Armani did a good return to the late fifties with his 80's suits, but every revisionist since has felt the need to add a "twist" lest they not be considered original geniuses.
But really, we all know their true inspiration is not Cary Grant, but Pee Wee Herman.

Do you know that every new generation of birds adds something to the song it was taught by it's parents to identify it as it's own call? Maybe we are no different?  Every generation gives its own spin. Personally I think that post modernist thought gave collapse to visual beauty in favour of reference and conceptualism.  Arguably ugly clothes reflect ugly minds. Modernism itself is said to abandon celestial beauty in order to dehumanise people. For us to become a machine or a system and lose the joy of religious redemption. 

For me personally I think art and design should make our hearts sing on reflecting the universal order. But in saying this I also am aware that difficult art reflects difficult environments or disturb thinking. This is no less meaning full. But does it only go to perpetuate a dissonance in ourselves and our societies or is it a release and cathartic experience?  To me fashion reflects all of this so when I see extremes or ugliness Inunderstand the true meaning of expression but it also brings a hint of misunderstanding and ignorance to a greater level of visual understanding in place you find novelty and concepts.

No way, you can't have chaos without order..we are products of order..that's why we recognise beauty because order and balance are what allow us and maintain us. Chaos is a part of a universal system that is induces collapse in order to produce better systems and destroy unbalanced ones.

What happens in art and fashion is we firstly express, second to this the degree to which we are able to balance plasticity.

People seem to care less about the second one and more about the first..which is fine but extreme cultures give birth to extreme expression. Arguably the more extreme the choas...The more order is needed..maybe this is why facism gives rise in times of disorder?

I don't want to derail this thread as Carpu has made a very important point that is worth a lot of discussion.
But.

I do really like that art above - it that you or Rothko?

I must say I visit Blue Poles by Pollack every time I am in Canberra and I never cease to find it wonderful. I just don't understand those who cant see its a great work.

So to answer Carpus question what went wrong... Id argue people were seduced by the atmosphere of madmen and the allure that dressing smartly presented. .however two things occurred. .firstly desingers had to make these clothes of their own, so designs were not identical and they were ignorant to the looks details.  Or we assumed the feeling was more important than the look..the look only had to approximate the feeling. Bring into that cost..time etc..You have a reworking and approximation fed by desire to feel and businesses to make money.

The reason I think we enjoy detail..is because it is more difficult to achieve an authentic look so the reward to our brains is greater when we recognise it.

Maybe we are harder to please..or need greater authenticity to bring about the feelings that we are trying to recreate?

The trouble with Mondrian imo is he didn't paint outside the lines. Hollywood Boogie Woogie begins to look disorganised. But to anyone who has ever quantised music on a piece of music software when you lock everything to the beat it sounds mechanical and robotic..I think thats were he went wrong with how he ordered the space ..when you play outside and around the pulse that is when things become interesting. Pollock went to an extreme of almost losing any strict measure.

The above piece which is called 'Melody Hanging on Rhythm' is my attempt at giving the visual order of the grid, call that tempo or pulse, whilst the colours behind play to the rhythm but sit on or around the pulse. The colours themselves follow a system of dissonance and cossonance exactly like music.

That's a reason as good as any!

I don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes on it, it's just the observational theory I put behind my art. I want to create something that perfectly aheres and opposes at the same time. Like how those Persian rug makers make deliberate mistakes. Mathematical perfection can be very plain the chaos and ugliness needs to be there so we can recognise perfection amd beauty. 

Like rothko said Demons and Gids give drama. Drama is really flux..and all things are in flux