Random Musings of a Fashion Fiend

The body beautiful...

2009-10-04T03:18:00.010-04:00

Ann Demeulemeester

It's rare that I ever swoon over an Ann Demeulemeester runway show. Clothes aside (and her clothes are always beautiful) her vision can at times be a little unrelenting. Don't get me wrong, I know that Ms. D has her clientele and knows what they want. She doesn't invest much time in thinking about what's trendy or of the moment. Some might say that's part of her appeal, others might dislike her for that very reason. I personally fall somewhere in between. I don't mind that she sticks to her aesthetic, it's just that sometimes I wish there was a little more variation from season to season. While Ann may not spend much time thinking about fashion's next direction, that doesn't always mean that she's completely out of the loop either. In a season where so many designers are revealing skin, Demeulemeester decided to cut away at her signature layers and bare some flesh...in her own way of course. The collection she showed for Spring 2010 reminded me of two of my favorite Ann D collections of the past, S/S 2001 and S/S 2006, which could explain why I like it so much. Then of course there's the undercurrent of sex and bondage that's on display. I mean really, it'd be kind of strange if I didn't like it at least a little. Keeping the silhouette predominantly lean, with an emphasis on short skirts and black leather, Demeulemeester's band of nomadic poets looked tougher and sexier than they have in quite some time. Her artfully destroyed jewelry and soft, flimsy layers were replaced with chains of zippers and bare sternums. Her trademark cropped, boyish trousers were shown in black leather and paired with everything from roughly beaded tunics to matching leather bandeaus. Belts were made of zippers that had been undone so as to fall apart in places, making them look more like harnesses than belts. Those zippers also appeared sweeping down the lapel of jackets and coats, dangling down the front of tops like fringe, even wrapped around the models' faces (romantically, of course). Balancing out the aggressive elements of the collection was a black and white print of birds, which I honestly wasn't a big fan of. Normally I like Demeulemeester's prints, but overall the avian motif didn't really do much for me. Worn with most of the looks was a leather cummerbund/girdle kind of thing that gave the silhouette a high waisted look, and also prevented the looks from baring too much skin all at once. I love the look of a plunging neckline that's been interrupted by something that has the look of fetish wear. For evening, or at least Demeulemeester's version of evening, washed leather vests or slouchy jackets were worn open over long, sylph-like skirts that dragged along the floor. Accessorized with those multi-harnessed belts or a thin chain collar dangling from the neck and attached around the waist, they were an edgy update of a cliched evening silhouette.

Like I said, I think the reason why I like this collection so much is because it's not territory that she always explores. It's not often that she goes for a really tough, aggressive, sexy mood; her vision has skewed more romantic and soulful these last few years. So it was a welcome change to see her embracing sex and severity. I also like that the lines of the clothes are kept close to the body, stripped down to their simplest forms instead of layered, gathered and voluminous. While I would give anything for her to delve into color more, like she did last spring, it's nice to see her shaking things up even a little bit.

Haider Ackermann

I've been aware of Haider Ackermann since about 2007, and in the two years since first seeing his clothes on Luisaviaroma.com I have followed his work and slowly fallen in love. On the surface there are some similarities to his fellow Belgian Ann Demeulemeester, as well as to Rick Owens. But once you look closer it becomes easier to spot what makes Ackermann distinct. For one, he uses sensuality and sexuality much more freely than Demeulemeester or Owens does. His clothes, from his twsited, super-soft leather jackets and fluid tailoring to his languid, soigné goddess dresses, are designed to exploit the female form. He has no qualms with baring flesh, cutting away fabric to reveal shoulder, back, hip or leg, which gives his work an erotic edge that isn't really to be found in the work of many of the designers whom he can be compared to. Perhaps that's due to his background. It seems natural that someone who was born in Colombia and raised in Belgium would design clothes that are a clash between passionate sensuality and moody romanticism. It also seems natural that Ackermann developed a bit of nomadic streak in his work. This season his mind went to India, though not being one for themes the results were anything but literal. In a way though the inspiration suits Ackermann's talents perfectly. On the one hand you have the elegant, regimental tailoring of the English colonial period; on the other you have the sensual wrapping of saris. That basically sums up the two things that he is best known for. Whatever led Mr. Ackermann to his inspiration, it produced what is probably my favorite collection of his thus far.

Opening with one of his signature washed leather jackets with attenuated shoulders and sleeves pushed up past the elbows worn over a short, twisted mini dress in what looks like suede that was slashed open across the hip bone, he didn't seem to stray too far from the look that has become his trademark. Sure, the silhouette was shorter, and the dress was more body conscious, but the look was instantly recognizable as his own. Then followed a number of riffs on a safari jacket. One was sleeveless and worn with cuffed leather shorts, while another in black leather was lengthened into a kind of mini dress. Yet another had been hacked away to create a halter top that was worn with a long bias cut fishtail skirt. Around look 7 was when the sari-esque elements came into play. A charcoal mini dress had cutout cold shoulders and was wrapped at the waist, while an asymmetrical top had one sleeve and was paired with slim pants in wrinkled washed satin. In the soigné department, a mannish safari jacket with face framing collar was worn over a mini skirt with a billowing train. All of these looks were in varying shades of black and gray, which isn't surprising as Ackermann tends to stick to fairly monochrome colors. Look 13 then was quite a surprise coming from him; a golden yellow silk military vest paired over matching draped shorts that swooped up across the front of the vest.

After that the collection lightened up. There was another head-to-toe yellow look of a cropped jacket worn over a draped halter gown with that same double-length skirt (which would appear throughout the collection. Then came a few looks in deep navy satin that were the perfect contrast to the bright yellow that had come before them (and which I wish there had been more of). After those three navy looks the color lightened even more into pale icy blue for a clingy v-neck column gown and an asymmetrically wrapped mini dress, faded blush for a halter dress and suede jacket combo, a soft sand colored jumpsuit in softly metallic looking fabric, and some pale, vaguely military inspired looks in beige and taupe before the collection moved into dark browns and finally black. Closing the show were three black looks, a single sleeved gown, a jumpsuit with cutout shoulders and a keyhole neckline, and finally an asymmetrical one shoulder goddess gown designed to bare one breast.

Like I said, I think this may be my favorite Haider Ackermann collection of all the ones that I've seen. His signatures are all there, the draping, the sensuous tailoring, but there's something more. Maybe it's because the pale color and the unabashed display of naked flesh is so on track with where the season seems to be going. Maybe it's just that all of the elements he's become known for seem to be amped up a bit more; the color is more unusual, the sex appeal is more overt. I'm honestly not sure what it is. It's also interesting to note that this is probably the first time that Ackermann's collection has been so much apart of the trends that are going on, but I'm sure that was purely coincidental. He's just not a trendy designer. Still, it doesn't hurt that he managed to give everyone what they want and expect from him while also managing to be a part of the moment. Whoever said you can't have your cake and eat it too clearly didn't work in fashion.

Lanvin

What can I say about Lanvin that hasn't already been said before by those with more colorful vocabularies than mine? Beautiful, glamorous, feminine, flattering, timeless; all of them work. This season, in addition to all of those things, Alber Elbaz injected his collection with more than a little bit of sex, and a big dose of good old-fashioned fun. It sounds kind of cheesy when it's put that way, but really, that was the most exciting thing about this collection; it was all about the joy of going way over the top. If you look at this collection and last season's collection side by side, they'd appear to be polar opposites. But last season, besides the restrained glamour and echoes of wartime austerity, there was a hint of eccentricity. That's nothing really new for Elbaz, his collections always have this slightly askew feel to them, but last season the effect was a bit more pronounced...at least to me. This season however the volume was turned up all the way to 11. The collection seemed to revel in that beautiful eccentricity. The show opened with sharp, fitted dresses and skirts that were finished with exaggerated, exuberant ruffles that traced the edges of a top or the waist of a dress creating a peplum. Skirts were cut tight and cropped well above the knee, while dresses or tops with deflated puff sleeves fell assymetrically off the shoulders. This whole opening section had echoes of Elbaz's F/W 2007 collection, with it's focus on exaggerated mutton sleeves and sculpted ruffles. Here though the effect was sharper, more aggressive in a way. Paired with the models' messy chignons, smoky black eyes, mile long legs, as well as the cinematic lighting, these looks made for some of the most overtly sexy looks that I can ever recall on a Lanvin runway. Mixed into the sharper looks was a beautiful asymmetrically draped ecru dress that was twisted to one side. Even that though had a sexuality to it because with the dramatic lighting and the softness of the farbic, it seemed to blend into the models' skin. There was also a one sleeved draped black jumpsuit, a surprisingly trendy moment in the collection that was a sign of what would follow.

From there Elbaz began to lighten up, both in shape and in color. After the parade of monochromatic looks that had come down the runway, out came 5 draped dresses, some slinky, others more structured, in different shades of red and pink. Two in particular caught my eye and were a good indication of the new-found sex appeal to be seen throughout the collection. Both were softly draped with a wrap skirt that opened on the side, one with a draped v-neck and a single rolled up sleeve, the other seemingly tied and knotted around the neck and falling off one shoulder. The beauty of them was that, sexy as they were, they looked like they had simply been flung onto the body and artfully arranged; like they would fall into a puddle of fabric on the floor at any moment. That's the beauty of Lanvin though, as haphazard and spontaneous as the clothes appear, they're always perfectly made. There were two looks in leather, one a black dress with puff sleeves, the other a draped chocolate blouse worn with a black skirt, that offset the prettiness well, though I do think that they would have been better had they been shown with the more aggressive opening looks. After them Elbaz moved into soft makeup shades of blush, pale tawny orange, beige and taupe. This section of looks, all of them falling in soft drapes or gathers, tied in perfectly with the whole super-soft, super-pretty lingerie mood that's become the dominant theme this season, though the clothes never really referenced lingerie. Then came two more jumpsuits, one in a faded cocoa color, the other in a pinkish taupe. The fabric of the brown one almost had the look of loose Fortuny pleats, and worn with a jeweled belt and whopping enamel and brass snake collar, it definitely recalled the era when Fortuny was at the height of his popularity.

Up until now there was no embellishment on the clothes, but it almost seems like Elbaz made a conscious decision to not only embellish the evening clothes, but to go as far as he could with sparkle and glitz. First came a fleshtoned one shoulder jumpsuit completely covered in beadwork, accessorized with a jeweled belt and layered necklaces. A beaded t-shirt was worn with a draped skirt that had clashing beadwork lightly scattered on it. Another ensemble paired a matching top and pants completely encrusted with brass colored paillettes with a beaded track jacket, again finished off with huge layered necklaces. And finally a trio of sparkling party dresses, one each in green, sulphuric yellow and red, had contrasting pieces of black that almost looked like a t shirt layered under the dress. Mixed in with the over the top beadwork were simpler draped options. Two floor length dresses were slit all the way up the thigh. One in khaki was almost like a draped shirt dress, while the other in washed black was gathered on one shoulder. Again these looks were uncharacteristically sexy for Elbaz, but they still had the languid ease and unfussiness that is associated with Lanvin. There was a beautiful navy jumpsuit with those same destroyed Fortuny-esque pleats, a simple full skirted dress in pleated teal silk, and the final look which was a nude body that had randomly draped bright pink tulle covering it. It kind of looked like cotton candy.

Needless to say, I love, love, LOVE the collection. The one thing that Alber Elbaz consistently does is create beautiful clothes that make the viewer (and I would assume the wearer as well) feel good. I love the feisty twist that he gave the collection. There's a sexiness to it that feels both right for now and fresh for Lanvin. Don't get me wrong, Lanvin is always sexy, but it isn't usually so overt. I also love how deliciously over the top this all is. In almost any other designers' hands (save maybe for Lacroix) accessorizing a fully beaded, brightly colored party dress with multiple statement necklaces, bracelets and earrings would be way too much. For whatever reason though, none of this comes off that way to me. Instead of being tacky or loud, it reads as quirky and fun, and fun is something that fashion is in desperate need of right now.

all photos from Style.com

'Tis the season...

2009-09-21T18:39:00.009-04:00

In a way New York Fashion Week is like Christmas; you have to open a bunch of gifts you didn't want and won't use before you get to a good one. That's really the best description I can come up with for it, lot's of filler with some moments of excitement. While that makes looking through the shows annoying, it also makes it possible to review the ones I like all at once.

Donna Karan

Last season Donna Karan presented one of her most perfect collections in years combining glamour and sensuality with modernity and authority...not that that's anything really new for her. She's always been about that. But included in the mix was a nostalgic kind of femininity, something really elegant and pulled together that brought her collection to a whole other level. I was definitely curious to see where she would go for spring. Donna, like many women, has two very different sides to her. One season she goes after the spirit of New York, delivering on the powerful female mantra she laid out in the 80s. The next she's following the Zen path towards serene sensuality with a distinctly Eastern feel. I can't recall a collection where she managed to fully blend her two opposing sides into the same collection...until now.

Inspired by the elements, specifically the sea and the breeze blowing off it, Karan maintained her tailored, hourglass silhouette from fall. The opening look said it all; a chalky gray nipped waist jacket with a wide portrait neckline worn with a simple pencil skirt in a lighter shade of gray. The pieces were typical Donna Karan staples, but with a twist. Below the latex ribbon tied waist on the jacket, random crinkles shaped the upper hips and added texture to the look. As it turned out texture and rippling crinkles would shape up to be the main focus of the collection. There were echoes of last spring's Prada collection in the focus on textured fabric treatments, though here the rumpled effect was used more sparingly and focused on one area of the garment. There was a strapless top in linen with tight crinkled texture at the waist worn over a pencil skirt in fabric that had the texture of crepe paper party streamers. Burlap jackets were left to fray around the edges which gave them the look of tweed. A gorgeous peach blouse reminded me of the dolman sleeved tops she showed last season. From the back though it was cutout to reveal the shoulders, and what appeared to be bat wing sleeves from the front weren't sleeves at all. And a fiery red tube dress with gray trim was shown under a matching sheer textured coat.

From there the collection continued on the way it started, though now the feminine tailoring was punctuated with the occasional soft, ethereal look. A flowy red and gray printed organza skirt which was worn with a simple fitted tank introduced an ethereal, almost balletic feel that balanced out the sexy urban tailoring. There were also chiffon or printed organza wrap dresses, one in an icy gray that was among my favorite pieces in the collection, a fantastic degrade washed leather jacket, softly draped goddess dresses that fell off the shoulder or wrapped tightly around the body, a drop-dead skirt suit in chalky white python and a simple full skirted white cotton shirtwaist-come-cocktail dress. Of course this being a Donna Karan collection there were a number of stunning, effortless looking evening dresses on display. My personal favorites were the asymmetrical white jersey toga with plunging neckline and the fiery red satin column with draped bust. Like I said last season I just don't get why Donna's gowns don't end up on more red carpets. They look like they'd be extremely comfortable, and they're stunningly gorgeous on top of that. Why any starlet would choose a frou-frou bulldozer of a gown over something sleek and sensuous is beyond me.

While I don't think the collection was as perfectly realized as her last (there was the addition of some unfortunate looking chapeaux, a criminal offense imo) it did a pretty good job of picking up where that one left off. And like I said, this collection was a great blend of Donna's two opposing sides. It was completely urbane; chic, sleek and practical, but the soothing grays and beiges combined with the rough textures that appeared throughout gave the collection an earthy quality that, I think anyway, provided a wonderful contrast. Donna's always been telling women that they can be it all - mother, executive, seductress and goddess - and this collection was a good reminder of that.

Marc Jacobs

In a way fashion trends work like a pendulum. At some point the pendulum swings out far enough that the only way it can go is in the other direction. As far as Marc Jacobs is concerned, last season fashion swung as far as it could go in the tough, studded, shoulder-padded, leather legging-ed, mini-skirted 80s redux that has dominated runways for a few seasons now, and the only logical thing to do was something else entirely. His logic isn't entirely off either. Style.com quoted him as saying that "it's not such an individual expression", the it in question being the predominant look of the moment. That would definitely explain his collection for next spring, because it couldn't be farther from what's going on right now. Combining what seemed like miles of swirling, pleated ruffles, lingerie, menswear and a touch of Zandra Rhodes' trippy bohemian spirit - all of which was styled in a bizarrely layered way - Jacobs sent out a collection which he claimed was inspired by the stage. There was a hint of kabuki in the model's whitened face makeup and burgundy bow lips, as well as the modified geta platforms that were worn with every outfit. Some looks were topped with ruffled Pierrot collars, while the layering of others suggested a dancer in rehearsal mode. Dresses in pastel pink or white came smothered in those swirling ruffles with pearl trim, while masculine pinstripe suiting fabric was softened with ruffles edging the lapel or trousers. One jacket in sapphire blue had a huge lamé ruffle forming a bib down the front. It was worn with matching shorts, which were worn over sheer chiffon track pants in a lighter shade of blue. An olive green military jacket was belted under the bust and worn over ruffled hotpants. Vintage-style bras were worn over crisp button downs or knit tops, and pencil skirts cut at mid-calf had mesh girdles built into the waist. There were pastel jacquard ankle length circle skirts, candy striped harem pants, and dresses or outfits in pastel colored plaid with ruffled trim. All of this was just in the first half of the show.

