Expert Collections containing Melchior
Expert Collections are analyst-curated lists that highlight the companies you need to know in the most important technology spaces.
Melchior is included in 1 Expert Collection, including Food & Meal Delivery.
Food & Meal Delivery
Startups and tech companies offering online grocery, food, beverage, and meal delivery services.
Melchior has filed 12 patents.
Sexual attraction, Agricultural pest insects, Ethology, Flavors, Beetle families
Sexual attraction, Agricultural pest insects, Ethology, Flavors, Beetle families
Latest Melchior News
Nov 17, 2023
Abstract The article examines a fashion exhibition at a heritage museum on a historic site in terms of fashion museology. Fashion museology, which has emerged from the growing phenomenon of exhibiting fashion in museums, advocates the visual representation and holistic atmosphere of the curatorial space that determines the on-site audience experience. This article focuses on how the interrelation between fashionable clothing, the bodies of the audience, and the heritage space constructs a hybrid space in which bodily movement articulates the displayed clothing. We consider the heritage space to be a performative event and explore how heritage museums can harness and make practical use of the affective interrelationship within the designed museum space in terms of the quality of the fashion exhibition experience. Museum audiences are situated in and moved around by the curated spatial environment, which is a space with cultural residuals and historical inheritance, where the bodily encounter with the displayed clothing occurs. The investigation of this interaction via case studies sheds light on the overlooked haptic experience and spatial storytelling in fashion exhibitions. The site-specific interaction at the heritage space mediates the body in multiple ways. Such curated bodily movement acts as a narration that imbues the clothing on display with meanings. Introduction Fashion has been studied by humanities scholars mainly in terms of the complexity of its production and consumption as commercial product, the interaction between personal, national and transnational identities, and its mechanisms as cultural product (Paulicelli and Clark, 2009 ). Despite the growing popularity of exhibiting fashion in museums (Pinnock, 2019 ), this practice is dominated by visual sensibility as the primary sense of audience experience—that is to say, the focus is on the way people visually perceive the display artefacts and their attached meanings, which is a cognitive and cultural process (Kaplan, 2002 , 37). The exhibiting space, or the culture-inscribed environment, constructs a relation with the displayed clothing to form a certain atmosphere that is captured by the body which contributes to the holistic viewing experience. Apart from facilitating the movement of the visitors, the exhibiting space actively engages with the bodies of visitors in an affective way. As Potvin notes, “environments mitigate, control, inform and enhance how fashion is experienced, performed, consumed, seen, exhibited, purchased, appreciated, desired and, of course, displayed” (2009, 1). The site-specific affective experience reinterprets the historic content of the displayed clothing via bodily experience in contemporary time. Acknowledging studies on how fashion displays are presented in museums in terms of historical analysis (Clark et al. 2014 ), this article explores fashion in museums in terms of lived experience and bodily encounter, specifically with reference to museums built on historic sites. The space of the heritage site, as differentiated from the institutional museum space, has accumulated cultural residuals and inscribed historical meanings. We consider the heritage space is a performative event and explore how heritage museums can harness and make practical use of the affective interrelationship within the designed museum space in terms of the quality of the fashion exhibition experience. This space is fashioned by and ‘culturalizes’ the displayed fashionable wear, which is in turn perceived by audiences whose bodily experiences reflect the intertwined atmosphere of the space. In other words, bodily movements promoted by and within the space articulate the cultural meaning of displayed clothing. As Paulicelli and Clark note, “clothing is part of material culture and has a double face… [that is] public and private, material and symbolic, always caught within the lived experience” (2009, 3). Acknowledging the value of traditional methods of studying symbols, patterns, and forms, for example, as a means to interrogate human culture and history, this study nonetheless takes an affective approach to considering fashion in the museum. The increasing popularity of exhibiting fashionable clothing in museums is not just commercially oriented, rather it is an opportunity to reconnect the body of the audience to the displayed clothing that was initially made to be worn, touched, and felt, but which can now only be visually appreciated. Acknowledging concerns regarding knowledge production by museum, which is partial and situated and always politically driven (Vergo, 1989 ), the concept of the inclusive museum derived from new museology Footnote 1 can be critically adapted in fashion museology especially in terms of bodily engagement. The inclusive museum allows audiences to access the cultural heritage regardless of their class, age, gender, ethnicity, and education (Vergo, 1989 ). This democratic advocacy