Natalie Berry speaks to New York-based designer, climber and upcycling pioneer Nicole McLaughlin about how climbing inspires her work, sustainability in outdoor fashion and how to get creative with what you already have in your gear cupboard...
When Nicole McLaughlin misjudged a dyno and fell onto her arm at her local bouldering gym in New York City, she quite literally took her injury recovery into her own hands: she stitched together a colourful patchwork of old The North Face jacket offcuts to form a sling. This creation is exemplar of McLaughlin's approach to design work, blending functionality with fashion and sustainability in a fun and experimental way - often sourcing second-hand materials from outdoor clothing and climbing gear. Shoes made with chalkbags, skirts stitched from fleeces, bras built from bumbags - not to mention Haribo shorts and a cereal packet puffer vest. Yes, you read that right.
Is this article 203 days early?
Or, 162 days late?
At least it's better than an article about #vanlife
Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
And there's me thinking an upcycling icon was Alberto Contador
> Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
It may be that the article has done her a disservice then because she herself says "It's really important to me to have functional clothing, so that's why I tend to use these items to make hyperfunctional projects" and yet not a single thing shown is useable nevermind an improvement in functionality of the item on which it is based
I actually want one those oven glove jackets. Très chic.
> Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
I'm not middle age but that doesn't change anything.
Icon?
Garbage, what every well dressed millennial will be wearing post Apocalypse.
I must say*, I don't get how cutting up what must be multiple items that, even though second hand could well have been perfectly serviceable or repairable, and turning them into something unwearable?
That doesn't appear to upcycling, just wasteful?
*middle aged man who doesn't understand alert!
> Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
Just have to take a look at the chair. No need to be middle aged to see it's bollocks
It's simple. The articles that have been made are designed to provoke, stimulate conversation. They are pre prototypes that will spark ideas. Not to be taken too literally.
> It's simple. The articles that have been made are designed to provoke, stimulate conversation. They are pre prototypes that will spark ideas. Not to be taken too literally.
Like an unmade bed? Which unlike this upcycling can at least can be slept in again, when it's finished stimulating all those thought provoking ideas.
> Like an unmade bed? Which unlike this upcycling can at least can be slept in again, when it's finished stimulating all those thought provoking ideas.
I liked the idea of the unmade bed. I don't like the idea of cutting up 4 Patagonia garments, with a life time warranty, a great after sales repair service and umpteen people who'd take them off your hands, just so you can stitch together a pretty hideous skirt. Seems to be the absolute antithesis of upcycling and sustainability.
Calm down people, there's a very simple explanation here:
At just 27, McLaughlin's custom designs have been featured in global fashion media including Vogue, High Snobiety and Hypebeast amongst others...
It's fashion: of course it's going to be impractical and rubbish.
> I liked the idea of the unmade bed. I don't like the idea of cutting up 4 Patagonia garments, with a life time warranty, a great after sales repair service and umpteen people who'd take them off your hands, just so you can stitch together a pretty hideous skirt. Seems to be the absolute antithesis of upcycling and sustainability.
I had to read the article, I didn't believe you. They cut up Patagonia clothing!!! In days of olde folk were burnt at the stake for less.
I do not judge fashion, it is what it is. As a result, I am not going to give my opinion on the aesthetic value of what has been created. However, I do question it being called upcycling. Wikipedia defines upcycling as:
> Upcycling, also known as creative reuse, is the process of transforming by-products, waste materials, useless, or unwanted products into new materials or products perceived to be of greater quality, such as artistic value or environmental value.
It could be argued that it takes "unwanted products" and turns them into products of greater "artistic quality", I cannot pass judgement on that the designer is very successful in the circles where it matters, but turning items with a lifetime guarantee into artwork is of very questionable environmental value at the very least.
I really like the waffle coat, great for long alpine routes.
What a load of absolute crap.
> Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
Middle aged? Luxury...
> It may be that the article has done her a disservice then because she herself says "It's really important to me to have functional clothing, so that's why I tend to use these items to make hyperfunctional projects" and yet not a single thing shown is useable nevermind an improvement in functionality of the item on which it is based
All looks rather fun in a fancy-dress/dressing up kind of way. Are you telling me that there is no room in the world for that?
My Jaguar failed it's MOT, so rather than fix it, I smashed it up and made a wheelbarrow , and it's a crap one at that.
> My Jaguar failed it's MOT, so rather than fix it, I smashed it up and made a wheelbarrow , and it's a crap one at that.
But if it was going to be scrapped and someone make a decorative ornament out of it that saves making a lot of decorative ornaments from freshly mined materials and saves the energy of recycling and sells it to someone who would have otherwise bought those more 'environmentally costly' ojbects?