The second half of the show was what interested me more. Those ruffles that had appeared throughout the show were now shown in candy-colored metallic brocades and were used to completely cover some of the garments. Even though the clothes were girly to the point of being ridiculous, there was something almost humorous about them...not surprising given Marc's obsession with subversion. If anyone can make pastel ruffles just a little bit off, it's Marc. There were some beautiful chiffon dresses in pale mint, pink or white with layered hankerchief edges, a black skirt ensemble in a cutout fishscale pattern that was embroidered in sequins and trimmed with ruffles around the shoulders and cuffs, and a dress reminiscent of vintage Paco Rabanne was made of sequined red and burgundy ovals that were linked together. The last look was one of the most traditionally beautiful things in the collection; a white organza dress with delicate black spirals swirling across the bodice and skirt like wisps of smoke.

Honestly, I wish I could say I liked the collection more. I definitely get it, and the fact that it's so different from almost everything that's been going on for a while now is refreshing, but I just don't think this made for one of Marc's most compelling collections. More than anything it just doesn't move me, one way or another. Here's hoping that the Vuitton collection is more convincing.

Rodarte

Probably one of the best things about Rodarte's Spring 2010 collection was the fact that, despite the Mulleavy sisters' references, there was a lot that could be seen in the clothes. This season the sisters concocted a fairy tale about a girl who's burned alive and reincarnated as a condor forced to survive in a barren, apocalyptic world. From that tale though they created looks that called to mind everything from Mel Gibson in "Braveheart" and the warrior queen Boudicca to voodoo shamans and grunge. Every look in the 35 piece collection was shredded, frayed, patched and just generally destroyed to perfection. Given the inspiration the color palette was suitably dark, earthy and strong, ranging from burnt browns and tans, faded burgundy and plum, a few shots of chartreuse and black. Some fabrics were bleached or tie-dyed, while others were printed with a faded tartan and all of them were pieced together in the sisters' signature collage construction. Almost all of the looks were comprised of short dresses, with a few pairs of slashed and zipped cigarette pants thrown into the mix and a finale trio of gowns. Like last season that left me a little frustrated. I totally get the Rodarte aesthetic, and I can totally appreciate their approach to design, but I don't really understand why, for the past few seasons, they've been delivering collections that are comprised almost exclusively of dresses. They've done beautiful separates in the past that were no less special than their fantasy dresses and gowns. Just like last season I'm wondering why they didn't show them on the runway. I know that they have to have made them for retailers, so why not show them? The problem with showing one dress after the other, all of which use similar techniques and fabrics to achieve their effect, is that they appear extremely similar. Instead of noticing the subtle differences between each dress, most people will zero in on the similarities. Take the first three looks; each of them were short, comprised of a streaky tan skirt and a top that mixed gray plaid, a shot of chartreuse and a bit of mauvey tie-dye. Each of them was draped differently, but because they were shown one after the other they looked more similar than they did unique. The collection moved from those first mini dresses through to woven or crocheted patchwork tunics with fringe dragging on the floor, tops pieced together with thick bands of black separating each fabric, pieces made from swirling bands of leather with bits of skin peeking through, and finally a series of black dresses and gowns. If Rodarte's swirling, draped gowns with transparency on the torso have had an ethereal quality in the past, the ones shown this season were more menacing than goddess-like...not that that's a bad thing.

While the collection didn't disappoint me, I am reaching a point where I'd like to see something else from Laura and Kate. Don't get me wrong, I love what they do and I love their twisted view of femininity, but I think they're kind of selling themselves short by focusing on one very specific thing and reinterpreting it with each collection. Also, I want to see more of their separates front and center. Take their S/S 2008 Anime collection, which was really where they started exploring this more artistic approach to designing and was the collection that introduced both their streaky handpainted fabrics and cobwebby knits. But there was quite a bit of variety in the clothes, as well as in the fabrics and colors. I'm starting to miss that. I'm almost positive that if this collection had been shown last year I'd be over the moon for it, but since things are getting a little routine in Rodarte's alternate universe I think it's time to move forward.

Vera Wang

Vera Wang is one designer who I've always liked but never really loved. It's like, I can see where she's coming from and I find the results really beautiful, but it's never really been my thing...until now. I'm not sure what she did differently for Spring Summer 2010, but the things she's become known for came together in a completely fresh way. For the first time her collection was imbued with a bit of an edge, and that edge did the clothes a world of good. Working mainly in black and shades of gray with a few pieces in a periwinkle print, the overall look of the collection was ornate but worn with a street sensibility; think a black draped dress with a capelike sleeve worn with a chunky necklace and wicked black platform sandals, or a silver crinkled halter top paired with a puff of black tulle for the skirt worn with a jeweled chain belt slung around the hips. A crinkled black jacket was paired with a white blouse and black origami-folded mini skirt with an asymmetric hem. The look was very Vera, but with an almost goth feel to it that felt completely new for her.

One of my favorite looks was a dark navy sleeveless wrap tunic with tuxedo lapel worn over matching pajama pants. It would make such a sexy evening option for the artsy type who likes her elegance to be slightly askew. Overall the embellishment was kept to a minimum, which could be why this collection felt more hip than any of her past collections. The only real embellishment was the incredible jewelry done in collaboration with Philip Crangi. Seriously, from the dangling bibs of beaded spiderwebs to the chunky crystal flowers suspended from chain cuffs, the jewelry was to die for. Other than that though the only decoration on the clothes was the texture, swirls of tight pleating across a skirt, densely packed tulle ruffles covering the front of a mini dress, or a shoulder outlined with mongolian lamb fur.

Oddly enough what made this collection stand out for Vera was it's restraint. By streamlining the clothes, minimizing the details and condensing the lineup she really seemed to pull everything together better than she has in the past. The clothes also had a more youthful, sexy spirit which, balanced with the dark romance, feels contemporary. Sure, most of the clothes are in black or putty gray, but since so many other designers this spring and every spring douse their collections in super-bright color, I say that this collection is a welcome relief for the retinas.

Proenza Schouler

If Vera Wang's collection offered some relief from all things neon, the Proenza Schouler boys seemed to revel in it. Added to the intensely bright color were bold tropical prints, tie-dye and megawatt sequin embellishment. In type it sounds like the kind of thing that I'd hate on principle alone, but for some reason I have yet to figure out, I really liked it. The silhouette throughout was short, save for the two pants looks they showed. Some of the first looks paired sporty button down shirts with draped skirts that looked like jackets or sweatshirts if they were tied around the waist. There were two great shifts, one in cobalt and one in turquoise, that wrapped asymmetrically and buckled low on the hips. Shirtdresses in crisp white or tropical blue tie-dye had extended button plackets as if there was a second shirt wrapped around the bottom, and were shown layered over black and white tie-dye knits. There were a few intensely tie-dyed mini dresses with angular layered hems that had feather shaped paillettes peeking out from underneath. I have to say, I really like the clash of the casualness of a tie-dye tank top with the glitz of the sequins.

After those tie-dyed dresses was when they turned the color, print and sparkle up to 11. Tank dresses were beaded with iridescent bugle beads, trimmed with those feather paillettes and finished off with a bit of black chain mail. Tent dresses in purple or green came trimmed in a patchwork of beading, sequins and feathers that formed a print-like effect against the fabric. One of my favorite looks was a cobalt long sleeve top that looked a bit like a rash guard which was tucked into a jungle green beaded skirt. It was glammy and totally party ready, but just like with those tie-dye dresses it had a casual athleticism that worked as a perfect contrast to the sparkle. After a few looks that combined bikini tops with feather embroidered full skirts which I didn't really love, the boys sent out stiff silk mini shifts in multicolor prints that had the look of tropical fish. Some had ostrich feathers peeking out of the hems, others had plastic sequin fringe on the straps. The prints were absolutely incredible, and coming from someone who doesn't really like print or bright color, that's saying something.

Like I said, I have no idea why I like this collection as much as I do. Don't get me wrong, I've always appreciated Proenza collections, but I don't know that I've ever really loved one. I think it might be that this one is more over the top than their past collections, more fun and brash...I'm not sure. One thing's for certain though, if I were a skinny, leggy 20-something with a big enough credit line I would be all over those dresses.

all photos from Style.com

It's the end of the world as we know it...

2009-09-09T20:06:00.003-04:00

...and it's not even 2012 yet.

Earlier today it was announced, and I'm still trying to process it as I type this, that Lindsay Lohan has been hired as the artistic adviser for the house of Ungaro. Back in July the designer Esteban Cortazar left his position after Ungaro's management told him that they were pursuing Lohan to be his collaborator. According to an article posted by the New York Times, the deciding factor in his resignation was when he was made aware that his bosses wanted Lindsay to take a bow with him after showing the collection. Now before you judge this as a temper tantrum from a diva designer, consider this; the person who takes a bow at the end of a fashion show is the person to whom credit is given for the collection. They are the person held responsible for either it's success or it's failure. With that in mind, would you want to share what is essentially equal credit with someone who doesn't really deserve it?

I didn't think so.

Add to this the fact that the person who will be given half the credit is a celebrity who, it must be said, is more well known for their tumultuous personal life, substance abuse issues and immature behavior, and you really can't blame Cortazar for leaving. I mean, you smell smoke, you get the fuck out of the building, right? Cut to now. Hired alongside Lohan is an unknown designer by the name of Estrella Archs, who has done stints at Prada, Hussein Chalayan and Nina Ricci among others. As for her, I wish her luck, but I don't see her lasting too long since as it stands none of the four designers who have preceded her have managed to jump through hoops the way that management wanted them to. As it stands, the record for longest stint post-founder is held by Giambattista Valli, who was chosen by Emanuel Ungaro himself to head the Ready to Wear when Ungaro stepped down to focus on couture. Since then there have been 3 different designers in just under 5 years, not one of them lasting more than 3 full seasons. At that rate of turnover, it seems illogical to blame any of the designers for not doing a good enough job because none of them were given enough of an opportunity to really make their mark. I mean seriously, there's even an unspoken rule in fashion that you can't fairly judge a designer until their third season (or something to that effect). How on earth could any of them be expected to establish their vision, please editors, create buzz and make the house money in that amount of time? It's an unrealistic expectation. Now Ungaro CEO Mounir Moufarrige believes that the only way to make the brand money is to give some creative control to a celebrity, and a washed up irrelevant one at that.

Quoted on why she's well suited to this position, Lohan had this to say:

"When I say I love fashion, I really do,” she said. “I live and breathe fashion and clothing. There are so many designers I really admire and look up to. It’s such a rush for me. There’s this Balmain motorcycle jacket, and when I got one of the few they made without the shoulder pads, I literally screamed."

Just as I said when I ranted about Kanye's pending foray into fashion design, that "I really love fashion" catchphrase is always the justification for these celebrities, and it's usually preceded or followed by something to the effect of "I've always wanted to be a designer". I have news for Lindsay, for the last three or four years it seems like everyone and their mother has "lived and breathed" fashion, and everyone thinks that wearing what's trendy and "fierce" automatically means that they're designer material. Let me be the first to tell you, if that's all it took then it wouldn't be so hard for those of us without connections or money to make it after we learn what we need to know.

Here's my $.02 on this whole thing; I think this is probably the best example that we will ever get of just how messed up so much of the industry has become in such a short amount of time. It's absolutely disgusting to me that a celebrity with no skill, talent or training in fashion has been given such a responsability, and equally disgusting that the company is using such a low-brow tactic to garner attention for the label. This goes so far beyond my frustration with celebrity vanity labels because at the end of the day, those don't matter and they never really will. They put their name on something and entertain the delusion that they're a "designer" for a few years before people lose interest. But this, this is big. This is handing a piece of control over the creative direction for a 40 year old fashion house to someone who has absolutely no knowledge of or experience in fashion design. Things like this just make it that much harder for fashion designers, and the fashion industry itself for that matter, to be taken seriously. Furthermore what Moufarrige's decision basically says is that designers are irrelevant and unnecessary, that all you need to sell your product is a celeb with a proud legacy of tabloid cover stories. I'm sure I sound like an overly dramatic queen or a raving lunatic (it's six of one, really) but think about it; How long will it be before Moufarrige decides that he doesn't need Archs and gives the reins to Lindsay alone? How long will it be before other desperate CEOs decide to do the same? I'm not saying it will happen, but this officially means that it can, and that's a scary thought.

Now if you'll excuse me I'm going into my dark corner to reminisce about the days when designers were designers, actresses were actresses, and Lindsay Lohan was a child star.

The agony and the ecstacy...

2009-09-02T17:12:00.006-04:00

When I had heard that Jennifer Connelly would be appearing in a Balenciaga campaign for the second time, I wasn't exactly jumping for joy. Given David Sims track record as the photographer of Balenciaga's campaigns since 2002, the resulting campaign thoroughly sucked, and seemed to rely solely on the fact that there was a famous face starring in it, as opposed to actually doing anything interesting with that famous face. But for F/W 2009 Ghesquiere enlisted a new lensman, Steven Meisel. That gave me hope, though not much.

My ambivalence about it only grew once I saw the first image. It was kind of awkward, the colors were dull, and the hair and makeup team took the striking Ms. Connelly and ruined her. Reclining on a chaise with fried, semi-teased hair and smudgy burgundy eyes she looked like the drunken aftermath of a Valley of the Dolls theme party. So I wrote the entire campaign off as a failure (having only seen the first image, but I'm like that) and didn't think much more about it. A few weeks later I happened to pop into the thread on tFS and the newest image posted did more than just catch my eye. Jennifer was sprawled on the floor, gripping the chaise which had toppled over, and her face was tilted back in a look that was somewhere between ecstasy and pain (the good kind, obviously) . I liked it. A lot actually. So much so that I wanted to see more. Now the whole campaign has been unveiled, and even though it's not perfect, there is some gorgeous going on.

First off, the girl can pose. Some of what she's doing looks intensely uncomfortable, but you'd never guess it by looking at her face, and I'd expect nothing less of an Oscar winner. The poses are really the most striking thing about the campaign. They're just not the kind of thing you see every day in fashion photography. I also love the rich, warm color of the set. Coupled with the lighting, the whole image has a beautiful painterly feel to it. I'm guessing that's the point here actually, because some of the seemingly random props (a guitar, a bust, unrolled bolts of silk draped across the furniture) are the kinds of things you would see in renaissance or baroque portraiture.

Of course with the good comes the bad, starting with hair and makeup; it's just wrong. I can see what they were going for, but it looks like the screwed up, beauty school version of it. Plus, I just don't think that smokey eyes suit Jennifer very well. It's not her look. I'm also a little disappointed in the styling. They neglected some of the more striking looks in the collection, instead picking some of the duller pieces from a lineup that was extremely rich and colorful. Don't get me wrong, I'm still not a firm believer in the collection itself, but I do think there were much more photogenic pieces in it to choose from than some of the ones seen here. I also think the lack of variety in the looks and colors that they chose, focusing mainly on the blurry, streaky prints in muted colors from the second half of the collection, ends up taking away from the individuality of each image. In the end it's a solid campaign that has a lot going for it, but just misses the mark on being really good. It has, however, made me far less cynical about the whole celebrity-as-model thing. I wouldn't have thought that possible.

all photos from Balenciaga.com

Flashback: Dior Haute Couture Spring Summer 2000

2009-08-15T17:22:00.015-04:00

To celebrate my 50th post, which, considering I started this blog one boring, sleepless night during fashion week is kind of a big deal, I'm going to look back at what was one of the most controversial fashion shows ever presented. It also happens to rank amongst my all time favorite collections.

The collection that John Galliano presented in the first month of the new millenium provided me with my very first hit of a wondrous drug known as Dior Haute Couture. I don't know how, why or where I first heard of this collection, a collection that has since gained a level of infamy within the industry, but I do remember hearing about it and after all, that's the most important thing. Even so, at my age and having not yet fully immersed myself into the world of fashion I didn't realize just how big a deal this collection was. The collection was inspired mainly by the homeless population that John frequently saw during his morning runs along the Seine, with inspiration also pulled from Charlie Chaplin's iconic "Tramp" character, Diane Arbus' photography of social outsiders and oddballs, mental patients, and the artist Egon Schiele. Pretty intense stuff, huh. But keep in mind that Galliano is nothing if not a romantic. From the earliest part of his career he has loved to concoct stories built around an impoverished, eccentric muse, whether real or imagined. As I've heard it explained by him in many an interview, including one for SHOWstudio.com back in 2001, he imagined that these people had chosen to live outside of society, to retreat from their lives and that out of their need they inadvertently created a kind of style all their own. Also brewing in John's head was a desire to expose the inner workings of haute couture garments, while also chipping away at the elegant, respectable image that Dior had always maintained.

