, they can't go towards a degree, they aren't for anything really other than your own personal enjoyment and to build skills in an area where they may be lacking. I took the first class in 2003 in my first year in the UK just for fun and to see how interested I was in fashion. The second class I took about 2 years later when I moved back to London to live and work full time, again to gauge whether that was an area of fashion I wanted to go into. These classes do issue certificates when you are done (basically just saying you completed the course) but I never bothered getting them at the time. I would like to put this on my law school app's because it helps substantiate that I am involved and passionate about fashion. However, last time I tried to get a re-issued certificate from CSM, it was a huge hassle, they archive old things from pre-2007, the person would have to go and fetch it for me, they promised they would, and needless to say it never surfaced. That was a year ago. I imagine it will be more difficult this time. I don't have a problem calling and pleading with them about it if it's necessary. Since these classes aren't for credit, don't go towards a degree, but are done by a university, how do they fit in? Do I just put this information on my CV/resume? Or do I need to somehow gets these certificates to LSAC? This one thing is really stressing me out so any advice would be appreciated!

What are you going to specialize in, fashion law?

did you know julie can see right up our nose in that avatar?

[meggo]

no, I mean 'fashion law' isn't an area though I'm sure you're being facetious. It can either go the way of corporate law or more towards intellectual property where you've got a lot of copyright issues and that sort of thing and it gets a lot more specific when you get into textiles.

Anyway, the only reason I wanted to mention them is because fashion and design is a big part of my life. My largest EC is fashion related so I felt like including these classes I took at well respected institutions would help show that I interact in many ways different ways with fashion. It's not just that "I like shopping" or something like that, but I'm involved in the fashion community. I don't see why I'd exclude my interest and support of fashion and design simply because my career may or may not lead that way. Lots of people do stuff that isn't directly correlated with law. If anything, I think I think it's unique.

[TimMitchell]

no, I mean 'fashion law' isn't an area though I'm sure you're being facetious. It can either go the way of corporate law or more towards intellectual property where you've got a lot of copyright issues and that sort of thing and it gets a lot more specific when you get into textiles.

Anyway, the only reason I wanted to mention them is because fashion and design is a big part of my life. My largest EC is fashion related so I felt like including these classes I took at well respected institutions would help show that I interact in many ways different ways with fashion. It's not just that "I like shopping" or something like that, but I'm involved in the fashion community. I don't see why I'd exclude my interest and support of fashion and design simply because my career may or may not lead that way. Lots of people do stuff that isn't directly correlated with law. If anything, I think I think it's unique.

I was just being sarcastic in my last post  . I never understood how the fashion industry works, I never see a lot of people wearing designer cloths or the wacky stuff you see on the runway. The only exception seems to be handbangs. However, that might just because in a po-dunk city, when I was in NYC I saw a couple fashionistas walking around. I just don't understand how an industry that seems to be very large and expensive maintains itself by selling a product that dosen't seem to have a large market 

[meggo]

haha, I was just having a conversation about this with my boyfriend last night comparing how I view great literature and how I view great fashion. It then diverged into Joyce and Ulysses and became complicated.

The fashion industry sustains itself quite nicely actually, even in the midst of a 'recession'. I always find it funny when people say things like 'wacky stuff' on the runway. I totally understand why you say that, and why a lot of people view it that way, but I could never see it that way. Just to address that quickly, most of the stuff on the runway is highly wearable, it's just that the 'masses' aren't as familiar with those lines or the only ones that get publicized are couture shows. Often runway shows are styled a certain way to evoke an image, feeling, etc. and when the clothes hit the shops, they are easier to understand or conversely they are sometimes altered slightly to make them more wearable (this is really only in the case of labels like Alexander McQueen and Balenciaga).

As for how the industry sustains itself, I would say several things. First of all, perfume and cosmetics are the bread and butter of a lot of big houses. Like Dior for example. The profits they receive on their cosmetic and perfume ranges allow them to fund their extravagent couture shows. Couture has an incredibly incredibly small consumer base. Roughly less than 100 people in the world buy couture. The shows are for the most part extravagent. But they also can provide amazing publicity for a brand. About 8 - 10 years or so ago, things began to shift when the 'It' bag became this big phenomenon. Where bags were easily identifiable as being expensive and of a certain label and due to limited productions they became incredibly desirable. This then became the 'bread and butter' of a lot of designer houses who were getting huge profits on these things, as well as getting loads of free advertising, etc. and they help to sustain the sometimes less profitable ready to wear lines. This meant a lot of designers branch out into handbags and accessories because they see it as a way to sustain their actual clothing. Though the 'it' bag trend has pretty much become defunct, it still changed how the industry worked. Finally, I would say more people wear 'designer' clothes than you might realize.

Anyway, I'm sorry I'm sure this post is boring to you, but that is a sort of brief overview of partly how the industry functions 

[TimMitchell]

haha, I was just having a conversation about this with my boyfriend last night comparing how I view great literature and how I view great fashion. It then diverged into Joyce and Ulysses and became complicated.