That chair looks like something Liam neeson would cable tie a swarthy looking Eastern European baddie to and say “ you WILL tell me ....,“
Any chance of a pair of Joy Division oven gloves then?
> But if it was going to be scrapped and someone make a decorative ornament out of it that saves making a lot of decorative ornaments from freshly mined materials and saves the energy of recycling and sells it to someone who would have otherwise bought those more 'environmentally costly' ojbects?
I wonder how many of the items are genuinely at the end of their working life and couldn't be given away to someone just starting out, etc?
In fact, how many are actually brand new...
I find it amusing that this thread was temporarily archived while the more scathing posts were excised. I'm quite tempted to re-post my own just to see what happens.
> That chair looks like something Liam neeson would cable tie a swarthy looking Eastern European baddie to and say “ you WILL tell me ....,“
Dunno. Just looks like a waste of a perfectly serviceable chair to me. And I'm sure someone would have gladly upcycled those holds to their home wall rather than see them make the chair unusable.
> I find it amusing that this thread was temporarily archived while the more scathing posts were excised.
Censorship by the front door...
Is it 1st April?
Yes they deleted my comment where I wondered if the article was an advert in disguise. I don't even think the upcycling is bad and I quite like some of it (apart from wasting servicable gear).
I think it's odd how we have had 2 articles in quick sucession which just seem to promote a particular instagram account (this one and the vanlife one). And I know UKC is looking to raise more money, understandably, so it makes me wonder. This post might get deleted as well. The deletion of negative posts makes it look more like an advert to me.
> Yes they deleted my comment where I wondered if the article was an advert in disguise.
Oddly, the thread is still archived on my laptop, but reinstated in censored form on my phone🤔
Because it is.
> Oddly, the thread is still archived on my laptop, but reinstated in censored form on my phone🤔
CTRL + F5 might rectify that.
> Incoming... middle aged men explaining why all this is bollocks.
Go on then, explain why it isn't bollocks.
This person has absolutely no understanding of what the word sustainability means, and it's frankly embarrassing.
I hope they get caught outside in cold wind, wearing a jacket made of stale cereal and shiver for a few hours contemplating their life's path.
> on a more positive note this now brings new meaning to the phrase " nice pair of Patagonia s "
Wasn't it Shakira who sang
"Lucky that my breasts are small and humble
So you don't confuse them with mountains"
“...and in the final part of the trilogy of these features, UKC interviews Derek Zoolander on how whether you’re in a lay-by on the A82 or A5, Mugatu’s “Derelicte” fashion line is his absolute first choice for living his very best #vanlife..!”
OK all you naysayers, explain the point of climbing to a fashion designer.
No, because it’s all equally silly. However, half the stuff she’s cut up still looks serviceable, the rest of it looks brand new! That’s not up cycling
> OK all you naysayers, explain the point of climbing to a fashion designer.
Climbing, in the grand scheme of things, is fairly harmless, whereas the fashion industry is inherently evil.
It forces the browser to request the latest version of the page rather than rely on a cached copy.
Excellent click bait and comment generator.
And actually, quite wonderful objects.
Mick
> OK all you naysayers, explain the point of climbing to a fashion designer.
It gives them things to design, while we're off cragging (looking like I was coated in glue and shot through a jumble sale in my case)
edit: tryping
> And actually, quite wonderful objects.
If she was a seven year old, perhaps...
Surely, the clue is in the name McLAUGHlin. I’m putting a bid in for the chair with holds bolted to it, and will train until I can lift myself off the floor with said holds whilst still sat on it.
It's just art, isn't it? She doesn't claim it to be functional; she says something along the lines of it being "hyperfuctional. So functional that it doesn't work".
The chair didn't do much for me but I thought the hydration pack shoes were funny. It might not pass one of Grayson Perry's "Is it art?" tests: if you saw it in a skip would you wonder who threw away that art; but it did make me think. Mainly about how this is an extreme, mocking extension of what we see in some outdoor gear - functional beyond function. One example being how all climbing trousers seem to come with a tiny loop of elastic sewn onto the leg as a "toothbrush holder" which absolutely nobody in good mental health has ever ever used - yet they keep adding it and marketing it as a feature!
> Just have to take a look at the chair. No need to be middle aged to see it's bollocks
Tres chic or chaise trick?
> It's just art, isn't it?
Maybe call yourself an artist then?