The clothes themselves drew heavily on the deconstruction and reconstruction techniques championed by the Japanese and Belgian avant garde designers who first gained noteriety in the early 80s, as well as his own experiments with deconstruction from his days at Central Saint Martins. With his penchant for drama and romance, as well as the expertise of Dior's atelier's, Galliano managed to make deconstruction, something which had been firmly established as an aesthetic unto itself, all his own. Probably the most interesting thing about this collection, and for me the real genius of it, is the dichotomy between the impeccable craftsmanship and the worn, destroyed look of the clothes. That the garments were painstakingly crafted by hand using the finest materials and most precise handwork, and yet look as though they've been ripped to pieces and are libel to fall apart at the seams is probably the most brilliant bit of "high/low" fashion I can think of. Another thing is that this collection was shown to an audience that included some of the worlds most well-off women, with the hope being that they might buy the clothing, and yet the clothes themselves were inspired by poverty. I mean think about it, many of these haute couture clients give donations to or throw benefits for various charities. It's not unlikely that somewhere along the line they've done something towards helping those in need, and yet they're being offered a selection of incredibly expensive fashion to buy from that looks like the clothes worn by the very people they've worked to help. It's completely perverse really, a fashion mind-fuck for the ages. The controversy that resulted from this collection was so great that it was being discussed heavily outside of fashion circles. While I can understand some of the sensitivity that the public felt about the topic, I think that Galliano was dead on in that SHOWstudio interview when he pointed out how hypocritical it was for people to attack him for his perceived insensitivity and vulgarity in using poverty as an inspiration, given how so many of the go-to cultures and destinations that designers look to for ideas are completely poverty striken themselves. Besides, other artists have found inspiration in povery, but since fashion is often derided as vapid, useless and shallow it's a much easier target for criticism than contemporary photography or painting.

By far my favorite pieces in the collection were the four closing looks, inspired by Egon Schiele. The gowns were entirely de-and-re-constructed, featuring fans of fabric held up by exposed boning, asymmetrically sliced slits bound with lacing, angled seams traced with a shadow of black tulle and trains with lopped-off hems. Each of the gowns were streaked with paint in faded colors taken directly from Schiele's work, and the illustrative quality was enhanced by the aforementioned tulle, which was veiled over the fabric. That little trick gave the seams the look of dashed off brushstrokes, as well as making the creamy silk taffeta look a bit like canvas that had been ripped off of it's frame.

That was the real beauty of the collection, the romantic little details, from belts of twine strung with objet trouves (broken jewelry, books, miniature liquor bottles, love letters) to the raw edges on the fabric which had been delicately frayed by hand, one thread at a time.

To this day I think that this collection was one of Galliano's best, and certainly most thought provoking. It was such a huge departure from the elegance, drama and overt glamour that he built his reputation on and which had characterized his work at Dior up until that point; that alone was risky. Combined with the subject matter and the inherent social commentary within it you have to at least respect just how far out on a limb John went. Even though I don't believe he was deliberately trying to push buttons (that just doesn't seem his style) he had to have known that there would be some reaction to this collection. The fact that he stuck to his guns and did what he felt without hesitation is proof, to me anyway, that he is one of the few fashion designers who truly is an artist.

all photos from Corbis.com

Not A-mused...

2009-08-07T22:16:00.012-04:00

I finally took the time to go up to the Met and check out this years Costume Institute exhibit, The Model As Muse before it closes this Sunday, and as promised here's my $.02. Honestly there was a part of me that was debating whether or not to even bother since it's such a schlep up Madison by bus to get to there. I just wasn't as interested as I've been for past exhibits, and the only reasons I went were a) because you're not required to pay the full admission fee at the Met and there aren't many things to do in Manhattan for $3 and b) because I haven't missed an exhibit since Chanel in 2005, and I wanted to keep that track record going. Plus, I figured maybe I'd be surprised and it would be better than I thought...didn't quite work out that way, such is the power of positive thinking. I'm sure I'm making it sound like it was just a train wreck, and that's really not the case. As always Julian d'Ys did an amazing job with the wigs, masks and "makeup" that adorned the mannequins, and the set design was pretty good, particularly in the "Grunge" room (graffiti on the walls, dim lights and Nirvana on the sound system). But on to the subject itself. Being that the focus of the exhibit was models there were a lot of photographs, more than any other Costume Instititute exhibit I've seen anyway. There was everything from prints by Penn, Avedon, Newton and Meisel to archival issues of Vogue displayed in showcases. Getting to see such iconic images, like Avedon's "Dovima With The Elephants" or Erwin Blumenfeld's January 1950 Vogue cover of Jean Patchett up close and personal was actually pretty cool.

"The Doe Eye" by Erwin Blumenfeld
Vogue Jauary 1950

Sunny Harnett in Gres by Richard Avedon
Harper's Bazaar September 1954

"Dovima With the Elephants" by Richard Avedon
August 1955

Marisa Berenson by Hiro
Haper's Bazaar February 1966

Twiggy at FAO Schwartz by Melvin Sokolsky
1967

"Fetching is Your Dior" by Chris von Wangenheim
Christian Dior advertisement 1976

But the photos were just part of the story. The other part of the story was the clothing. The exhibit was divided into rooms which each housed a decade, and therefore represented a "look". It started with post-war Paris, since really the mid-to-late 40s were when the idea of the supermodel was born. In that room there were poised, haughty looking mannequins with arched brows and red pouts dressed in clothes from the golden age of haute couture like Balenciaga's "shawl" coat and sack dress, and evening gowns by Charles James. The next room focused on the 60s youthquake, the mod era of Pierre Cardin, Paco Rabanne, Rudi Gernreich and early Saint Laurent. The centerpiece of this room was three aluminum dresses worn in the movie "Qui êtes vous, Polly Maggoo?" rotating on a platform under psychedelic lighting. Then came the 70s, which was pretty much glossed over with one small display showing what was supposed to be a V.I.P room at a club, but struck me as looking more like a painfully hip Williamsburg loft space than Studio 54. Lounging on a couch were one group of mannequins in gilded peasant blouses and ball skirts from Saint Laurent's Ballet Russes collection, and another group in slinky Halston jersey. Like I said, the 70s disco era was completely glossed over in terms of clothing. Then of course came the 80s and the supermodel era, which you'd think would be treated as some sort of holy grail kind of experience given that everyone (not including me, however) worships the supermodels. Here's what the supermodel era amounted to as far as Harold Koda and his team of curators is concerned; a couple of Versace, Chanel, Armani(?), Ralph Lauren(??) and Donna Karan (???) looks in front of a projection of George Michael's "Freedom" music video. That's all. The pinnacle of the model obsession and all we got was a music video and some clothes. I can't imagine why Azzedine Alaia wasn't featured in the exhibit given that this room was so utterly flat. I mean, are Ralph, Donna and Giorgio really the designer names that come to mind when you think of the supermodels? Where was Mugler, or Galliano, or Dolce and Gabbana even? After that came the phase of alternative beauty embodied by grunge and unusual looking models. The clothes were nothing special, mainly just some grunge looks from MJ's infamous Perry Ellis collection and some Anna Sui with a side display of Prada and Helmut Lang to cover the "minimalism" end of the 90s, but the room itself was pretty cool and completely blew the f-ing supermodel section out of the water.

The post-war years: Balenciaga (left photo), Charles James (right)

The 60s Youthquake

The late 70s

Alternative beauty - 90s grunge

One thing that was done in an attempt to really combine the two concepts of models and clothing was to recreate iconic images using mannequins and the actual clothes that were photographed. So there was a life-sized recreation of Dovima with the Elephants or a group of models dressed head-to-toe in Charles James photographed by Cecil Beaton, Peggy Moffit in Rudi Gernreich's "monokini" from 1964 and Brooke Shields' infamous Calvin Klein jeans ad. Unfortunately these little vingettes were limited, and the majority of the clothes were really just like a brief walk through fashion history, and were basically incidental to the pictures of models wearing them. Ultimately they weren't the focus, and about halfway through the exhibit I found myself thinking that the theme would make for a much better photography exhibit than a fashion exhibit since the images were what it all boiled down to.

All in all, not a great exhibit. Like I said in my post about the Gala back in May, I think calling the exhibit "The Model as Muse" is completely misleading because the truth is that the models didn't actually inspire the clothing, they merely embodied an aesthetic that the designers were striving to achieve, so to imply that Peggy Moffitt inspired Rudi Gernreich to bare a woman's breasts, or that Gianni Versace never would have printed Warhol's image of Marilyn Monroe on a gown had it not been for the models he surrounded himself with is simply untrue. The most that can be said about the women to whom this exhibit was dedicated is that their images defined an era in fashion, which is nothing to scoff at. But ultimately that doesn't have anything to do with clothing because the clothes would have come about with or without the models who wore them. This wasn't so much a fashion exhibit as it was an examination of changing ideals of beauty throughout the second half of the 20th century. I stand by my statement that this subject would have made a much better photography exhibit, since that was really the focus here. But since there was also a Francis Bacon exhibit open, I wouldn't consider my $3 completely wasted.

condenaststore.com, vam.co.uk, staleywise.com, harpersbazaar.com, wornthrough.com, missomnimedia.com, flickr.com/the metropolitan museum of art

Pussy Galore...

2009-08-04T23:27:00.005-04:00

Finally the Lanvin campaign has debuted, and for the first time I'm truly excited by a campaign since the F/W 09 ads began to surface. That's not so surprising given that Lanvin campaigns have the unique distinction of never being truly bad. Oh of course some are better than others, but because each season looks so distinct (which means they're unpredictable) and the ideas are always so interesting (which makes them stand out) it's a sure bet that you'll never be let down. Since 2005 Alber Elbaz has used Steven Meisel to bring his visions to life, and the results have produced some of the more creative fashion advertising that I can think of. This campaign is no exception.

Picture this if you will; supermodel Kristen McMenamy, elegance, madness, a touch of Bourdin and a pair of black cats. The result is sort of Crazy Cat Lady: The Early Years...before her beauty withered and her surroundings became squalid. As for those black cats, they bring to mind so many different things; mystery, the occult, danger as well as the legendary Chat Noir in Montmatre. For me though the whole thing kind of brings to mind the scene in Batman Returns when Michelle Pfeiffer is killed and then transforms into Catwoman, particularly the first shot.

As of right now I'm going to call it; I love these ads. I love the look of insanity etched on Kristen's face. I love the severe lighting, white skin and odd, angular poses that recall Guy Bourdin. I love that the only color is the red lipstick, and most of all I love that the ideas used in the campaign combine to create something completely unexpected. I mean, can you honestly say that this is what you would have expected to see given the collection of vaguely '40s Parisian elegance Alber delivered in March? I certainly wouldn't have, and yet, the ads suit the collection perfectly.

images posted on theFashionSpot by surrealseven

The not-so-glamorous life...

2009-07-30T00:44:00.008-04:00

So even though I completely railed on the Gucci F/W collection (and I stand by that review) I admit that I was looking forward to seeing the ad campaign for it, which mainly had to do with the casting. The female models include Raquel Zimmermann, Anja Rubik, Abbey Lee, perennial Gucci droid Natasha Poly, Myf Shepherd (couldn't pick her out of a lineup if my life depended on it), Ernest Hemingway great-granddaughter Dree Hemingway, Freja Beha, vintage Gucci Girl Jacquetta Wheeler, and unexpected curve-ball Jamie Bochert. Now, in my opinion Frida Giannini's taste in models skews pretty bland for the most part, not to mention almost exclusively white (no change there, unfortunately), so I was thrilled to hear that this collection would break the cookie cutter Gucci mold of late with seasoned Gucci veteran Jacquetta and quirky underground fave Jamie. And I'll admit that even though the clothes shown on the runway were beyond tacky, they at least make for lots of visual interest, as well as having a built-in nightclubby vibe to them. So needless to say I was expecting something really fun, really glam, and maybe even a little sexy or edgy...not unlike the F/W 06 campaign shot by Craig McDean. My expectations were high, higher than they've ever been for something that Giannini's had a hand in doing, and I was eagerly awaiting the finished result. The result, however, was so anticlimactic that I now find myself wondering why I was ever interested in seeing this campaign to begin with. Like I said in my post about the Givenchy campaign, I'm not an Inez & Vinoodh fan. Their appeal usually eludes me. I don't really get a distinct point of view from them, and more often than not I find the results of their work completely unimpressive. In fact the only times I can think of where I've liked their work was their Balenciaga campaigns from the early 00s, and the one Gucci campaign they did with Tom Ford back in 2001. Other than that, nothing, and this campaign has done nothing to change that. What all of the glitter, glitz, camp and trashiness of the runway amounted to was a white backdrop with black platforms and an overcrowded group of models striking random "unposed" poses while never interacting with each other. That's one thing I can't stand, intentionally random stuff that looks like it was meticulously planned. I'm fine with meticulously planned perfection, and I'm fine with meticulously planned randomness that looks effortless, but I HATE meticulously planned randomness that looks rehearsed, and this does. Plus, could the concept be more boring? If you're going to latch on to a cliche, and at this point that's exactly what the whole 80s nightclub thing is, then ride it 'til the very end. In all honesty, with less models this would make a decent enough editorial concentrating on graphic clothes or something like that, but as an ad campaign? How does this really differ from the mind-numbingly boring studio shoots that Anna Wintour is repeatedly lambasted for doing at Vogue? This is just as boring as far as I'm concerned.

After seeing three of the final shots already, I have a pretty good feeling that this won't get much better than it is now, though I'd be thrilled if I turn out to be wrong about that. Oh I'm sure that there will be at least one good shot among the lot of them, but I doubt if it'll be anything worth remembering. In a strange way I can't even fully blame Frida for this campaign. Yes, she had final say in everything, but that F/W 06 McDean campaign was worlds better than this, and I believe she had final say in that as well. I don't even think I'd care as much if it wasn't for the fact that Frida, I&V and both of their creative teams responsible for creating this campaign from start to finish had all of the right ingredients at their disposal; a decent mix of models, visually impactful clothes and accessories, and a fun theme to work with as well. What made them decide to go for the most basic possible result will probably remain a mystery, and one that I'm not even all that interested in figuring out. Consider the lesson learned; never, EVER get your hopes up where Gucci is involved. It's pointless.

images from vogue.co.au and NothernStar @ tFS

I ♥ MJ...

2009-07-26T23:25:00.010-04:00

The appeal of Marc Jacobs ads, consistently shot by Jurgen Teller, usually eludes me. I don't want to say I never like them, for instance I thought the campaign for Spring Summer 2009 with Raquel Zimmermann was beautiful, but generally I feel like there's something I'm not quite getting, and that's never a good thing to feel. Given the delirious, over the top, glammy, clubby collection that Jacobs put out for fall I found myself really interested in seeing what the outcome for the ads would be. Then the first image (or rather, a collage of four images) was posted on the Fashion Spot back in June, and my interest was piqued. It was exactly what it should have been, if that makes any sense. Teller's signature washed out photography and candid shots combined with the gritty New York backgrounds and party clothes made for a perfect combination. Now the full series is up on marcjacobs.com, and for the first time ever I can honestly say that I love a Marc Jacobs campaign.

Like I said, the look of Teller's photography (that poorly done candid kind of look) suits the mood of this collection perfectly, and honestly I don't think the campaign would have been nearly as good were it shot by someone else. And even though I'm not usually a model person, I really love the casting here. The five girls, Natasa Vonjovic, Olga Sherer, Kamila Filipcikova, Irina Kulikova and Ajuma Nasanyana, really delivered, bringing life to the fun, chaotic mood of the photos (especially Natasa who is working the wild-child party girl vibe for all it's worth). I do wish we would have seen more of Ajuma, since she's kind of a favorite of mine and the fact that she was cast in such a huge campaign is kind of a big deal, but that's really the only complaint I have. Sure, the technicolor makeup and mega-sculpted hair from the runway has been toned down and disheveled, but I'm willing to overlook that since it adds to the trashed mood of the images, and they do create quite a mood. I absolutely love the whole "night out" vibe, with shots that go from waiting in your tacky, gaudy apartment or hotel suite to meet up with your friends, to wandering the graffiti covered streets and drunkenly hanging off of the scaffolding (admit it, you've done it too), to the next morning, wandering home in the same outfit you went out in the night before. They're almost like the party photos taken by those inhibition-free, exhibitionistic Facebook devoted youths, just with better clothes. All that's missing is the silly little caption underneath the images. Best of all though, I finally feel like I "get" a Marc Jacobs campaign. It probably won't last, and I'll be completely out of the loop by next season, but nothing good ever does last very long, does it?

all images from marcjacobs.com

Flashback: Versace Haute Couture Fall Winter 1997

2009-07-15T12:13:00.005-04:00

In July of 1997, twelve years ago to the very day, I was eleven years old, and I can still remember what I was doing when I heard that Gianni Versace was killed. It's kind of like how people my parents age remember where they were and what they were doing when they heard that President Kennedy was killed. It's one of those memories that remains crystal clear among the haze of other moments in your life. At the time I knew the name Versace, thought I had no idea just how significant he was and how big a deal his death would be. As it turned out, Gianni's swan song, shown a mere week before he was killed, made for quite a final statement. I doubt anyone at the time, including Gianni himself, could have realized just how forward this collection would turn out to be. I mean, being ten years ahead of fashion is like being 100 years ahead in normal time. Now over a decade has passed, and only a blind person could fail to see how influential this collection has been. The biggest story in the collection, both literally and figuratively, was Versace's attempt to bring back the mega shoulder pad of the 80s. Everything including jackets, razor sharp LBDs, knit tops worn with mini skirts and Versace's signature slinky goddess gowns were built on a padded shoulder. Looking at the pictures, these are clothes that could easily have turned up on any number of catwalks in recent seasons. Also, you can't help but notice the similarities between the sharp shouldered black tailoring in this collection and the sharp shoulders that Margiela has been pushing since 2007. Though you can credit Margiela for helping to jump start the current shoulder pad obsession, credit is due to Gianni for putting the idea out there that 80s-style shoulder pads even could be brought back. Not to mention that some of the looks are just uncannily similar to things that Margiela has shown. You'll have to draw your own conclusions from that.