is coherent with the concept of “museums as contact zone” proposed by Clifford ( 1997 , 192), where different cultures come into contact in a museum environment. The inclusive museum largely focuses on cultural issues despite potential for some critique; for example, possible controversy caused by a culture being misrepresented outside of its original context. Nevertheless, the museum under new museology, as a popular place of culture, entertainment, commercialism and, indeed, education, is inclusive and engages with museum users interactively. Therefore, the inclusive museum can be thought and achieved through “inclusive” bodily experience at a haptic level. The study proposes a shift in emphasis from the visual to the haptic dimensions of audience experience in fashion exhibitions with a focus on heritage sites as institutions that foster such engagement. Heritage sites are rich in multisensorial and cultural residuals requiring bodily involvement where the spatial narration of the affective heritage environment is understood via both visual and haptic experience. The heritage museum is built within, and is part of, the on-site story co-making and the affective interrelationship between museum visitors, heritage space, and displayed clothing. Visitors are engaged/disengaged with/in the heritage space before interacting with the displayed garment situated in the curatorial setting (Liu and Lan, 2021 ). Acknowledging traditional thought on heritage-as-object and object-as-representation, the article instead focuses on bodily encounter as an alternative approach to understanding fashion exhibitions on heritage sites. In other words, the garment can tell a story and can only do so within the curatorial and architectural framework created by the museum display; at the same time, the garment needs to be curated in coherence with the heritage space so that visitors are engaged via vibrant bodily interactions to make the storytelling affective. The study uses case study analysis to reflect the phenomenon of the fashion exhibition on a heritage site through different perspectives (Thomas, 2015 ). Following the introduction, the article is divided into the following sections: the literature review on fashion in terms of cultural identity, fashion in museums, and bodily engagement on heritage sites. This is followed by the analysis of two case studies with divergent approaches. The textual approach adopted in the case of the French designer Pierre Cardin Footnote 2 runway show and exhibition in Beijing in 1979 elaborates on the significance of the body of audience. The investigation reflects on the critical presence of the audience in the success of the Cardin exhibition, whereby the exhibition is interpreted as a political and cultural event due to the on-site bodily engagement and the atmosphere co-produced by the presence of the audience. The article then, via an experiential approach, provides an empirical study on the second case study of a temporary fashion exhibition at a heritage site, entitled Peking Express, held at the Beijing Temple of Confucius and Imperial College Museum at Guozijian, Beijing, in 2013, which was an exhibition of works created by Chinese fashion design students Footnote 3 under the guidance of renowned Dutch fashion designer Alexander van Slobbe and Lan Lan. The exhibition is a case study on the creation of a hybrid space with inclusive bodily engagement, using haptic experience as a way to gain understanding rather than by applying authoritarian interpretation on cultural representation. The ensuing discussion on the exhibition aims to conceptualize exhibiting fashion on heritage sites. From fashion as identity to fashion in museums Fashionable clothing as cultural identity Originating from studies of fashionable dress as material artefacts, fashion studies has extended into interdisciplinary research, where the design aspects of clothing in terms of structure, silhouette, color, form, function, and material/textile are studied by scholars to produce cultural meanings and conduct visual storytelling, which are the main focus of fashion studies in contemporary discourse (Teunissen, 2014 ). Scholars such as Tarrant ( 1996 ) are interested in the social and physical aspects of the history and development of clothing; while others like Taylor ( 2002 , 2004 ) focus on the material culture of dress history addressing the interrelation of socio-cultural, theoretical, and object-based contexts. Clothing can be read and decoded in terms of the value of textiles and symbolic power of decoration in the cultural system to reflect ethnicity, social status, age, sexuality, etc. (Wilson [ 1985 ] 2020; Entwistle, 2015 ; Sikarskie et al. 2023 ). In Silverman’s words, “clothing draws the body so that it can be culturally seen, and articulates it in meaningful form” ( 1986 , 145). Before the increasing popularity of fashion in museums in the past two decades, fashion was studied in terms of fashion as system (Kaiser, 1990 ); and fashion as identity, exemplifying cross-disciplinary approaches across philosophy, anthropology, and sociology (Wilson [ 1985 ] 2020; Davis, 1992 ; Svendsen, 2006 ). Fashion is conceptualized as a practice and event originating from social relations (Breward, 2004 ), whereby stylish clothing is a “demonstration of identity” (Ross, 2008 , 12) and “personhood in aesthetic form” (Gell, 1998 , 157) in order to fulfill the needs of people in relation to social adaptation and self-distinction (Simmel, 1997 ). Scholars Jones and Leshkowich ( 2003 ) elaborate that colonial discourse is reflected in the dress in colonized countries in Asia. In short, fashion is a medium and it is always mediatized in the effort to understand the world. Fashionable dress is more than an object to wear but a human-made artefact understood as a social tool (Barnard, 2014 ); for example, Miller argues that fashion is social custom, “an imitation of the others” ( 2007 , 32), that can be studied, displayed, and understood as a cultural phenomenon, which is, in turn, prompting the increasing number of fashion exhibitions in various museums to take place. Borrowing Ribeiro’s ( 1995 ) words, “fashion acts as a link between life and art” (5), while museums manifest and extend this connection. Along with the emerging phenomenon of fashion in museums in the past decade, discussions are being carried out by many scholars, such as Wallenberg ( 2020 ) who argues through analyzing several fashion exhibitions that “fashion’s intimate relation to life” is a way to understand past lives whereby fashion and dress are a part of cultural histories (2). In other words, studying fashion is way of better understanding everyday life, as fashion is embodied in every aspect of our cultural life; every piece of clothing worn on the body carries social meanings associated with the person (Dunne, 2010 ). Moreover, Steele ( 2008 ) notes in examining some fashion exhibition practices, such as the exhibition, Visions of the Body: Fashion or Invisible Corset, which took place at the Kyoto Costume Institute, that there is an interest in “the role of fashion as a second skin, and the connections between fashion and modern art” (26). Therefore, displaying fashionable dresses in a curatorial setting is more than a special theme on fashion in museums, but rather a means to develop various cultural understandings on fashion, as fashion is now consistently regarded in terms of its cultural, artistic, and historical significance. A typical approach is seen regarding gender; for example, when Petrov ( 2014 ) highlights the gender inequality embedded in conventional display methods and museum collections of dress. Moreover, Crewe argues in terms of Geographical Theory of Fashion that “envisions fashion as both product and practice, object and agent. Fashion is valorized in complex ways through design and desire, production and reproduction, representation and transformation and, perhaps most significantly, through relations between creator, wearer, and garment in space and through time” (2017, 6). Exhibiting fashion in museums—from object showcasing to experience co-making Fashion in museums has a relatively long history that can be traced back to the late twentieth-century (Palmer, 2008 ; Steele, 1998 , 2008 ). Fashion began appearing as part of museum exhibitions in major museums as early as the beginning of the twentieth century at venues such as the Victoria and Albert Museum in 1913, Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in 1929, Brooklyn Museum in 1925, Royal Ontario in Toronto in 1933, and McCord Museum in Montreal in 1957 (Petrov, 2019 ). The increasing interactions between fashion and museums have attracted attention among contemporary scholars and practitioners in both fields of fashion studies and museum studies. It is acknowledged that the museum always operates in line with political and social happenings of the moment and that it has its own political and social motivations and cultural ideologies. Nonetheless, exhibiting fashion in museums has mutual impacts, which include framing fashionable dress beyond merely being historic artefacts, while simultaneously influencing traditional museum practices. Drawing on Melchior’s ( 2014 ) research, it can be argued that the contemporary popularity of fashion in museums reflects the shifting interest from dress museology to fashion museology. Dress museology, which is exercised in traditional museums, reflects the emphasis of the practice of collections and studies leaning towards the aesthetics, materials, and techniques of historic clothing dressed on realistic forms – in other words, on the history and cultural representations of dresses on display, which is a typical method of understanding the world. These fashion exhibitions, or to be more specific, costume exhibitions, which have taken place in museums since the early twentieth century, concentrate on the showcasing of dress supported by the practices of collection, storage preservation, clothing maintenance, and display conditions. Dress has been handled and displayed like other artefacts to achieve the museum’s educational purposes. By contrast, fashion museology provides a contemporary approach for curating fashion exhibitions in museums where exhibitions are designed and driven by the creation of the atmosphere in the curatorial space via visual experience and bodily engagement of the audience while they are on site. The approach understands that the spatial atmosphere of the exhibiting space together with the material of the actual dresses actively contribute to the visitor’s visual experience and co-produces the on-site story (Liu and Lan, 2020 , 2021 ). “Focusing less on the actual piece of clothing and more on the creation of a visual impression, a narrative to engage and evoke the feelings of the visitor” (Melchior, 2014 , 9) drives the contemporary approach of fashion in museums. Museum practitioners, like administrators and marketing departments, value fashion as rapidly and continuously changing styles (Wilson [ 1985 ] 