The fashion industry sustains itself quite nicely actually, even in the midst of a 'recession'. I always find it funny when people say things like 'wacky stuff' on the runway. I totally understand why you say that, and why a lot of people view it that way, but I could never see it that way. Just to address that quickly, most of the stuff on the runway is highly wearable, it's just that the 'masses' aren't as familiar with those lines or the only ones that get publicized are couture shows. Often runway shows are styled a certain way to evoke an image, feeling, etc. and when the clothes hit the shops, they are easier to understand or conversely they are sometimes altered slightly to make them more wearable (this is really only in the case of labels like Alexander McQueen and Balenciaga).

As for how the industry sustains itself, I would say several things. First of all, perfume and cosmetics are the bread and butter of a lot of big houses. Like Dior for example. The profits they receive on their cosmetic and perfume ranges allow them to fund their extravagent couture shows. Couture has an incredibly incredibly small consumer base. Roughly less than 100 people in the world buy couture. The shows are for the most part extravagent. But they also can provide amazing publicity for a brand. About 8 - 10 years or so ago, things began to shift when the 'It' bag became this big phenomenon. Where bags were easily identifiable as being expensive and of a certain label and due to limited productions they became incredibly desirable. This then became the 'bread and butter' of a lot of designer houses who were getting huge profits on these things, as well as getting loads of free advertising, etc. and they help to sustain the sometimes less profitable ready to wear lines. This meant a lot of designers branch out into handbags and accessories because they see it as a way to sustain their actual clothing. Though the 'it' bag trend has pretty much become defunct, it still changed how the industry worked. Finally, I would say more people wear 'designer' clothes than you might realize.

Anyway, I'm sorry I'm sure this post is boring to you, but that is a sort of brief overview of partly how the industry functions 

Actually, I don't find it boring at all. The fashion industry has always been perplexing to me and you are shedding some light on it.

So would you say that a "couture" show (don't know what couture means) is the same thing as an executive corporate assembly where everyone is pretty much getting together to party on the company's dime? This happens frequently in business so it would follow it happens in the fashion industry.

I never thought about the impression the media gives about the fashion industry versus what reality is. It follows since retail news distorts everything, more people are going to watch when they do a report on a fashion show where the models are all wearing stuff that is unwearable, although that may be less than 1% of the shows out there.

[meggo]

Fashion (and I"m talking high fashion ie the real runway stuff that you see in Paris, NYC, Milan and London)) is roughly divided into two categories, ready to wear (also known as off the peg) and couture (also known as made to measure). Couture is in a way like a corporate event, but actually there are other fashion 'parties' and 'events' that fit that mold more than a couture show (for example, last August I think it was Dior celebrated it's I think 75 Anniversary by hosting a massive show on the grounds of Versailles) so that's more like a corporate event. Couture is still a show, people still buy the clothes from it, but the clientele is much much more limited and a lot of it is creating more of an aura around a brand.

Also, profits in fashion have been shifting significantly. Within again I would say the last ten years or so, you're profit margins are increasing a lot more because you can get more work done in factories and still charge the same if not higher prices. This is what has helped the demise of the 'it' bag. Every year prices were going up (when it started, it was surprising to spent $800-1k on a bag, now the average price is pretty steadily around 1,500 to 2k) but the labor and materials costs have pretty much staid the same. There is even a problem now that's gotten some press in Italy of having a lot of Chinese migrant workers coming and working in the factories there so that labels and companies can stamp the 'made in italy' on an item, meanwhile it's actually produced by chinese migrant labor. In addition, within the fashion industry, you have a couple really big powerhouses who pretty much own, or own a share of all the major designers. This is LVMH who you've probably heard of (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy), followed by the Gucci Group and the Prada Group. Miuccia Prada (head designer of Prada and Miu Miu) is actually a very intelligent and somewhat vicious business woman. So these brands have a lot of money to throw around and invest which in turn can make it harder for a lot of new and young designers to get started. and if you think about it, fashion is a really unique industry in that it gets free advertising EVERYWHERE. The rise of celebrity has undoubtedly helped this numerous numerous times over, but there are magazines that features designers in editorials, in style sections, in shopping sections, so everywhere these designers get free press. This means that for an up and coming label, getting your clothes on a celebrity or in a magazine, means that you don't have to spend money on print advertising. Of course you have to spend it on freebies or loans, but it's just a different animal if this makes sense.

I think the perception of the fashion industry overall, is quite funny. It always makes me a bit apprehensive to say to people 'I'm interested in fashion' because for a lot of people that translates to 'I like shopping and wearing Abercrombie' or something silly like that, but I'm very much involved in the design, styling and business aspect of how the industry functions. Part of the reason I took a break in between my first year of university and where I'm at now was to gauge whether I wanted to go into the industry, but ultimately, after taking classes like the ones I mention in the thread, I decided not too. But it's fascinating and once you go into, or know about, fashion, it opens up doors in almost every other corporate world in one way or another.