Along with the sharp, aggressive tailoring and major shoulder pads there were floral brocade cocktail sheaths, sparkling crystal mesh mini dresses, padded tubular straps, asymmetric mandarin collars, Japanese floral and Byzantine cross embroideries, corseted leather and gold chain mail mini dresses. The whole collection was distinctly Versace, but from what I've seen of Gianni's archival work this collection is a bit harder and darker than his usual fare...which of course means I love it. Because of the fact that there's virtually no patterns/prints, much less color and embellishment and a predominantly strict silhouette, this collection comes off as almost minimal by Versace standards. Of course, knowing what would happen to Gianni after this collection was shown the dark, severe, borderline somber mood of this collection takes on a certain poignancy. It's a shame that the world never got the chance to see what Gianni would do next, because this collection and the RTW collection shown before it hint at a harder, darker, more streamlined direction. I honestly don't know what the general consensus on this collection is within the industry, but for me this makes for an amazing final gesture from a legendary designer.

Here are all of the images from the collection. Obviously they're not in order, but they're worth looking at anyway.

And unfortunately since YouTube is run by fascists you can no longer hear the music in this short clip of the show, but it was "Smack My Bitch Up" mixed with a bit of opera. Good stuff.

all images from Firstview.com

Under the sheltering tent...

2009-07-08T05:26:00.007-04:00

Givenchy

It's been interesting, over the last month or so, to see the way that the three Givenchy collections presented in the same time frame have related to each other. It started with the Resort 2010 collection, continued with the Mens show for S/S 2010 two weeks ago, and culminated with the F/W 2009 couture collection shown yesterday. All of these collections, which are worked on simultaneously at some point or another, have been influenced in part by North Africa, though in Tisci's hands you can bet that you won't get something all that literal. After seeing the resort collection in June, and then the mens show later in the month, I felt pretty confident that the couture collection would be in a similar vein. It wouldn't be the first time that Tisci's resort collection has been an indicator of the couture show that's shown after it, but even still, knowing the vague direction that this couture show would go in I didn't know what to expect, and in a way that's become one of my favorite things about Riccardo Tisci. He keeps your attention.

The show opened with a double breasted black velvet coat that had an exaggerated hourglass silhouette and a sheer hood, and right away I loved the look. It reminds me a lot of a coat Nicolas Ghesquiere did in his F/W 2001 Balenciaga collection, same wasp waist and all. That's not a put down though, and the silhouette feels somehow fresh for Riccardo. Then came a second coat in strips of exotic leather with a similarly curvy shape, followed by a velvet jacket with built out hips worn with matching trousers. These few looks, though easily the most simple in the collection, were also some of the ones that excited me the most. Don't ask me why, I couldn't tell you. Then comes look four and you're pretty much whacked over the head by the impact; a black hooded cowl top with full, draped zouave trousers accented with huge golden bibs, facemask and bangles, a look clearly inspired by traditional womens fashions in Muslim and Islamic cultures. After this look there was a black velvet jacket worn with ballooning trousers embroidered with gold beadwork in a vaguely Moorish/Moroccan pattern. I honestly hate the silhouette, but the beadwork on the pants is absolutely gorgeous. There was a flowing black draped chiffon mermaid gown, worn with that same heavy gold jewelry which was followed by my favorite look in the collection; a black turtleneck top paired with a high-waisted black mermaid skirt covered in sequins that had sculptural detailing at the waist. There were jet beaded zouave pants (which looked just as unfortunate as the ones Balmain showed for fall), and a stunning high-necked long-sleeved jet beaded gown with spikes protruding around the chest and shoulders.

If you view the collection in order, look 10 comes as quite a shock after the black looks that opened the show. A pale beige gown with strong shoulders and a plunging neckline was decorated with inexplicable hot pink beading around the shoulders and below the waist. This dress was followed by another with cutout sides and a keyhole neckline, this time embellished with bright green jewels at the hip and scattered down the skirt. Both of the dresses were really quite pretty on their own, and the fabric had some kind of subtle design woven into it, but those garish, cheap looking embellishments made me cringe. In all fairness the green version is slightly more appealing than the hot pink one, but still, it's like taking a beautiful painting and putting it in an ugly frame; the accent ends up taking away from the beauty of the artwork. Then came an ecru jacket cut with asymmetrical flyaway panels at the hem in signature Tisci style worn with tapered trousers. The jacket was embellished with red beadwork in a tribal kind of pattern that was pretty, but having seen an HQ image I have to say I would rather that the detail had been embroidered in thread rather than the chunky plastic beading. It would have been more refined looking. Following this was a strapless gown in degrade silk that went from ecru to intense red at the hem. Compared to the garish neon beading, this use of color actually made sense in the context of the collection. Another look had a top in white with an asymmetrical train draped off the side and back that had illusion sleeves embroidered with more of that red tribal bead-work. Again, I wish the beading had been done more subtly. Even changing the beads to smaller shapes would have helped. I'm just not digging the chunkiness of it. Billowing white veils covered two strapless, embellished bustier looks, one with pants, the other with a sheer skirt in chiffon that I can't wait to see in motion once the videos start popping up. A white sheared fur jacket was embellished with gold studs and chains, and here I thought the chunkiness of the embellishment worked. A strapless white dress was also embellished with gold studs and had an underskirt in black peeking out. And the final dress, strapless, white with embroidered patterns on the fabric and an angular infrastructure giving the silhouette a jagged sort of shape, was kind of dull compared to everything before it. It definitely wasn't a "finale" look, that's for sure.

First for the positive; I love pretty much all of the black looks that comprised the first half of the show. They were beautifully understated and kind of fresh for Tisci. I also love the inspiration behind the collection, and in Tisci's hands it yielded some interesting and beautiful results. The mystery, drama and sensuality of North Africa combined with the incongruent elements like spikes, studs and corsetry worked surprisingly well, and it's nice to see him playing with ideas he's toyed with less successfully in the past (hardware and fragility being one of them). Now for the negative. First, there were just too few looks. Givenchy has majorly skilled workrooms and plenty of people working in them, so there's really no reason why the collection should only contain 21 looks. I'm not asking for some lengthy 40-plus look parade, but 21 is cutting it way short as far as I'm concerned. Besides that, the less looks you have, the less room you have to really say what you're trying to in a coherent way. That was another negative, the coherency was definitely lacking here which is unusual for a Givenchy couture collection. Even when he throws different looks and different ideas out there in one collection there is almost always a good progression, and everything makes sense. But that wasn't the case here. It was too scattered. What did those two neon embellished gowns have to do with anything else he showed? Why was that corseted tailoring that opened the collection dropped after the first few looks instead of expanded upon? I awaited this collection with the standard he set last season weighing heavily on my expectations and unfortunately it didn't quite live up to them, which is disappointing. Also disappointing, but maybe not really worth complaining about, is the fact that a lot of this collection is familiar coming from Tisci. Yeah, the look and details aren't the same, but unlike last season this is all stuff we've seen him do before, and my policy on that is if you don't improve upon something then you shouldn't bother revisiting it.

all images from Style.com

Behind the seams...

2009-07-07T00:27:00.005-04:00

Christian Dior

Haute Couture. Just mentioning the words conjures up images of intense beauty, mind-blowing workmanship, and unbridled drama....ideally at least. Unfortunately these last few years the situation has been anything but ideal where Dior is concerned. Instead we've been treated to a string of collections singularly obsessed with the Dior archives. Don't misunderstand, there's nothing really wrong with scouring the archives for inspiration - that's essentially how fashion works - but how many times can the viewing public stand to have the significance of the f-ing New Look jammed down our throats? Seriously, one more season of a Bar suit reprise and I may snap. It's both numbing and painful at the same time. This season, besides finding inspiration in (read; rehashing) the New Look, Galliano found inspiration in backstage images of Christian Dior's cabine models while they were getting ready for a couture presentation, specifically in the state of undress captured in the images and the lingerie that the models were wearing. His desire, as it has been for quite some time now, was to show the inner workings of traditional haute couture. It's a nice notion, but it's not newsworthy in the least. Ever since his infamous Spring/Summer 2000 Hobo collection Galliano and his ateliers have worked to expose the inner secrets of couture clothing. Since that show nine years ago John has ripped clothes apart, exposed linings, boning and padding, turned things inside out and upside down, and rendered the clothes in complete transparency so that every stitch is visible, all with the goal of showing the work that goes into making a couture garment. So this season that means showing padded bar jackets in unsophisticated colors paired with black or flesh-toned garters, satin tap pants and stockings. As a look there was a little jolt to it that was a welcome respite from the stuffy faux elegance everyone has come to hate, but the truth is that this was just a styling trick. Honestly, there was no real undercurrent of eroticism or vulgarity to these looks. They were safe and unthreatening, a kind of sterile, PG-13 soft-core sensuality where any hint of something perverse or even truely sexual is hinted at only in passing. There isn't anything to really read into the looks, which probably accounts for why they're ultimately benign. And let's be real here, exposed undergaments are something that designers like Jean Paul Gaultier, Marc Jacobs, Miuccia Prada, Dolce and Gabbana, Tom Ford and Galliano himself, notably with his S/S RTW collection for Dior, have already done. Those are just the names off the top of my head, there are countless others who have done it at some point as well. I'm not saying that since it's been done a;ready that no one else can do it, but considering that the arena we're talking about right now is Haute Couture I expect more than just pairing a jacket with stockings. If that's all I wanted I could just buy Vogue Paris. Besides those looks, with jackets that ranged from hot pink, lime green, and yellow to zebra stripes and nude with a black dotted tulle overlay, there were tailleurs with jackets that had a garter built out of the jacket hem, transparent flaring skirts in tulle or pleated chiffon, draped dresses and tops covered with embroidery and a truly hideous deflated orange bubble skirt worn with a black bra and opera length gloves. Even though there wasn't anything remotely fresh going on with the clothes, a simple change of the colors would have made all the difference. If John would just ditch the dowager pastels and tacky brights the clothes would probably feel much less dated than they do...though the drag queen makeup, Irving Penn poses and silly hats that always accompany these collections don't exactly help either.

There were, of course, a number of dresses. A blush and black dotted tulle cocktail sheath looked like the A.B.S. version of the stunning nude and black embroidered transparent dresses John showed back in 2005, while a cherry red organza dress with a frothy top half covered in embroidery was sheer enough to show the stockings underneath. The stockings were nice. The dress...not so much. There was a hot pink pouf skirted dress, the top half of which was a beige bustier, some knee length numbers in some very off shapes that weren't quite draped but weren't truly structured either, and finally a selection of debutante-ready gowns. One look in draped white chiffon had a panel of leopard print down the front that was, to put it plainly, tacky as all hell. Another was a lumpen mass of embroidered pink faille with a skirt that was split open in the front to reveal the garters underneath. A pale lemon tulle skirt was scattered with crystals and worn with a nude colored bra. I get the point of that look, but it's execution is kind of tactless, no? It just looks awkward, and kind of immature as well. The rest were in a similar vein, pairing a corseted top with a full skirt in tulle, lace or one in faille draped in swags and seemingly suspended from the garters attatched to the corseted top.

This was yet another season of territory that has been covered by Galliano before with much better results. I'm truly tired of this obsession that Dior is having with a world that doesn't exist anymore. The days of the salon and the cabine, of gloved hands and outfits that are always finished off with a hat are long dead. I could say it's time to move on, but given that Galliano didn't start his career at Dior obsessing over these things it would seem odd to say that. What he needs is to let go and stop giving the suits what they think Dior needs. There's nothing wrong with looking at the past, but you need to run the inspiration through a sieve so that all that's left is what's essential, and if a businessman is telling you otherwise then any designer worth their praise should know better than to listen. I'd be repeating myself at this point if I expressed how utterly frustrating it is to see this creative rut play out, so I can't even think of anything else to say. The whole formula is stale, and the only thing to do with something stale is to toss it. I just hope that John and/or the Dior execs realize that sooner rather than later.

Paint it black-ish...

2009-06-23T21:44:00.006-04:00

Alexander McQueen

Last season was only the second time since launching his menswear line in 2005 that I was impressed by an Alexander McQueen mens collection. The first time was with his F/W 2006 collection, and not surprisingly there were quite a few similarities between the two. You could say that they were both "very McQueen", encompassing all of the things he's built his name on, delivering interesting, beautifully made clothing and inspired creativity in one dramatic package. So I was pretty excited to see what he had in store for S/S 2010, and wouldn't you know it? I was entirely let down, not to mention further reminded of why you should never, ever get your hopes up when it comes to fashion shows. This season McQueen opted out of a runway presentation, and that was strike one against him as far as I'm concerned. McQueen is a great showman, adept at creating an environment unto which he can project the clothing. Instead of his usual runway theatrics he and photographer David Sims collaborated on a short film (a growing trend lately, with Viktor & Rolf, Gareth Pugh and Stefano Pilati all getting on that bandwagon recently). I don't necessarily have a problem with creating a film to accompany a collection, so long as it's not some pseudo-arty piece of tortured soul b.s. Unfortunately that's exactly what we got here, and there isn't one moment in the clip that actually shows the clothing, unless McQueen is launching an underwear line now. By all means, go to alexandermcqueen.com and check it out for yourselves. It's short enough that it won't kill you or bore you senseless. My opinion? The film was an ultimately useless expression of the frustration that come along with being creative (seriously, the only thing I could think after watching about half of the clip was "yeah, been there and didn't make a mini-movie about it"). The clothes, presented in a lookbook, seemed to take inspiration from the life of an artist, meaning that a lot of them look like the kinds of crappy, beat up basics that an artist throws on to stand in front of an easel for hours, paint splatters and all. Needless to say the clothes were nowhere near McQueen's creative level. Honestly most of them weren't even marginally creative, let alone works of art in their own right. Sure, the tailoring was sharp, but even there it was done in such a run-of-the-mill kind of way. There was no surprise, no "how did he and his patternmakers do that?" shock, unless you want to count a ribbed athletic cuff at the hem of wool trousers as a surprise (and that's been done, it's nothing new). There were a few jackets that had brush-stroke edging to give the look of the piping or binding that comes on traditional English schoolboy blazers (also something that's been done), a white shirt with a sketch of an eagle printed on the chest and faded and bleached khaki trousers worn rolled up. For the most part these clothes were just that, clothes. I don't think you could really call them fashion. Judging from what I can see they just don't seem to cross that threshold into being something more than a garment.

Other pant options, besides the checked wool work out pants, Ralph Lauren looking khakis and bland, traditional trousers in bland, traditional fabrics were navy pants stained with paint splotches (again, been done by everyone from D&G to A&F). A shirt and jacket appeared to be assembled from god only knows how many pattern pieces that had the look of a quilt, unless it's in fact a print or some kind of woven design in which case they're far less remarkable. Then there were two looks, one a navy suit another a white shirt and navy pants, that had paint stains in the shape of hands on the chest and crotch, you know, cause no artist or house painter can resist groping a dude in dull tailoring. These pieces in particular were slightly offensive to me, and not because I've become some prude overnight. They offend me because the joke element of the hand prints is so utterly low-brow. It's cheesy, juvenile and gimmicky. The only thing I can credit McQueen with is actually having the balls to make them in the first place instead of letting that little blip of creative silliness pass. There was a suit that appeared to be streaked with silver paint, but the streaks were in fact woven into the fabric as opposed to painted on. It was kind of beautiful looking, though as a suit there is an unfortunate Tin Man effect that I doubt was desired. The last two looks were the most, or depending on how you look at it, only interesting looks in the collection; a vest/shirt combo and a jacket/shirt combo in an abstract digitalized mirror image like the prints McQueen used for his S/S 09 womens show. I'm actually kind of curious to know what images were manipulated to make the prints. Beautiful as they are though, I don't think I'd ever want to wear them. They're very busy, too busy even, and ultimately not something I see many men wearing very convincingly.