'Designer' is a heavily overloaded word. I'm a designer, but the things I design are electronics, and electronic/computer systems (with the odd bit of mechanical and graphic design thrown in during my spare time). The term has a wide range of other uses within the 'creative arts'.
If it's art then it shouldn't be called upcycling. She is destroying useable kit to make items that don't have much of a use. Fair enough but that's not upcycling.
They say bad things come in threes so we've had;
1) The van life advert disguised as an article.
2) The "upcycling" (it's not) fashion designer advert, poorly disguised as an article.
3?) ................... I'm going for 'sustainable transport' that is actually a bus that's been painted green but is still running the most inefficient of engines.
I can see why they are writing advert-articles (adverticles?) as everyone needs money and it must be quite hard to make money off a website. No sane person would browse the internet without *dblock (I'm not even allowed to write it here) and very few people would pay for UKC, so what are they to do? However I would say that openness would be a better policy; just say on the article 'this is sponsored content' or 'in our weekly sponsored series where we highlight a cool instagram' or something like that, and people would still read it. The thin disguise of the #vanlife one and possibly this just seems a bit odd for a site that is as good as UKC.
You said it better than my half formed thoughts could muster. I'm more perturbed by the "under the radar" nature of it, thin end of the wedge? It's also telling that the UKC mods/ powers that be will remove posts alluding to it being an article and while it's their forum and they can do what they want with it I'm not convinced it does them any favors. When there was a bit of a hoo ha on an article regarding cyborg climbers various UKC staff came into the forum thread to defend/ explain/ dismiss concerns whereas these previous two haven't warranted such a response despite the strength of feeling generated by the articles.
In these austere times I agree that we all need to make money and though I do use that particular piece of software beginning with A and ending with Block though I'll put sites I like such as UKC and Pinkbike on the safe list so the ads still come through as they tend to be more relevant.
> It's also telling that the UKC mods/ powers that be will remove posts alluding to it being an article ...
No replies have been removed from this thread or the van article thread.
Alan
I'm sure my reply was removed; I asked if it was an advert and the comment dissappeared, then the thread was briefly locked. Could it be my browser acting up?
Red Rover
"Yes they deleted my comment where I wondered if the article was an advert in disguise. I don't even think the upcycling is bad and I quite like some of it (apart from wasting servicable gear).
I think it's odd how we have had 2 articles in quick sucession which just seem to promote a particular instagram account (this one and the vanlife one). And I know UKC is looking to raise more money, understandably, so it makes me wonder. This post might get deleted as well. The deletion of negative posts makes it look more like an advert to me."
Robert Durran
"I find it amusing that this thread was temporarily archived while the more scathing posts were excised. I'm quite tempted to re-post my own just to see what happens."
Yes that comment of mine is referencing an earlier comment I made that dissappeared, shortly before the thread was locked.
Hi all, I thought I'd include a quick reply here to clarify that a) this article and the van article are not advert articles which we are paid to publish and that b) if we ever do publish an advertorial article (which is really rare) we do make it obvious that it's 'sponsored content'.
Like you suggest openness is the best policy and we do work really hard to ensure that all the ads on-site fit with the ethos of UKC and UKH. Firstly, all ads are outdoors-specific and supporting independent retailers where possible. That's why you don't see adverts for expensive cars or Amazon, and the ads fit with the content of UKC/H. Secondly, UKC/H are primarily news/articles/forums/functionality (like the logbook, galleries and route cards) sites. As such, we keep all the editorial stuff very much separate from the advertorial content, which appears in distinct areas such 'Gear News', 'Competitions' and 'Press Releases'. As a policy, we don't allow editorial content to be used for advertising. In the rare case that we do, it's because there is significant cross-over which we think is of benefit to our readers, such as the Lattice Training Series. When this does occasionally happen, we make it very clear that it's 'sponsored content'.
In short, all the advertising on UKC/H is intended to be in-line with the ethos of the site, and anything that is advertorial is clearly marked as-such. We don't 'stealth post' advertorial articles.
OK thanks for the clarification, that's good to know. I'm sorry I was so wrong! I do think your adverts are much better than those on most other websites.
> I'm sure my reply was removed; I asked if it was an advert and the comment dissappeared, then the thread was briefly locked. Could it be my browser acting up?
Hands up, we did remove some comments, in fact, it was me that did it. Technical log issues meant they didn't show up when I looked.
This is actually in line with our policy of stricter moderation on threads attached to news items and articles though. Two replies were removed from the van article but they were very sweary.
As Theo has said, there was no commercial link-up with these two articles, in fact, the authors were both paid for writing them.
Alan
OK fair enough, no problem. Sorry if I was being an arse about my advert theory!