2020) materialized through clothes and bodies who wear them (Entwistle, 2015 ; Calia, 2020 ); in this constant pursuit of newness, the styling practices of the fashion industry can consolidate museum exhibition design and improve the audience’s aesthetic experience. Apart from attracting more, and specifically new and younger, visitors who are considered non-traditional museum visitors, fashion exhibitions can increase the vitality of museums. As Melchior ( 2014 ) notes, “fashion museology describes the focus of museums on fashion and the declaration of new museum ideologies in what can be seen as a reaction to the new museology paradigm” (6). Moreover, scholars focus on the ways that “museums have become ideal platforms for fashion display, on fashion’s potential for other areas of museum practice outside the exhibition, and fashion’s role in developing and transforming the museum as a twenty-first century cultural institution” (1–2). Museums are regarded as non-commercial spaces, and the entrance of fashion, particularly high-end contemporary fashion, makes museums a part of the fashion system, another channel of display for the fashion industry (Anderson, 2000 ). For example, according to Webb and Yokobosky ( 2020 ), dress-centered fashion exhibitions are mainly shown in two ways, either as a collection of works by a certain designer and/or brand, or a display with a sense of avant-garde that is not intended to be worn on a daily basis, such as the Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London which had almost half a million visitors from both UK and overseas (Calinao and Lin, 2017 ). Focusing on the immanent on-site visiting experience, many museum scholars and practitioners are investigating how fashion is experienced in museum contexts, such as fashion exhibitions held in art museums, design museums, cultural historic museums, and museums of science and technology. In fashion exhibitions at various museum institutions, the space in the building designed to display objects has been the center of the discussion on how fashion has been integrated into the field of museological display. There are many other characteristic places and spaces for displaying dresses, such as in art galleries, community spaces, and shopping centers. As Potvin ( 2009 ) notes, the “spaces which influence the display and representation of fashion” (6) are critical in realizing the clothing on display – specifically, the interrelation between the dress on display and the body perceiving it. In this regard, the historic inherited and culturally charged space is always more provocative than a “white cube” in mediating the physical presentation of the dresses and the subsequent cultural representation of the display upon the bodies of visitors. Experiencing a fashion exhibition held at a heritage museum on a heritage site may require one’s visual ability to understand the dress in a cultural and historic context, but it takes one’s bodily experience to understand the dress in relation to the present cultural and physical space. Acknowledging that “visibility and visuality conspicuously give fashion meaningful shape, volume, and form” (Potvin, 2009 , 7), this shape, volume, and form are meaningful in so far as they are relational to the cultural setting of the built environment and its impact upon the body of the audience. The given values and cultural meanings of fashionable dress are mediated by the space thereafter re-realized by the bodies of the audience while co-making the spatial storytelling in/with the heritage space. The study, therefore, aims to investigate how the heritage site with rich cultural residuals actively contributes to the haptic experience of the body gained from the displayed clothing, whereby touching and being touched by the textiles are significant in creating understanding of the fashion exhibition. The displayed garments are not always explained away by, or hidden behind, their visual and cultural representation, but instead can be curated according to—and (re)interpreted via—bodily experience and lived encounter. Exhibiting fashion in the heritage museum—from visual dominance to haptic understanding under the concept of the inclusive museum Studies on the visual and textual experience of visitors are dominant in discourse on the fashion exhibition; the tactile experience is generally overlooked in fashion museum experience (Petrov, 2011 ) because haptic experience gained through touching, smelling, hearing, etc., is discouraged, if not totally prohibited, in the museum setting. The traditional museum display method where objects are covered by transparent glass for protection, for example, is a disconnection and denial to haptic experience in the exhibition space. Museum exhibition is predominantly visual (Bennett, 1998 ), so communication with the public is through visual presentation (Riello, 2011 ), whereby the symbolic meaning of the object becomes prominent and is interpreted by audiences. Comprehending the heritage space and the clothing exhibited within via haptic experience. The term “haptic”, or haptic system (Gibson, 1966 ), as an embodied way of knowing, has been discussed extensively in the fields of anthropology, ethnography, architecture, cultural geography, and so forth. Haptic refers to more than immediate skin contact and includes internally felt bodily sensations (Paterson, 2007 ). With recent scholarship focusing on touch or non-visual senses in the field of psychology (Stoller, 1997 ; Howes, 2003 ), it is understood that embodied