Overall, I don't think it would've been possible for me to be more let down than I was. The collection is brief, bland, not particularly creative, and lacking in the kind of beautiful, perfect clothes that make you overlook those things. For all of the tortured artist mumbo-jumbo that the video alludes to the collection sure as hell doesn't make good on what's promised, at least not as far as I can tell. What's most upsetting is the thought that last season, and F/W 06 for that matter were simply fleeting moments of creative clarity when McQueen's head was in the right place at the right time. It's depressing really, that one of fashions greatest contemporary talents has gotten to a point where his output is so uneven. Maybe Lee's more of an artist than anyone realizes, his creativity slowly burning away in his head and driving him to self-destruction. Hey, weirder things have happened.

Prada

So apparently for S/S 2010 Miuccia Prada sees life as one big gray area, and really, what could be more apt given that the world is broke, people aren't buying clothes and for the last few years most men's fashion has been stuck in the midst of puberty, giving guys who don't fit the gawky boy-man mold (ahem, me) a complex. But oddly enough, given that her collection was almost exclusively rendered in shades of gray the statement itself was as black and white as they come. There was a formality to the collection, with echoes of late 50s/early 60s menswear, but it was broken apart and softened to make sure the look wasn't retro. Prada stated that among her inspirations were black and white movies and the desire to make men feel "sexier, more beautiful, more sensitive—he wants to be vulnerable." and I actually think that, at least on the first two points, she succeeded. There was a certain sexiness to the looks (if you ignore the Lurch-like models blankly glaring into the camera). The show started out quietly, dully even by Prada standards, with a single breasted graphite colored jacket with narrow lapels worn with trousers in a slightly lighter gray and a deep v-neck top instead of a shirt. Then another variation on that look, the jacket now in charcoal. From there the jackets went from single to double breasted, only it was a single button double breasted look which, imo, isn't all that great looking. Combined with the drapey, straight cut it looked kind of sloppy, and one thing that a double breasted jacket should never be is sloppy, not to mention that the single button look strikes me as kind of dated. Much nicer were the infinite cardigan combos that were shown. Some were classic with sleeves cropped at the elbows and the hem of the white tees underneath peeking out for some contrast. Others were sleeveless, worn over sweater vests and sleeveless button downs with ties. Then with look 7 the detail that would be Prada's obsession for the season made it's first appearance. It was that same sleeveless cardigan, sweater vest and shirt combo, only now the cardigan and vest were perforated to look like mesh.

From there the perforations took over, with everything from coats, crewnecks, sleeveless mock neck tops and polos, right down to the shoes and occasional fedoras that topped some looks. There were four looks that combined jackets or parkas with short-shorts (a look I'm still not behind when it comes to menswear). Those looks were some of only a handful that had any kind of pattern or print to them in the form of small checks, dense paisley-ish patterns and what looks like some kind of digitalized herringbone. Aside from those pieces the rest of the collection was done entirely in solids. After this there were more iterations on the tailoring and knitwear that opened the show before Miuccia fully gave in to her obsession, sending out entire outfits in black that were marred with perferations which gave the pants a transparent look not unlike the organza bellbottoms she proposed for women back in Spring of '08. I wasn't exactly fond of the pants, mostly because I think they're just silly. Transparency for women serves two purposes; it creates a feeling of lightness and softness which serves as a foil to the seductive nature of see through clothing. You can be the Madonna and a whore while wearing the same dress. However men's methods of seducing aren't the same as women's, and seeing the silhouette of a pocket and knee high dress socks doesn't exactly have the effect of whipping me into an erotic frenzy. Who knows though, maybe it works on women. Anyone care to elighten me?

In all fairness, those perforated pants were really the only missteps in the collection. The rest of the clothes were essentially just good looking, well tailored classics tweaked through both fabric and cut. Even those perforated knits look completely believable to me. I can totally see those working as layering pieces for any number of urban males. Ultimately though this collection doesn't make as strong an impact as last season's menswear collection did. They were both based on the same premise, transforming classic staples of men's clothing as a means to transform the wearer, but while that one left so much room for interpretation, this one doesn't seem to have a very strong subversive undercurrent, at least not one that I've picked up on yet. I'm not about to knock it for that though, because ultimately the clothes look good and that should be the real gauge of whether or not a collection was successful. Who knows, it may prove smart on Prada's part that she didn't propose anything threatening this time around, because the next time she chooses to it'll pack even more punch than usual.

All photos from Men.Style.com

Want. Need. Now...

2009-06-22T05:00:00.006-04:00

It's always kind of a good thing that the mens collections for the following spring are shown just before the current summer even hits it's peak. It means that guys like me who love fashion and don't want to wait 'til next year can update our wardrobes as the shows on the runway unfold. I mean, I can't be the only one who does that, can I? The Milan menswear collections for S/S 2010 are under way and so far things are looking up. Maybe it's the current crappy weather that has been hovering over New York for what feels like a month already, but I'm definitely needing a bit of lightness, ease and color, and some of the collections so far are doing a pretty good job of keeping my attention.

Bottega Veneta

There are always those collections, few and far between as they may be, that leave me with no other thoughts but "I like it". It's rare. I'm one of those people who always has a thought on fashion shows, as this blog proves. But this season's Bottega Veneta collection has left me simply liking what I see, no thought process or deeper meaning necessary. To be honest, even if there is some kind of story or message at work in this lineup of looks, I don't care enough. I'm too distracted by the pieces. BV is always a good looking collection, even when it slips into predictability. This season however, on top of looking good, things were also quite a bit less predictable. The mood was a bit more youthful and casual, the colors were more bold and the whole thing came off as kind of playful and (gasp) fun. Leather baseball jackets, colorful polos with contrasting bands around the sleeve, safari jackets, floral wallpaper patterns and tie-dye were some of the things that made an appearance, and that was just within the first 15 looks. There was a great tie-dye cardigan in cocoa brown, sage green and seafoam paired with olive green shorts, tailoring in grapey purple, poppy, and brick, sometimes worn as full suits, other times worn with bright pink or orchid colored v-necks for contrast. Preppy striped fabric was dyed with splotches of blue, red and pink, and a ridiculously gorgeous aubergine washed leather jacket may very well have been designed specifically with me in mind. Seriously, that's one of my absolute favorite colors, and unfortunately it's pretty uncommon for menswear. There was also a leather baseball jacket like the one that opened the show in that same shade of purple with sleeves in pale blue. Soft, drapey tees and fine knits came in a variety of reds, coral and oranges, and were worn with tapestry patterned cropped pants that were oddly cool looking, though they're not exactly a look I'll be trying to replicate. And for evening preppy navy blazers were paired with checked shirts and creased jeans worn cuffed at the hem.

The one thing that I always appreciate about BV, both for men and women, is the ease. Even if it isn't always my taste I like that the clothes always look comfortable and easy to wear an yet completely pulled together. It's worn in and familiar, but never sloppy, the perfect look for a summer wardrobe. The whole collection is filled with pieces that I'd like to own and wear asap. Hell, it even has me wanting to wear bright color, and that, my friends, is huge.

Versace

What is it about the exotic clash of cultures and time periods in North Africa that keeps designers so transfixed? I've never been to the region myself, but my fantasy images of sun-bleached villas, bustling souks and barren sand dunes baking in the heat are enough to sustain me. It was this imagery that the Versace collection was drawing on for S/S 2010, and boy did it have an intoxicating effect. Shown in airy shades of white, cream, beige, gray, and khaki with shots of rich tan, inky blue and black the collection was a wonderful mix of ease and formality. The opening look, a crisp white suit with double breasted jacket and wide cut slouchy trousers was worn with a knee-length djellabah/shirt hybrid tunic. A creased suit in buttery cream was worn over a taupe t-shirt that almost, almost had the look of being stained by sweat, but in a romantic, swarthy, non-gross kind of way. A beautiful ivory suit had a jacket with patch pockets on the front taken from safari jackets, and one of those airy tunics worn open underneath. There was a fantastic collarless cardigan (or unstructured jacket, hard to tell) that had toggle closures up the side which was worn with one of the many great looking pairs of pants in the show, not too tight, not too baggy and with a slit at the ankle to help it break over the foot. After the whites and creams came looks in dusty grays, taupes and streaky, tone-on-tone tie dye or reptile skin prints. A matte snakeskin jacket with asymmetric button closure was particularly lust inducing, as were the boys in itty-bitty, teeny-weeny earth and animal print bikinis. When it comes to Milan you've gotta love the guy candy, but that's material for an entirely different kind of blog.

From there the clothes moved from soft, warm earth tones to cool, soothing shades of gray. There was a gauzey dip-dyed button down worn open over a deep v-neck top with pants that had a bit of sheen to them, a streaky printed tunic worn under a dove gray trench, and a sleeveless shirt with military epaulettes paired with wide leg pants. As with the rest of the collection the looks had a languid ease to them, though the color palette was decidedly more urban looking than in the first half of the show. By this point those djellabah/shirt tunics started to seem like a pretty good idea. Honestly if I had Versace-type money burning a hole in my wallet, I wouldn't be entirely opposed to trying the look out. It's very Saint Laurent in Marrakech, lounging on a pile of pillows smoking some kind of pipe or another. The final passage of looks was all in black and geared more towards evening, but even here there was nothing overly formal about the clothes. Options included black and white striped blazers worn over one of those printed, sheer knit collared sweaters, a cardigan with some kind of frogging or toggles down the front (not nearly as silly looking as it sounds) paired with sharp black trousers, and a final version of that omniprescent tunic in glazed black fabric (likely cotton) paired with a classic jacket and pants.

I kinda loved it. The mood was right, the looks were right, the colors and prints were right and best of all the lineup was filled with pants for men who have thighs. But even better than that, the pants were good looking too!!! The whole package was just really desireable. As practical and unthreatening as the clothes and colors are, there's still a sense of fantasy to it all due to the subtle ethnic and militaristic touches. Were I offered whatever lifestyle it is that these clothes portray, I'd be hard pressed to turn it down, especially in this horrendous weather.

All photos from men.style.com

Crusin II...

2009-06-05T14:43:00.005-04:00

Marc Jacobs

In a riotous mix of color, print and eras (though not as riotous as S/S 09) Marc Jacob's collection for resort 2010 was a mix of old Hollywood, vacation cliches like sailor stripes and souvenir prints, mid-70s Parisian bohemian, and mid 80s party girls. Sailor striped tops were embellished with tropical flower motifs, intentionally cheesy floral printed bandeau/skirt combos and jackets were right out of the tourist-in-a-tropical-locale handbook, and cropped trousers in vintage geometric or paisley patterns could be right from the flea market. A red and black party dress was covered in a print that, from a distance looks like some kind of flower but up close is actually made of colored scribbles. A sheer black mini dress had bands of neon across it that kind of looked like barbed wire. It was paired with a gray tweed jacket edged with shredded neon fringe. And a black cap sleeved wrap dress covered in pop colored parrots had the same feel to it that Saint Laurent's 40s collection; vintage, a little trashy and flirty.

From there things became a bit more decadent. Orchid pink satin shorts were paired with a cropped black jacket trimmed with what looks like passementerie that recalled late 70s era YSL. A blue short sleeved jacket with a slight peak in the shoulder was paired with more of those cropped trousers, now in a shiny jacquard. Ochre satin high-waisted shorts were worn with a printed blouse with billowing sleeves, and the final piece was the dress worn by Kate Moss to the Costume Institute Gala back in May (I still love it, though it fit Kate better than Olga). I'm currently reading "The Beautiful Fall" by Alicia Drake, about the Paris fashion scene of the 1970s, and this whole second half of the collection looked like how I imagined Saint Laurent muse Loulou de la Falaise to have dresses back then, a mix of high fashion with the bohemian spirit of Biba and Ossie Clark in London. Every single look was paired with massive platform sandals that made me think of the shoes Jodie Foster wore in "Taxi Driver". So there you have it, a mad mix of looks that spans who knows how many eras, trends and personalities, but could you expect anything less from fashion's favorite mix-master?

Miu Miu

In contrast to Prada's kitschy, almost cartoony take on destination dressing, the Miu Miu collection was a slightly more sedate affair. Still sticking with a vaguely "life of leisure" vibe combined with the 70s infused bourgeoise sensuality of the F/W collection, the look was a mix of athleticism and glamour. Think Saint Tropez, the rich, fashionable Parisian elite on holiday spending their days by the pool or on the tennis court court, lacquered red lips and all. The main portion of the collection was built around maillots, worn as layering pieces under short tennis skirts, slouchy track jackets, and beachy cover-ups for day wear. Shown in muted shades of beige, cream, pale celery green, and a super pale blush pink. Two sheer halter gowns in a gorgeous retro Calla Lily print (worked in two different colors for the top and bottom of the dress) were worn over plain maillots and had a blouson effect at the waist that billowed in the back.

Long v-neck halter dresses were shown in black or a dusty lilac version of that Calla Lily print, while seperates took on an even sportier feel shown in crisp white, navy and black paired with high lace-up athletic looking stilettos. The Calla Lily print made it's final appearences as a short red on black shift, a red on black maillot worn with a pink on black A-line mini, and a black on lilac full skirted mini dress. Closing the show were three short dresses in the same pale solids that opened the collection trimmed with bands of taupe and embellished with oversized buttons. Like I said, the whole thing had a very 1970s life of leisure feel to it, clean, sporty, a bit louche but tinged with undeniable glamour. I have to admit I'm loving it, probably even a bit more than Prada, but mostly because this collection has a whiff of decadence and vanity to it that Prada didn't.

all photos from Style.com

Cruisin...

2009-06-04T11:04:00.006-04:00

Prada

This season for resort Miuccia Prada has returned to one of her recurring themes, the quirky mid-century suburban housewife. This time around she, her husband and their two-and-a-half kids have packed up and headed to a warmer climate on holiday. Bright, beachy colors like candy pink, lemon yellow, coral, sky and cerulean blue, red, and orange were mixed together in eye watering combinations that are definitely not for the faint of heart. Draped batwing tops were paired with short, layered A-line skirts. Mini shifts had color blocked bands around the skirt hem. And bikini briefs with ties on the side (very Malibu Barbie) were layered and worn with two-tone button down shirts or sweater vests.

After the bold solids there came a retinal assault of prints. Vaguely wallpaper prints, bold geometrics borrowed from Prada's F/W 2003 collection, overblown paisleys and illustrated tropical florals were used for everything, from wrap skirts with ties on the side, blouson tops with contrasting trim, preppy button downs, v-neck mini shifts, more of those A-line skirts and dropped waist chiffon chemises, and in almost all of the looks there were at least two prints used at a time. Combined with the Carol Brady hair the whole collection had a fun, kitschy vibe to it. It reminded me a lot of Miu Miu's S/S 2003 collection, just in a more extreme form. Overall I'm not in lust with it like I have been with Prada lately, but I'm definitely intrigued to see how, or if, this collection has anything to do with the S/S show.

Calvin Klein

Francisco Costa's recent collections for Calvin Klein in the last few years have managed to preserve the integrity of the house by making contemporary, clean, timeless clothes for an urbane, unfussy type of woman while also taking the identity of the house forward. While I admire the fact that he does such good work channeling the house DNA in new ways, there are occasional times when I've longed for the ease, simplicity and cool sensuality of Calvin himself, not to mention that I have grown a wee bit tired of the lack of color on CK runways in recent years. Granted, Klein himself was never known for bold, intense color, but he didn't use exclusively black, white and shades of gray either. For resort 2010 Costa has brought a little bit of that easy sensuality back to Calvin Klein in a collection that was much more light and easy than his recent work has been. Eschewing strict tailoring and severity for transparency and soft volume, Costa used a subtle palette of different whites and parchment, smoky grays and slates, and a handful of what I call "hybrid" colors. One was a sort of faded citrus yellow/green, another was a dusty mauvey-nude, and yet another was a pale creamy tawny orange. Like I said, they're hard to describe, much like Calvin's own color choices were back in the day. Separates consisted of narrow cropped transparent trousers, sheer organza jackets and coats that closed asymmetrically, and simple textured tops. Those trousers appeared throughout the 24 look lineup alongside occasional skirts with an unusual drape to them. More than separates though this was a collection of beautiful dresses, many featuring off-the-shoulder necklines that highlighted the collar bone. With subtle transparency and volume in the skirts they were extremely feminine without being the least bit girly.

