now let’s genuinely discuss this, why is there a difference between aespa and illit in this situation?
1. aespa and newjeans do not share the same corporate ecosystem
2. aespa and newjeans have polar opposite identities in public perception
3. aespa does not have newjeans’ plan
those are three brief points but..
aside from that, a useful way to tell the difference between what’s more likely homage and more likely imitation/copy is thinking about the fact that homages point at something, while copies substitute for something.
it’s more likely to be a reference/homage if it’s a brief moment rather repeated across career scaling, the surrounding choreography intent is different, the artist is clearly signaling recognition or respect simultaneously, the work can stand on its own without the reference etc.. all of that points to aespa’s case.
if aespa is doing a movement from newjeans whilst mentioning eta and not sharing the same emotional space and corporate ecosystem as them in the market, most people will clearly view that as a reference.
now, it’s more likely to be a copy when multiple distinctive sequences are reproduced, the timing, formations, transitions, and intent with execution overall are all highly similar, the borrowed material intent is a major selling point of the performance, the similarities go beyond one or two recognizable moments, and an average viewer would mistake the new work for the original creator’s work. all of that points to illits case, in addition to them sharing the same corporate ecosystem as newjeans unlike aespa. oh and also, the plan.
Gucci’s ‘Beauty and the Bag’ campaign continues with new imagery fronted by the Houses’s newly appointed global brand ambassador, Ningning.
Captured by Mert and Marcus, the maknae of aespa appears in a Gucci look that mirrors the graphic identity of the Paparazzo bag, with the House’s codes carried across silk, jewellery, eyewear, and leather. Presented in black leather, sand suede, and GG canvas, the design takes center stage as the campaign explores the instinctive connection between wearer and bag, framing the handbag not as an accessory, but as the object around which the entire image is constructed.