tactile and spatial experience provides a sense of immediacy for the body when interacting with the surroundings. In particular, multisensory quality is deemed as tactility, where skin is the sensing organ, while the other senses including vision “are extensions of the sense of touch” (Pallasmaa, 2014 , 34). Tactile experience as a form of non-optical function is contextualised and becomes a part of the heritage understanding (Liu, 2018 , 2020 , 2022 ). The tactile experience reactivates multisensory involvement in the embodied process of transferring meaning. This is, therefore, a tactile space; a form of embodied knowledge that promotes cultural interpretations and bodily expressions within the curated space. Going beyond the visual spectacle in curatorial display and the understanding of the artefacts through cultural representation allows haptic experience to co-produce stories on site. The fashion exhibition curated in context with the heritage environment offers visual experience as well as bodily engagement that enable clothing to be regarded together with cultural and historic values. In this regard, the heritage narration reinterprets and reconnects the dresses to the lived surroundings via bodily movement and engagement. At the same time, however, there is always a balance between the curator-led authorship and the processual, dialogic nature of the exhibition as experienced by visitors (Loscialpo, 2016 ). The historical understanding of clothing is, therefore, always realized by the body that is embodied with present-day values. Exhibiting fashionable dresses on a highly culturally-charged heritage site provides access to an inclusive museum via curatorial practice. The inclusive museum contributes to individual recognition and personal development (Mason, 2004 ), and thereafter to the regeneration of society (Fleming, 2002 , 224). The curatorial practice under the concept of the inclusive museum, therefore, seeks to organize displayed dresses to correlate with the audience’s culture and history, by (re)creating the space of the cultural residuals that allows the heritage site to mediate the exhibited dresses. Fashioning heritage in contemporary time “culturalizes” the everyday wear at the same time, whereby the exhibited dresses are presented via an audience-oriented approach that impacts on the bodies of audiences wandering through the space. According to Message ( 2006 ), the inclusive museum “refers to the style of architecture, the approaches towards installation, and the modes of publicity circulating around the museum, rather than to what is exhibited” (604). Site-specific curatorial explorations in the heritage museum, compared to other “white cube” spaces, are magnified, changed and different, as there is always a body involved, specifically the presence of the body and bodily movement interacting with/in the heritage space. The article, therefore, argues that the affective heritage environment provokes bodily experience, promotes the lived encounter while the bodily movement unfolds with/in the space, and situates the displayed clothing in a multisensorial narration, which together continuously co-produces the on-site story. With the heritage space being able to affect upon and be produced by the body, neither the space nor the displayed clothing is a fixed visual and cultural representation. The displayed clothing and anticipated bodily movement manipulated by the curatorial sitting activates the heritage museum as a multisensorial medium. Method Our research draws upon ethnographic methods combining participant observation and archival research. The two case studies presented differ in terms of participation. The first case study analysis is the international fashion exhibition by Pierre Cardin in Beijing in 1979. Relevant artefacts and archives examined include photography and texts at the National Library of China and National Digital Library of China in Beijing, undertaken in 2022 and 2023. The second case study is the fashion exhibition, entitled Peking Express, curated by Alexander van Slobbe and held at the Beijing Temple of Confucius and Imperial College Museum at Guozijian, Beijing, in 2013. One of the authors was directly involved in the design and co-curation of Peking Express; both authors visited the exhibition and the heritage site subsequently, and they have continued to visit the heritage museum an average of three times a year since then. The self-reflection and self-observation during and after the visits foreground our subjectivity towards Peking Express and the heritage site in terms of autoethnography (Adams et al. 2015 ; Anderson, 2006 ; Bochner and Ellis, 2016 ). Our on-site experiences were documented using photography. The exploration on our personal thoughts, feelings, and observations is used as a qualitative method for understanding the cultural, political, and social meanings of the heritage site that have been manifested as a curatorial space. Furthermore, the two case studies have been chosen for reasons that are coherent with the advocacy of the bodily inclusive in fashion exhibitions that focus on the socio-culturally embodied and the lived encounter. Firstly, the collaborations in both Cardin’s show and Peking Express were between a visiting European impresario and local designers/audiences, where the chosen sites, curatorial designs, and selected garments on display were social, cultural, and political statements made by and with all the stakeholders who brought their own values and thoughts into the