A stunning shift in a slate gray had the transparent portion worked over the arms, while a strapless dress in charcoal had a deflated bubble shaped skirt with pleating across the front. Ivory or beige dresses had a soft drape over the hip and hems that fell to mid calf, while two full length gowns in shimmering gray or ivory organza closed the show. The whole lineup, even the pants, was a reminder of Calvin Klein's obsession with underwear and his penchant for making a sexy, unassuming little slip dress. The only real flat note (if you'll pardon the pun) in the collection was the shoes. Boyish lace-up oxfords or ankle high pixie boots did nothing for the clothes, and rather than doing what they were likely intended to do, contrast with the lightness and softness of the clothes, they just looked awkward. The clothes weren't all perfect, but it was the most "Calvin" collection Costa has done in a couple years and I really hope that he continues on this train of though for spring.

all photos from Style.com

Bitchin'...

2009-05-26T02:19:00.007-04:00

So here we go folks, a brand new ad season is closing in and the first glimpse of something new is a preview of Givenchy's F/W 09 campaign. I've never been really wowed by a Givenchy campaign before, often finding them boring and kind of uninteresting. Since Riccardo Tisci started in 2005 his campaigns for the label have been shot by Dutch duo Inez & Vinoodh, which could perhaps be why I've never been especially moved by them (I don't want to say I've never liked anything by I&V, but it's rare that I do). But in the past, despite not liking the images much, I have always been intrigued by Tisci's choice in models which can only be described as eclectic. Lately he's been mixing hot new faces (Iris Strubegger, Edita Vilkeviciute, Lakshmi Menon), Givenchy perennials (Lara Stone, Mariacarla Boscono, Natasha Poly) and interesting curveballs (Frankie Rayder, Ujjwala Raut, Kristen McMenamy, Adriana Lima) on his runways to great effect, and the result is some of the most interesting casting around. This season Tisci decided to replace I&V with another dynamic duo, Bourdin-worshipping golden boys Mert & Marcus. I have sort of a love/hate relationship with M&M. Occasionally they really bring it, but more often then not their formula of inhumanly airbrushed perfection and cartoony color just grates on my nerves and bores me to tears. So I wasn't really sure what to expect when the results were unveiled. The fact that for a while Adriana Lima was the only girl mentioned as part of the cast wasn't exactly reassuring. However, what we wound up with is actually pretty solid, if the preview is anything to go by. Set in a fancy-pants boudoir, the cast, with their death stares and severe makeup, looks like some kind of really chic cult of sexual predators or something along those lines. I really like the contrast between the fussy interior and the aggression of the girls and clothing. Then there's Adriana's solo shot. It's kind of what you'd get if you crossed a George Hurrell photo of Jean Harlow with a Marilyn Manson groupie circa 1997, and I mean that in the best possible way. She looks nothing like "Adriana Lima" the bubbly, boobalicious, ultra-glossed Victoria's Secret angel everyone loves, and for that alone I'm kind of impressed. I wouldn't have thought it possible. There's also this Leonor Scherrer, the one who looks quite a bit like Malgosia Bela, thrown into the mix. Until I read the blurb posted from WWD on tFS, I had never heard of her before, though I found out she's the same woman I had seen in a picture by The Sartorialist that I loved. Overall the result is pretty different than what I would have expected, and if I didn't know that Mert & Marcus were behind the images I probably wouldn't have guessed it.

I don't want to say that I'm in love with them just yet, because I've yet to see the rest of the campaign and it'll probably be a few more weeks at least until more campaigns debut, but there is something about these that I like very much. Hell, it could just be that I really like the cast and the look, the whole "I might drain your blood as foreplay, I might not" kind of vibe. One thing's for sure, I can't wait to see more.

All images from wwd.com via MissMagAddict at theFashionSpot

Life's a beach...

2009-05-14T21:20:00.010-04:00

For the last few years Karl Lagerfeld has made it a tradition to ditch Paris and take his pre-season collections for Chanel around the world. The collections have shown up at Grand Central Terminal in New York, an airplane hanger in L.A., a theater in Monte Carlo, The Raleigh Hotel in Miami, and somewhere in London (can't remember the venue, it wasn't anything amazing though). This year's destination for the 2010 Cruise collection was Venice, and the inspiration, at least in part, was one of the cities most well known residents; Peggy Guggenheim. This being a Chanel collection though, Coco's spirit was definitely not far. So what do you get when you combine the artsy/bohemian chic style of Guggenheim (with more than a dash of the Marchesa Casati thrown in for good measure, if you ask me) with Coco's signature understatement and easy femininity, a bit of Visconti's "Death in Venice", and more than a hint of the city itself? Well for starters you get a great location. Shown on the Lido beach at dusk with wind blowing off the sea, the set was already worlds better than some of the borderline kitschy locales and sets Lagerfeld has chosen before (that airport show was just plain cheesy. It's jet set, we get it..) and I imagine it was pretty picturesque as well for the lucky bastards who were there. Now don't get me wrong, I would've LOVED to have seen models maneuvering from one teetering gondola to the next on the grand canal, or vying with the pigeons in the Piazza San Marco for space on the runway, but I'm a realist. I know that salt water and bird droppings just don't mix with expensive handmade clothing. Still, it would've been nice to be able to look at the pictures and see "Venice", ya know? But I'm just splitting hairs, cause from the pictures at least the location looks gorgeous. When I initially heard that Venice was to be the destination, I was a little worried. Given Karl's penchant for cutesy gimmicks that can sometimes drown an otherwise chic outfit (like the plastic "Barbie Doll" purses from Fall, or the mini 2.55 bags that looked like alcohol monitoring anklets back in '08 for example) I was dreading what seemed like the inevitable parade of straw boater hats tricked out with Double-C's and striped gondolier's sweaters thrown in with Carnival masks, or something equally touristy. I can thank the fashion gods that Karl thought better of this, and that where he did use nautical stripes, he managed to make them look grown up and chic. The first looks out were probably some of the most theatrical and "costumey" looks I've ever seen from him; black swimsuits worn with billowing black capes, tricorne hats and sunglasses perched on a rod to look like those masks worn at a masquerade. Even though they were no doubt inspired by the Venetian carnival celebration, there was something very "Eyes Wide Shut" about the looks, and having the slightly perverse sensibility that I do, I quite liked the Kubrick vibe. From there Karl went right into the Visconti allusions, sending out sailor-inspired tailoring, dresses and knitwear, but even though the first looks out were a kind of homage to the characters in Visconti's film, the clothes basically fit in with the whole early-20th Century life of leisure/jet setting thing that Coco herself embodied. Really the only thing exciting about the looks was the hair and makeup. Every model was outfitted with curly, fluffy little bobs (some better looking than others) and smokey eyes. Now here's where the whole Marchesa Casati thing comes into play for me. About 1/3 of the wigs were red, and paired with the dark eye makeup, the models wearing them really did seem to have been styled to look like her. It wouldn't exactly be random if Karl worked a bit of La Casati into the collection. She did spend a good portion of her life living in Venice, in the very same palazzo that Peggy Guggenheim would purchase after the Marchesa lost her fortune and was forced to sell it, which would then become the Peggy Guggenheim collection. But wait, there's more! According to something I once read (don't actually remember where I read it, just that I did), when the Marchesa's belongings were auctioned off, Coco Chanel herself was one of the bidders. So there you have it. No matter what, everything goes back to her. Karl knows his Coco lore, and for the first time it seems, I do too.

Anyway, from the sporty and nautical inspired opening looks, Karl moved into more decadent, and what I imagine could be called "Venetian" territory. Chiffon dresses were printed with baroque scrollwork over the signature double-C logo. Mini dress and cardigan combos came covered with gilt embroidery or vaguely mosaic patterns. A stunning printed column with a Fortuny-esque kind of vibe came with embroidery around the collar and under the bust, and was cut to leave the sides completely exposed. And dropped waist chemise dresses came accessorized with gorgeous necklaces and bracelets that popped up throughout the show. This being a Chanel collection, there was, of course, a number of tweed suits. Some of them had the jackets worn open over a bra and girdle type thing peeking out from the high waisted skirt, and I have to admit, it was kind of refreshing. For some reason I tend to find the tweed suits, arguably Chanel's most well known look, kind of stuffy a lot of the time. It's just something about tweed itself, I suppose. But like I said, it was refreshing to see them worn with a sort of, I hesitate to say vulgar attitude, but it sure as hell didn't look stuffy. For me though this Chanel outing was all about the dresses. Each one of them just really easy and beautiful. There was a gorgeous Venetian red off-the-shoulder column with sheer sleeves, a strapless draped black satin number worn with an incredible drop necklace that hung all the way down to the waist, a short red lace number with buttons up the front and billowing split sleeves, and an ecru column with metallic beadwork forming a Y down the front. All of them had that sort of slinky glamour of the late-teens and 20s.

I think that's why I liked a lot of the collection. I find that Karl does some of his best work when he channels that sort of flapper side of Chanel. I don't know what it is exactly, maybe it's the ease and simplicity of the fashions that defined the era, as well as the fact that Coco herself helped to champion those ideals. Maybe it's that there's less room to go all out with the baroque embroidery and heavy detailing that Karl loves to indulge in. Thinking back, most of the Chanel collections that I've really liked over the years have had a bit of a 20s flavor to them, even if it wasn't overt. In a way I think the paired down presentation helped the collection as well. Not that renting out the stretch of beach, flying in models, crew and clothing, and making sure all of the guests were able to get there as well is what anyone would call understated. But there was something really pure about having the models walk a straight line up and down a runway, or boardwalk serving as a runway, with nothing but a natural backdrop and lighting to set the scene. I've grown a little tired (okay a LOT tired) of these monumental Chanel presentations lately with the huge sets and all of the "Chanelisms" crammed into each outfit. Something like this, more intimate, more special, and more restrained, just seems really appealing. I guess the whole thing, clothes, location, styling, show, all just clicked for me. Needless to say, I haven't liked a Chanel collection this much in a long time, and it's nice to know that Karl can still have that effect on me.

All images from Style.com

Flashback: YSL Spring Summer 2001

2009-05-13T03:00:00.008-04:00

I've been thinking a lot about this collection lately, mostly because in the eight-and-a-half years since it was presented nearly everything shown in it has returned to the forefront of fashion (read: pleated tapered trousers, shoulder pads, the 80s in general). But I've pretty much always had a soft spot for this particular collection, and it was definitely one that helped shape my own tastes when I first got into fashion. The whole package is just so desirable; perfectly styled, sharply dressed, the right mix of masculine and feminine with more than a hint of sex waiting to be revealed. The odd thing is that for his very first effort Tom Ford did a really good job of making a clear statement by injecting a lot of himself into YSL and not getting bogged down in the legacy of the house, which is pretty immense. Interestingly enough (or maybe not so interestingly, considering the bitch fest that Saint Laurent and Pierre Berge were throwing at the time) the collection was met with lukewarm-to-negative reviews, with the main criticism being that it was all Ford and no Saint Laurent, or as someone quoted in the NY Times review put it, the collection was "slick -- and 'slick' is not what you'd call Y.S.L."

At the time it was shown I couldn't have cared less one way or the other, I just liked what I saw. Eight years worth of learning about fashion later and I can honestly say that I think the criticisms weren't entirely fair, and that you most certainly can equate the word slick with Saint Laurent so long as you bother to look beyond the respectable, fussy, bourgeois work that defined that latter half of his career to the erotic, scandalous, perverse things he did when he first established himself. No, this collection didn't look like Yves designed it but it did have an awful lot of what he originally stood for within it, interpreted through Ford's own aesthetic of course, which is exactly what should happen when a new designer is charged with working for an established house. That's the other thing that's gotten me thinking about this collection again, Stefano Pilati's recent work. When he started at the house his work was very feminine, very colorful and kinda fussy, much more like the work Yves did later in his career rather than the radical things he did when he started out. For the last two years though Pilati's work has grown progressively more severe, cold, and conceptual; the very opposite of Saint Laurent's ideal woman. Ford's own collections at the house went in the exact opposite direction, becoming more romantic, more overtly feminine and more subversive in their use of sexuality and seduction as he spent more time there. This all got me wondering; Why was Ford's work constantly criticized for not staying true to the house's DNA while Pilati's recent work is getting heaps of praise even though it's incredibly similar to what Ford did when he first took over? At the very least, Pilati's new work should be equally as criticized for not remaining completely true to the DNA of the house, because from where I'm sitting neither of them have addressed the whole of the Saint Laurent legacy, they've both chosen to focus on particular facet of it, which in truth is probably the smartest thing to do. But why criticize one person and praise the other when in reality they're doing the same thing, just in different ways? I just don't get it to be honest, and the only conclusion I can come up with is that a lot of people just wanted to find fault with Ford's work regardless of what he did. I'm not saying he was any more right for the house than Stefano Pilati is, but at the very least his cold, hard, sleek woman looked a hell of a lot more appealing. But you don't have to take my word for it...

Shown entirely in black or white, with the only shots of color being metallic gold or lavender wedge sandals and the occasional burgundy orchid tied around the models' necks, Ford concentrated mainly on sharp lines and construction, keeping texture and embellishment to a minimum. Le Smokings featured sharp shoulders, deep necklines and either pleated, tapered trousers or fuller cut cuffed trousers that fell over the foot. Occasionally they were worn with plunging, angular vests that looked like cummerbunds when worn under a jacket. For all of the structure though, there was a really sexy slouch to a lot of the tailoring, particularly in the pants. One of the recurring motifs throughout the collection was wrapping around the waists on dresses, tops and jackets, and I remember seeing the graphic black and white tank dress worn by Kate Moss in more than one editorial that spring. A top with a transparent back paired with a straight skirt was an update of Saint Laurent's iconic dress with the lace back photographed by Jeanloup Sieff in 1970, and paired under every look were boned garters and silk stockings. I have to say, I find something incredibly glamorous about sheer black stockings worn with a strappy sandal. And even though you can't see the garters on most of the looks, knowing that they're under the clothes is pretty f-ing sexy, especially on the more masculine inspired looks, don't you think? You can kind of see the garter underneath the second white smoking, and a clearer shot of it in the pic of Maggie Rizer from the side. Her look shown from the front is completely unremarkable, just a drapey knit top and silk trousers, but when you see that side view of her backstage the look takes on a whole new feel and you can't help but want to curse the photographers for not getting a shot of that on the runway.

As the collection moved from basic daytime separates styled with a decidedly after-dark feel into more traditional evening options, the wrapping that appeared throughout the collection became more structured, turning into obi-esque bands around the waist on some cocktail dresses and on a strapless bustier paired with trousers. The only real decoration shown in the collection made an appearence in the form of black feathers embroidered onto black dresses or on the lining of square panelled skirts with a train in the back. There was a trio of tulle covered mini dresses, tuxedo jackets spliced into asymmetrical harnesses or dresses, a gorgeous black satin three-piece smoking and an extremely sharp white bandage dress with the afforementioned obi detail. The final look was definitely where Ford let loose and had some fun, sending out an anatomically correct molded leather bustier complete with a diamond barbell pierced through the nipple, an homage to the copper molded bust and torso that Saint Laurent comissioned from sculpter Claude Lalanne in 1969 to be worn over chiffon evening gowns. I cannot fully express how much I love that particular piece. I know it probably makes me some pervy misogynist or something like that, but I love it. And I think this collection was a clear case of just how trained Ford's eye for details and presentation was as well. From the layered fringed hair that dipped over the models' eyes to the ribbons and orchids tied around their necks, right down to the tiny little "cigarette case" purses that came complete with lighters that slid out of the side. I kid you not, they came with working lighters. Check the blog header if you wanna see it for yourself. I might actually be convinced to take up smoking if I knew where to find one.

I really do think that given the current fashion climate, and the nearly ten years since it was shown, this collection definitely deserves a re-evaluation. It's just too chic to ignore.

All images from Firstview.com. To see the entire collection, click here.

The Party of the Year?

2009-05-05T13:27:00.006-04:00

Every year I, along with countless other fashion following die-hards, await what could arguably be called the most fashionable event of the year, especially these days now that the Oscars has become so predictable in terms of the red carpet. The Costume Institute Gala, held every May, always packs a major fashion punch because the rules that apply on other red carpets just don't hold any water here. It's encouraged, if not expected, that anyone in attendance go all out. So why is it that this year there were many, many looks that either did nothing for me at all or left me scratching my head thinking 'WTF?". This year's exhibit "The Model as Muse" has left me feeling a lot less anxious to trek up 5th Ave. to see it than I normally am, mainly because I think it's stupid-bordering-on-insulting that the models, most of whom cannot be called muses, are the focus instead of the clothing. But I'll await judgment on that until I do drag my ass uptown to see it. I will say this though, given the evening's theme I was expecting big things on the red carpet if only because every non-model female guest would have to contend with unnaturally beautiful women and presumably up their respective antes in order to do so. Unfortunately that was not to be, and a lot of the models upstaged everyone else. Last year's Superhero themed event, 2007's Poiret event, 2006's Anglomania, 2005's Chanel and 2003's Goddess themed evenings all had some fantastic fashion moments, so what exactly went wrong here? First, as my fellow tFS-er Kimair already pointed out there were just too many people in miniskirts, and for every one that worked, there were many more that looked cheap or underdressed. Call me crazy, but I love a gown, I always will, and really, even for a celeb how many events can you go to where "the more dramatic, the better" may as well be the dress code? Combined with an overwhelming amount of tough, clunky shoes and booties too many people wound up looking more appropriately dressed for clubbing than they did for a gala. But like I said, there were some mini-length looks that worked for me.

First there's co-chair Kate Moss in Marc Jacobs. Now normally I find her style pretty overrated, and I still don't get what the whole obsession is about. But as sick as I am of her face I gotta say, the dress is gorge, kind of a modern take on 30's movie glamour, and the turban is a fun, theatrical touch. The only thing I don't love is the shoes. A sandal with tiny, painful little straps over the toes and ankle would've looked better.

Next there's Stam in Rodarte. Love it. Love the colors, love the soft hair and darker makeup. Love the accessories (here the tough, chunky shoes work). Need I say more?

Then there's the stunning Alek Wek, who has never looked better imo. The truth is, I'd probably hate the dress on someone else for being too garish, but with her coloring and that dramatic makeup I'm kind of swooning over it.

Another look that under normal circumstances I'd be hating was Sasha P's Giambattista Valli. With the exception of the tiara, I think it's just the right side of kooky and dramatic. Either that or it's true that models do in fact know how to wear clothes, and can make a peacock feather cape and mini dress seem like a great idea.

Now, onto the gowns...

Iman. Donna Karan. Platinum/ivory hybrid color. There was just no way in hell it could've looked bad.

Natalia Vodianova in a pink Fortuny "Delphos" looked great. The color was just unusual enough to be noticed in the sea of neutrals and brights, she's gorgeous as it is, and I'm obsessed with Fortuny. It wasn't a standout look per se, but her choice to wear Fortuny is pretty fabulous in and of itself.

Iris Strubegger (who has quickly become one of my favorite faces on the runway) looked amazing in one of my favorite looks from the Givenchy S/S 09 couture collection. I rarely say fierce, preferring to save it for special moments when my inner queen just can't help herself, but I'd say it applies here...

Another stunner in Givenchy was Kristen McMenamy. I love her, and I love the dress, so even though I'm slightly disappointed that she chose something from an older collection, I'll get over it. Plus, how ballsy is it to wear white when you choose not to color the gray in your hair? I love ballsy. Always will.

Erin O'Conner looked just as fab as always in Gaultier Couture. Seriously, the dress and pose makes her look even more long and lean than she is.

A controversial choice as far as most on tFS were concerned last night; Blake Lively in Versace. I love the color, I love the sleek hair and makeup, sure the girl can't pose and the dress is slit down to here and up to there, but my guess is that if that dress showed up on someone else very few people would be ripping the wearer to shreds and saying she looked like a slut. Do you really mean to tell me that Gisele didn't look just a smidge on the trashy side in a sparkly blue micromini? Come on people, double standards!!!

As for Shalom Harlow, let's just say that Lisa Fonssagrives would be proud. This isn't the first time she's worn a dramatic, borderline weird look to the event. in 2007 she wore a fringed Viktor & Rolf gown and cape, and just like I did then I think this look works.

I adore Coco Rocha in this bronze Isaac Mizrahi. The color with her pale skin and deep red hair is a risky, but pretty damn fabulous, combo.

And finally, some much needed guy candy in the form of Mr. Chuck Bass himself, Ed Westwick. I couldn't care less what he's wearing. I will throw this suggestion out there though, him + Tom Ford menswear = a very good thing....just sayin'.

Other than that, nothing much to write home about. Due to the drama between Azzedina Alaia and Anna Wintour, the red carpet probably missed out on some fabulousness since something like 7 people were slated to wear his clothing, including Naomi Campbell and Stephanie Seymour, who decided to sit out in protest with him. I think the whole thing is so silly. I get why Alaia's pissed that his work was completely ignored for the exhibit despite the fact that he was HUGE during the Supermodel era, but to me his asking the women he designed clothes for not to wear them was kind of foolish. The ultimate revenge would have been to have all of those women show up looking incredible in clothing by a designer who wasn't given his due. Instead the whole thing comes off like a hissy fit from a temperamental diva who asked his friends to pick a side.

Now for the WTF moments I had mentioned earlier.

Erin Wasson in Phi: This is a look that's begging for someone to give her a good slap across the face for completely ignoring the fact that she's attending an event that's become known as "The Oscars of the East". Wintour and Co. should institute a door policy or something. Anyone looking like they've got a hypodermic needle in their clutch and day old underwear on is not permitted.

Dr. Lisa Airan in Balmain: This isn't a Kiss concert, hon. I usually think she looks ridiculous and overdone though, so this is no surprise.

Agyness Deyn in Burberry: No joke, the first thought I had was of Gene Hackman in drag in "The Birdcage". It's a shame cause the dress was pretty on it's own.

Molly Sims in Dolce & Gabbana: You know what that beautiful gold Christmas gift-wrap looks like after a kid rips it off of the box? This is it in ensemble form.

Anne Hathaway in Marc Jacobs: I actually liked this dress on the runway. But here the hem looks about half a foot too short. I'd almost be willing to overlook that if it wasn't for the Jacqueline Susann hair and jewelry.

Victoria Beckham in Marc Jacobs: I'll admit, I like the dress. It's cute and kinda fun. But she always, always overdoes everything. Her skin is too tan, her posing is too posed, her hair and makeup are always too severe for her bone(y) structure. No matter what she wears the bad always seems to overshadow the good for me.

Rhianna in Dolce & Gabbana: The word dopey comes to mind, trying too hard is a close second and ridiculous comes in third. A safe bet is this, if an outfit looks silly ON the runway on a model it's practically a given that it's gonna look silly on a real person in real life where you aren't strutting to a thumping beat with a spotlight glaring on you. And WHAT is with her obsession with driving gloves? They don't go with everything ya know!

Madonna in Louis Vuitton: If you can't figure out my reasoning for this one, what the hell are you doing reading this blog?!?! Seriously though, I kinda liked that dress on the runway (though even without the stupid styling the dress is way too youthful for a 50 year old woman). I kinda liked those boots on the runway. I even kinda liked those bunny ears on the runway, but combined as one outfit on someone who, it must be said, is becoming more and more past her prime everytime she's seen the whole thing comes off as tragic.

It was a pretty odd night as far as Met Galas go. There wasn't much "WOW" to be had on the carpet, and even the selection of guests wasn't as fabulous as usual. I just pray that the exhibit isn't as much of a letdown as the event was, but be assured that when I do go to see it you'll be getting a rundown.

Video: Givenchy Fall Winter 2009/1010

2009-04-23T11:12:00.003-04:00

So ever since I first saw the Givenchy collection for F/W 09 back in March when it was shown I've been dying to see the video. A big reason for that is because Riccardo Tisci tends to put a lot of detail in the backs of his garments, and unfortunately the "one-way runway", as I always call it, doesn't allow for many photos of the back view. Speaking of back views, in my review of the show I mentioned how I was dying to see the back of the white draped halter neck gown with feathered shoulders, and it totally didn't disappoint. I mean, I had a feeling that it would be backless, but still.....

Givenchy Fall Winter 2009/2010 -

I've got to say, in the month or so since this was shown and now having seen it in motion, I really do think this is my favorite Givenchy Ready to Wear collection that Tisci has ever done. It's well made, it's glamorous, it's a little hard edged and a little romantic too. But best of all, it's crammed full of gorgeous, wearable clothes, and that's not something that can be said about a whole lot of collections.

Video: Prada Fall Winter 2009/2010

2009-03-24T21:58:00.006-04:00

In the weeks since the Prada collection was shown during Milan Fashion Week, I've gone from liking it but wishing the ideas had been taken further to liking it for what it is. Who knows why, but for some reason some collections, particularly those from Miuccia, require a little bit of time to digest. Whether it's a case of simply becoming more accustomed to what you've seen or eventually "getting" it I can't say for sure, my guess is it's something different for everyone. But I will say this, seeing the video of a collection can make all the difference because so many things are completely lost in still photography. Even though it was visible in photos that Miuccia chose to send the models out into a closed space surrounded by bleechers and scaffolding instead of a runway, getting to see it from multiple angles made it seem much more powerful. It was almost as if the models were being displayed to a crowd of on-lookers at some sort of bloodsport event, like they were the unwitting animal or criminal thrown into the ring . It could be Thunderdome, it could be some gladiatorial arena, hell, it could be some down and dirty dog-fighting venue in the Bronx. Once you have those sort of images in your head, the tweed skirt suits take on a whole new spirit. The music, too, is pretty great. And of course, having multiple camera angles lets you see all of the details that the reviewers always talk about but never show up in the photos, like the skirts and coats slit up the sides to reveal the leg. I love that detail, and I pray to God that at least some of the pieces make it into boutiques with that slit intact.

I still hate the waders, though.

Video from TVModa thanks to StrikingFashion from theFashionSpot

Fin...

2009-03-12T21:14:00.009-04:00

John Galliano

John Galliano fashion shows are always a highly anticipated event, even if the previous collection was something of a let down, as was the case with Spring/Summer. Regardless, he is one of the few designers whom people seem to really count on to lift the spirits when the rest of fashion is a little low on joy and excitement. And it seems that when he does have an off season, it makes people even more hopeful that he'll really pull off a great new collection. While he succeeded in putting on a good show this season that's all he really managed. Don't get me wrong, the clothes were far from being bad, and I really don't think that John is capable of doing truly bad clothes, but they were both extremely costumey and out of touch with where fashion is.

Staged in a warehouse with a fake snowstorm falling for the duration of the show, colored lasers were used to create the illusion of a tunnel, like the snow was falling around the models in a cylindrical shape. This was actually the most amazing thing about the show, and my description of it hardly does it justice. The set, or rather special effects in lieu of a set, could have been the prelude to any number of things. Even though it was a snowstorm, the blue-ish cast from the lasers made the whole thing seem much more sci-fi than anything else, which might have been a welcome change from Galliano. He's never really been much of a futurist. The closest he's ever come to sci-fi territory was his F/W 1999 Haute Couture collection for Dior, partially inspired by "The Matrix". But it could have gone anywhere. Where it wound up was in Eastern Europe, territory that John has covered before both at his own label and at Dior. I was pretty let down right away. The opening looks combined the bundled, rounded shapes of Russian nesting dolls with the flared out Faustanellas worn by Greek soldiers. What that amounted to were jackets and coats with panniered hips that were sort of an extreme take on Dior's padded Bar jacket, and hugely flaring skirts in varying shades of gray. A gray checked wool coat had angularly cut shoulders, though the structure wasn't stiff like all of the shoulder pads we've seen this season. A black skirt was inset with godets in a yellow floral pattern while yellow flower embroidery traced the edges of the peasant blouse that was worn with it. After the monochrome looks that opened the show came a section of looks, predominantly short with full skirts and voluminous tops in bright red, royal blue, white and black that wre further lavished with Gypsy-esque embellishments and embroideries. Most of the skirts were paired with loose, billowy peasant blouses, while others were worn with heavily decorated jackets. A royal blue A-line coat was covered in thick black embroidery around the edges, and there was something vaguely Christian Lacroix about it. Overall this section of looks might as well have been a bunch of national costumes, at least that would have made sense. As fashion however, I just don't see what could be taken away from it, and I don't just mean in the sense of what can be worn. I mean, what's in there that women are going to desire, to aspire to? What is going to inspire them? The whole "Gypsy/bohemian" thing has been established time and again as more of an aesthetic than a trend, so it's not as if anyone is going to see this and feel the need to adapt it for themselves. And it's just so literal that I really can't look at this and feel inspired by it on a purely creative level either because the truth is, I just don't think it's that creative. So I was just left feeling pretty uninterested in the first portion of the collection.

Being that this was a very small collection, just 30 looks and most of them repetitive, the national costumes moved right into Galliano's signature bias cut eveningwear. While not much more interesting than the first 2/3 of the show, it was certainly the most wearable and the most beautiful part of it. Eight gowns, all in shades of gray, silver, and one in black, were beyond ethereal. Some were transparent, shown only over jeweled thongs, others were in metallic silk, one came draped in gray fringe and all of them were accessorized with veils, crowns of jewels, heavy Byzantine jewelry around the neck or waist, and a rosary. The whole look was sort of a combination of icons from Eastern Christianity and Tim Burton's "Corpse Bride". The dresses themselves, while nothing new for Galliano, were still mesmerizingly gorgeous, and even though I'm getting really tired of the transparency thing, I can't deny that. But then again, John has an instinct for making beautiful dresses. His bias cut numbers are stunning even when they're stripped of any kind of embellishment or dramatic styling, so maybe I'm being too easy on him there.

I really wish I can say that the collection moved me, but beyond reassuring me that Galliano hasn't lost his flair for the theatrical, it didn't do anything for me. This is mostly because it's just entirely out of touch with things, and I don't mean money-wise. I would be more than happy to indulge John in some over the top fantasy, especially now considering that money and wearability has become more of a priority than ever in the fashion world, but it's depressing that his inspiration has absolutely nothing to do with what's going on in fashion or outside of it. I mean, beyond the fact that there is minimal, if any, true imagination involved in this collection (it's basically a bunch of extreme takes on various national costumes) the whole folksy/gypsy/ Eastern European thing has been beaten into the ground for the time being. I could see if that was his aesthetic in a nutshell, just like Ann Demeulemeester is consistently dark, brooding and slightly gothic even when those things aren't in fashion, but that's not the sum of his aesthetic. It's one tiny fraction of the whole thing. And even in the past when John has done really out there collections for both Dior and his own line, they still do relate to the mood of things. I mean, even his completely over the top Victorian Dolls collection of S/S 2004, which may have seemed insane in a season that was in a very Gatsby sort of mood, the overt, delicate femininity of it made sense because really that's what everyone else was doing as well, just in a different way. But in this season, when designers were largely creating very strong, polished, aggressively elegant clothes his faux-naive peasant blouses and paisley prints make no sense. While I'm fine with his attempt to make people forget about things for a little while and maybe bring some joy to fashion in a pretty joyless moment, it would have been nicer if it didn't feel so trite.

Louis Vuitton

Question: What do you get if you cross Marie Antoinette with mid-80s Haute Couture and add a touch of the Pigalle district?

The Louis Vuitton F/W 09 collection, that's what. If Marc Jacobs' own collection in New York set the stage for the prevailing obsession with the return of the 80s this season, then his collection for Vuitton both cemented that obsession, and offered a different take on it. Instead of the the drug fueled glam club scene 80s or the hard edged Mugler/Montana 80s, the Vuitton show picked up on another side of Parisian fashion in the decade, the joyous, poofy, colorful, eccentric 80s of Christian Lacroix and Emanuel Ungaro. It was a much more overtly feminine take on the era than what has been shown for four weeks now, low on glitz, low on aggression and high on exaggerated prettiness. If most of the collections have left people seething at how literally the 80s is being used, the Vuitton collection actually did manage to deliver some clothes that wouldn't look retro worn today. Essentially what the show boiled down to was using things like ruching, tucking, folding and gathering to create volume. There was a certain haughty feel to things in that a lot of the looks were very pulled together, very "done", but there wasn't anything fussy about it. Combined with an almost cartoony girlishness and a tarty attitude, the whole thing made me think of a girl who has pillaged her mother's vintage couture, ripped it apart, reconfigured it for a night out and wears it with all the elegance of a streetwalker. It was that mix of something really chic and "Parisian" with something kinda trashy that made me like what I was seeing. The opening looks were mainly in black with one brightly colored detail; a long teal or coral ribbon tied at the waist, a candy pink lining peeking out the hem of a jacket, a hot pink pom-pom nestled in a puff sleeve. They weren't garish like neon, but against the black clothes they made an impact. A fantastic LBD came with two mismatched sleeves; on one there was a huge ruffled poof at the wrist, the other had a puff at the shoulder with the aforementioned pom-pom peeking out. A mini skirt was made of overlapping loops of black ribbon trimmed in fuschia and was worn with a jacket made of strips of fur. After the black with bits of color green looks started to come into play, first as a black coat with rows of scrunchy ruffles that was actually kind of ugly, then as a tulle and printed fabric tutu worn with a darker sweater and matching bra. There was also a tailleur of tightly ruched olive green iridescent taffeta worn with a giant black bow that looked like bunny ears. Those bunny ears popped up throughout the collection and added a really fun, Helmut Newton-esque touch.