space. Both Cardin’s show and Peking Express manifested pioneering attempts to reinterpret traditional characteristics of the heritage space materialized via the curatorial design, while remaining open to further negotiation by the audiences’ on-site movement. Secondly, both authors are grounded researchers who use their own bodies in terms of autoethnography for everyday research practice. The selection and comparison of the two cases have many implications for negotiating the bodily inclusive. For example, Peking Express involved direct bodily engagement on-site while Cardin’s show was indirect requiring involvement in conducting archival research at national libraries. By putting two fashion exhibitions using different approaches side by side, this approach reflects that fashion exhibitions on heritage sites are a vibrant, ongoing cultural negotiation with the constant presence of the body—as designer, curator, audience, and researcher, etc. ; from inside and outside of the cultural context; on and off the sites; as well as during and after the exhibition. In addition, the investigation on fashion exhibitions focuses on the interrelationship between curatorial/heritage space, bodily movement, and displayed clothing in terms of an affective approach. Affect theory has been interrogated and mobilized by the authors in previous studies in terms of heritage/museological/architectural space, and is not repeated here (Liu, 2018 , 2020 , 2022 ; Liu and Lan, 2020 , 2021 , 2021a ). In contemporary studies on heritage space, the focus is shifting from the static site and artefact, to questioning engagement, experience, and performance, whereby wandering in the heritage space becomes a process of embodied meaning and sense-making (Waterton, 2014 ). In other words, heritage space is not only symbolic, but affective (Micieli-Voutsinas, 2017 ), more-than-representational (Thrift, 2004 ), and performative and material (Kraftl and Adey, 2008 ). The fashion exhibition taking place within this complex and embodied environment is, therefore, designed and curated to be more than visual, but rather provocative, haptic, and affectual, which allows the on-site story to be co-produced and constantly emerging through ongoing and dynamic encounters of the body with the heritage-situated clothing. From visual presentation to bodily engagement in the case of Pierre Cardin’s first fashion runway in new China The international fashion exhibition by Pierre Cardin in Beijing in 1979, following China’s opening up policy, was culturally influential in transforming fashion in China into diversity. The exhibition, along with the launch of China’s first fashion magazine in 1980 entitled Shizhuang (Fashion), reinforced the notion of fashion as visual joy in the Chinese context. This article analyzes the critical presence of the audience in the success of the Cardin exhibition, whereby the exhibition is interpreted as a political and cultural event due to the on-site bodily engagement and the atmosphere co-produced by the presence of the audience. The fashion exhibition is, therefore, more than just a visual feast. The bodies of the Chinese audience both encountered and partially contributed to the curatorial setting and the exhibition space, that is, the social and political context of the late 1970s. The displayed clothing is interpreted and understood by the relationship of the audience to the social and cultural environment. Moreover, the bodies of the audience determine and (re)interpret the exhibition content that the cultural residuals of the historical site mediate. Fashion exhibition as cultural event The Cardin show was held at the Cultural Palace of Nationalities. Footnote 4 The venue was the first state-operated and modern-built museum that consisted of a museum, gallery, library, art institute, theater, and other facilities. The architecture was built on the former site of the Court of Justice in the Ming and Qing dynasties. In 1950, Mao proposed at the meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party to build a palace for the ethnic minorities, as China is a multi-ethnic country, to be used as a symbol of the great unity of all ethnic groups and as a center for the activities of compatriots from ethnic minorities. The construction of the palace was completed in 1959 and covered an area of more than 37,000 square meters. The venue was under the administration of the State Ethnic Affairs Commission and chosen because of its cultural representation and political significance for holding the first international fashion exhibition after the nation re-opened to the world. Footnote 5 Only professionals from fashion industries and journalists were permitted to attend, Footnote 6 and about 500 Chinese of all ages viewed this first showing, Footnote 7 as shown in Figs. 1 and 2 . It had a significant cultural impact on visitors, enlightening some Chinese artists and designers to realize that fashion reflects cultural embodiment and speaks for the creator. Fig. 1: First international fashion show at the Cultural Palace of Nationalities, 1979. Source: National Library of China and National Digital Library of China, Beijing.
Melchior Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
When was Melchior founded?
Melchior was founded in 2017.
Where is Melchior's headquarters?
Melchior's headquarters is located at Lille.
What is Melchior's latest funding round?
Melchior's latest funding round is Acquired.
Who are the investors of Melchior?
Investors of Melchior include Le Petit Ballon.