After a few exits in shades of blue there was a black coat, very simple and chic, belted at the waist with two giant puffs on the cuff of the sleeves. Needless to say I love it and would die if I saw someone gutsy enough to wear it on the street. A midnight blue tailleur paired a short cropped jacket with short puff sleeves with a puckered skirt that had a huge puffed up ruffle around the hem. Even though I can see the 80s in it, I think it could absolutely work as an outfit on the right girl. As separate pieces, it definitely could. I don't see how that skirt is any more or less retro than the bubble skirts that first got huge a few years ago and still refuse to go away in certain market sectors. A beige draped dress in matte and shiny silk on Stam was worn with those black bunny ears and patent leather thigh high boots with lacing up the back. It was a weird mix of pretty and vulgar, but I liked it...though something tells me we'll be seeing a lot of these bunny ears when the fall magazines start circulating. That look led into a section of similar face powder beige and Barbie pink looks accented with black. A simple draped short sleeve mini dress in pink was probably one of the least threatening looks in the entire collection and I could see it on any number of girls in a heartbeat. There was also a fabulous brown leather coat with a slight bubble shape on the bottom that gave the model a fantastic figure. How it'll look on a girl that already has hips remains to be seen, but hey, it could work.

And just like last season, the looks kept coming and coming. Bright color, bubbled, ruched, be-ribboned and tucked to the nth limit. There was a really cute look that paired a plain black long sleeve top that had a big blush colored ribbon at the neck with a short, transparent black bubble skirt that had rows of what looks like pleats running horizontally across it. It was lined in the same blush color as the ribbon on the top and paired with trashy patent platform boots with ribbons lacing up the front. Another fitted black mini dress had a panel of colorful print ruched across the front and a slight ruffle at the hem. It was, I hate to use the word cause it sounds kind of cheesy, but it was sassy. It had attitude, and I like attitude. There were some pieces with dense paisley-ish patterns on a red or yellow background paired with matching leggings, striped t shirt/tunic mini dresses, a voluminous astrkhan coat, a fitted wool motorcycle jacket paired with a pleated bubble skirt and gold brocade hooker boots, and finally a shiny lame and tulle bustier paired with capris that had a huge ruffle around the cuff followed by a ruched lame mini dress worn with patent hooker boots.

I actually love the spirit of the collection, particularly the joy in dressing up and the fact that none of it is taken so seriously. I also think that, unlike Jacobs' own collection, there are bunch of really great pieces in here that aren't complete throwbacks to another era. But I really don't mind the 80s vibe of this, particularly because it's such a different side of the 80s then what has been popular for a few seasons now. I get that it's not something that will appeal to everyone, but I was actually kind of surprised by how negative some of the comments were towards it on tFS. When compared to last season's LV show, which was pretty well received on tFS, I can't see how this is so bad. Yes it's tacky and over the top, but so was last season, probably even more than this was, so I really didn't get the complaints about this being too much. It was as if the handful of really, really bad looks were all people were seeing, while the good look or the look that were a least really fun got ignored completely, and I have a theory in regards to that. I think, and I may be wrong, but I think that people who have an interest in fashion are sort of trained to hate the 80s. All I've heard about for four weeks of shows on the Fashion Spot is how horribly, dreadfully evil the 80s were in terms of fashion and how anything inspired by the 80s should be nailed to a cross, not worn by people today. Now, I'm sure some of the people moaning about the return are old enough to have lived through the 80s and experienced wearing these clothes first hand. That's fine, but that doesn't mean that a younger generation should be told that they should hate the clothes as well because they're ugly. But the thing is, the people who lived through the 80s probably aren't the best people to lay judgement on this whole comeback that's being staged right now simply because their opinions aren't unbiased. Then there are those who didn't live through it and probably hate it because they're taught that the 80s = BAD. Sure, there are people who these clothes simply don't appeal to on a gut level, but I'd guess there's a decent amount of people who don't hate the clothes, they just hate what they think the clothes represent. Let's be real here, most of the high fashion clothes in the 80s weren't hideous, in fact, plenty of them were beautiful and also pretty interesting in their newness. It's the look of the 80s that's so abhored, the big hair, big makeup, big nails and big jewelry that went with the big shoulders, not the shoulders themselves, but I don't know if many people would be willing to stop and think about that. Sure, there were bad fashions in the 80s, but from what I've heard in my 2 short decades there have been bad fashions in EVERY era. I mean, polyester leisure suits, bellbottom jeans worn with patchwork leather jackets, vinyl minidresses....none of those things sound particularly appealing to me. Yet the 80s is always the one decade that is declared universally bad because of the bad things that happened to come with the good. I just don't get it, and I probably never will. Don't get me wrong, I understand that at this point people are probably sick of having the 80s redux rammed down their throats, but let's keep "sick of" and "hate" separate. I'll be honest, I really do hope the 80s thing dies down by next season. Not necessarily because I'm so sick of it, though I am, but mostly because if I have to endure another four weeks of complaints about the 80s I may just have to start following sports instead of fashion.

All images from Style.com

Welcome to my nightmare...

2009-03-10T20:36:00.006-04:00

Alexander McQueen

After a few years where people had begun to question whether or not Alexander McQueen had lost his edge, he has finally set the record straight. With his Fall/Winter 2009 collection, McQueen proved that he is still the king of macabre chic, and his timing couldn't possibly have been better in a Paris fashion week that's turning out to be largely disappointing. Opening his show with chicly tailored looks made in head to toe houndstooth of different sizes, he set the tone perfectly for what would follow. Now I know what some people might be thinking; "What the hell is macabre about houndstooth?". Well, nothing, unless you happen to cover the entire body in it at paint the models face up like some mutant sex doll on a murder spree. The first looks were all fairly traditional once you zero in on the clothes. Sharply tailored jackets with sculpted collars, draped sleeves, asymmetric peplumed waists or exaggerated cocooning shapes reminiscent of vintage Balenciaga were all shown in either traditional houndstooth or houndstooth that had been scrawled with red graffiti. I'm sure all of these jackets, paired with either flaring circle skirts or below the knee pencil skirts, will be offered in a myriad of different fabrics come summer when they make it to the racks, so for those women who aren't interested in looking like a checkerboard, fear not. The shapes themselves, particularly an asymmetric jacket with a single kimono-esque sleeve and sculpted portrait collar, are beautiful and would make for an interesting take on a wardrobe staple. There was a fur coat dyed with an overblown houndstooth pattern worn over a ruffled top and a leather pouf skirt, a jacket with flared sleeves and huge ruffles on the front that were trimmed in black and white striped fabric worn with a matching skirt, and a loose fitting dress, printed with a deformed houndstooth pattern that had a big ruffle on one of the shoulders. Mixed in with the graphic black and white houndstooth were two pieces in an orangey red and black harlequin pattern, one a voluminous blouse worn under a mini houndstooth jumpsuit and the other an even more voluminous organza dress.

From there McQueen moved into black, showing plastic-y looking fabric made into a cardinal type coat, a fitted double breasted trench with rounded sleeves and a big bow at the neck, and a stunning dress with a harnessed and corseted torso over a full ruffled skirt worn with over the knee platform boots. A knitted dress had thick tubes wrapped around the neck and shoulders, as well as around the hem, and an orange and black striped look could have been right out of Tim Burton's "The Nightmare Before Christmas". A red and black striped ballgown was like the demented version of last year's Swan Lake ballerinas, the skirt lifted up onto the shoulder to form a sleeve. Red and black prints featured houndstooth that dissolved into a flock of birds. A red and black tiered fur jacket was absolutely gorgeous, and on the more savage side of things a shaggy goat fur coat came lashed at the waist with a corset, while another had sleeves in the same fur and a body made out of leather covered with a lattice of harnesses over the torso. A molded top covered in red and black feathers was worn with a cage on the models head and a vinyl looking pencil skirt. The look reminded me a bit of his F/W 1997 Haute Couture collection for Givenchy, as did the general mood of the collection. I also got bits of McQueen's own S/S 2000 and F/W 2001 collections for his own label, particularly the latter with the sort of twisted clown vibe running through this collection.

From there McQueen went into evening, and ever since 2002 or so, he has had a way with very dramatic eveningwear. A black beaded wrap dress with a hood came lined in red and looked like what you'd get if you crossed Grace Jones with Leigh Bowery. A sculpted mermaid gown covered with those black and red feathers was similar to some of the gowns that Olivier Theyskens showed earlier in the week at Nina Ricci, though here the effect was a bit more balanced and also less jarring coming from McQueen. Coral snakes were used as a photo print in a mirror image like the crystal and wood prints from spring to make two fitted gowns, one straight and worn with a leather harness, the other with a kimono collar and pouf skirt. And a gorgeous sheath with an exaggerated mermaid skirt was draped in what looked like trash bag plastic, but is more likely some kind of synthetic/silk blend. It was worn under a long coat in fabric that looks a bit like bubble wrap. The two closing pieces were duds in my book, two strange sculpted forms covered in white or black feathers. Beyond not being particularly attractive, I just don't get what they're supposed to be.

All in all, an exciting collection. It certainly provided a shot of adrenaline for anyone who's been following the shows this season. I am, however, not without complaints. The first is the color palette. Black and red is a time tested combination. It makes quite an impact and in the right hands can look very chic. Unfortunately here, combined with the goth/industrial overtones, it reads as a little more Hot Topic than Haute Couture. It's unfortunate that a part of the teenage subculture, all of the purposefully sullen "nobody gets me because I'm alternative" types have destroyed a perfectly good color combo, but that's the way things go when teenagers are involved. Another is the overwhelming amount of patterns. I enjoy houndstooth, there's something very crazy-rich-woman about it as opposed to traditional tweed, but seeing so much of it per look, as well as back to back really took away from the individuality of the clothes, which is a shame because separated into pieces they are no doubt beautiful. My final complaint is that this isn't as McQueen as usual. In fact, something about it seems almost Junya Watanabe/Comme des Garcon, though I can't put my finger on it. I also think that the whole Leigh Bowery/80s London Club Scene thing has been handled better, namely by John Galliano in 2003. That collection wasn't remotely wearable, but it also wasn't a completely literal take on the inspiration. I think that's probably the biggest issue with this one, the level of imagination isn't really where it should be. But what the collection lacked in vision and variety, it did make up for in impact. It definitely won't be one of the collections that fades into the background this season, and if the reaction on tFS is anything to go by it certainly got people to sit up and take notice for a while. So I'm of two minds about the collection. On the one hand, it's almost too theatrical to the point of being student work which is certainly beneath McQueen's usual level of drama. On the other, I'm just happy to see that McQueen still has his twisted side intact since for a few years now he seems to have gone all soft and romantic, or worse, commercial. Is it bound to be one of my favorite collections of the season? Probably not, but hey, at least it had me excited enough to review it...

All images from Catwalking.com

Angels and Demons...

2009-03-10T14:24:00.006-04:00

Givenchy

There was a lot riding on the Givenchy collection for me this season, mainly because the couture collection shown in January made such an impression on me, and while Riccardo Tisci didn't exactly exceed my expectations he did meet them, though not in the way I would've expected. I was hoping that the lightness and the softness of the couture collection would translate into the ready to wear, but instead we got more of Tisci's very dark, very strict and somewhat aggressive romanticism. I'm not complaining however, since it was really a collection that took many things that he has previously explored in his early days at Givenchy and removed the tortured student aspect to produce a blend of dramatic experimentation and truly gorgeous, wearable clothes.

In seeing the first images as they came out I got a sort of fallen angel vibe from what I was saw in them. White ostrich feathers decorated one look while leather sleeves or chains decorated another. But, as is always the case with the first images that get published by the news and media websites, the images weren't in the order that the looks were shown on the runway. Now after seeing them in the correct order I see that my original take was actually kind of backwards. The collection seemed more about demons becoming angels rather than the other way around. According to Tisci though, the collection actually has nothing to do with mythology or religion. He was inspired, at least in part, by Elsa Schiaparelli's work during the late 30s and early 40s. It turns out that Hubert de Givenchy worked for a short period of time as an assistant to Schiaparelli (you learn something new every day) and that Tisci saw some of her influence in the archives. Combine that with raw, animalistic sensuality and what you get was this collection. However, I kind of like my spin on things better, and that's what I'm sticking to. Really though the collection did proceed a bit like Dante's "Divine Comedy", starting where else but in Hell. Out came a parade of sinners and demons, starting with sharp pagoda shoulders and strict tailoring all in black. The first dress had those pagoda shoulders, built over a regular fitted sleeve on one side with tufts of some kind of fur sticking out from underneath, and a similar top was paired with a shiny eel leather pencil skirt. Full cut trousers had drapes and geometric pieces worked into them from the waistband. One pair was worn with a sheer top that had a sleeve covered with a combination of shaggy hair and ostrich feathers that appeared to be harnessed to the body, while another pair of trousers was paired with a simple turtleneck sweater that had leather sleeves. And there were two dresses that also used that shaggy hair and ostrich feather combination on sheer bodies that definitely had a beastly, demonic sort of vibe that I actually kind of loved.

After that there was more sharp tailoring, from pants suits and coats in a gorgeous textured black wool with leather sleeves, to simple wool crepe trousers worn with an organza and leather blouse that had a black coneshaped bra worn underneath, a one sleeved sheath worn with a fur capelet and a fitted skirt suit with an oddly draped, but very beautiful skirt worn with a huge metal chain around the waist. Here was also where Tisci started to lighten the colors, segueing from black into navy blue by way of black/navy checked wool tailoring. From there he sent out sheer blouses in plisse silk worn over those cone bras, simply draped organza tops, a coat worn with a black fur collar and another trimmed with ostrich feathers, some more of those trousers (really the best pants I've seen all season) and a fantastic pantsuit that had a double peplum effect at the waist. I'm pretty sure the pants underneath have it's own peplum as opposed to the jacket having both of them, but I'm not positive. Either way, it's great looking. Mixed into the navy stuff was a look that was one of my favorites in the lineup; a fox jacket with leather sleeves worn over a fluid black dress with a deep v-neck. There's something incredibly glamorous about it that I can't put my finger on, and why such a simple look stands out to me I don't really know, but it does. I'd love to see more of the dress underneath, because knowing Tisci it's not as simple as it appears to be.

After the navy looks things started to lighten up, literally. Ecru tailoring and ivory lace came into the picture, though, this being a Riccardo Tisci designed collection that ivory lace wasn't exactly virginal. Worn with those recurring cone bras and built out with sparkly cobalt shoulder pads, the three dresses were really the only flat looks in the collection. I just don't think they added anything, and I don't think the collection would have suffered if they had been left in the studio. As it is the angular tailored looks with vests or stoles in ostrich feathers that bookended the lace dresses were much more appealing. After that there came three looks in a sort of mint-tinged white color completely covered with silver studs. The caped jumpsuit I could live without, but the two drapey dresses were a nice contribution to the growing trend this season for completely covering a garment in hardware. It's not hard to figure out why designers are making clothes look like armor, tough clothes for tough times and all, but I'm actually really liking some of the results on a purely aesthetic level. The pieces here, as with the pieces at Cavalli in Milan, have a great movement to them due to the weight of the metal on the fabric. How wearable they all are remains to be seen. After this trio came a mish-mash of looks, which is kind of unusual for Tisci since he tends to divide his collections into sections based on color, shape or details. There was a black leather coat worn open over a cone bra and trousers, a gorgeous long sleeved black dress with a cowl draped into the front with strands of beads attatched, some white tops with strands of beads that were covered in fabric worn with black pants or a twisted shiny leather skirt and some draped sheer black looks that combined fishnet, chiffon and chains. One of them, a long dress, was strangely beautiful, though the top made in the same way and worn with draped trousers was a much more approachable option. If the black section was Hell, then middle portion of the collection was Purgatory. The sinners aren't quite purified yet, their sins still weigh on their souls and keep them from Heaven....or whatever. Then of course, after paying your dues in Purgatory there's only one place you can wind up. Pure white draped gowns, and what looks like a jumpsuit, had "wings" made from a combination of ostrich feathers and pleated fabric. My personal favorite was also the simplest; a fluid halter neck colum with some feathers sprouting around the shoulders. I'm dying to see what the back of it looks like. But apparently these angels weren't quite purged of their sins, because the last look out was anything but pure; a black top with a deep v neck and draped trousers accessorized with some kind of bolero or jacket covered with fans of white fabric in the front and more of that shaggy beast hair in the back. I guess Heaven wasn't really their thing afterall.

I have to say, I really thought the collection was great. It may even be my favorite ready to wear collection Tisci has ever done. He managed to touch upon so many of the things that are huge this season, strong shoulders, architectural cuts, sharp tailoring, armor, barbarism, texture, the 40s, extravagent fur, and make them all work together in one collection without coming off as disjointed or worse, overloaded. Most of the clothes he showed would look gorgeous on a variety of women, from the fabulous pants, to the sharp little jackets, the interesting skirts and even some of the dresses. My only complaint would be the editing. I would've liked to see the black and white looks that were interspersed before the all white eveningwear worked into the collection better instead of just jammed in between two sections of solid color. Even if the whole "angels and demons" thing is total b.s. on my part, as I suspect it is, keeping the collection broken up into sections of black, navy, beige, and white would've just made for a really nice progression. But it's a minor complaint, and really, the only looks that I truly dislike are the three lace dresses. So maybe this season isn't the season that Riccardo decided to throw a surprise our way and continue with the color, softness and lightness he touched on in his S/S couture collection, but what he offered instead is still pretty damn great.

all images from Style.com