[Creative]

Yes, because it isn't real. You just have to have a look at the 'woman' of each designer (most of them homosexuals) and they're completely different, some take wearabilty into account, some don't. It has nothing to do with sexuality. Galliano's woman has nothing to do with Alber's one, and the same with the rest. That's a kind of 'legend'.

[Creative]

And there are some men who don't like what Alexander did (and they were never going to wear it) and there are some women who love what he did, in the same way there are some women who don't like what Alber (very wearable) does and some men who adore what he's doing.

[honeycombchild]

That's still really not what I was saying, but never mind.

[rosalynn]

I always feel a bit out of my depth commenting on collections, and bow to tFS members' superior knowledge. A lot of things affect my personal views on collections, and I couldn't even begin to pigeonhole myself into any category.

I will start off by saying that I am relatively new to fashion. I am largely ignorant to the history of even the better-known fashion houses. I think this affects my criteria for what makes a good collection - while I'd rate a collection on its own merits, other members would (rightly) factor in many seasons' previous collections, and even designs under the namesake designer.

I'm sure my knowledge will increase now that I'm into fashion. I'll learn more about it, will remember previous seasons which will set a benchmark for me to compare against. For the time being, I can only ever call what I see.

Another thing I'd say is I will often be less critical of shows earlier in fashion weeks than those later. For example I quite liked Alexander Wang's collection when I first saw it in New York, by the end of NYFW I really wasn't keen at all because most of the collections I saw since were a lot better.

I don't have any loyalty to any brand. If they do stuff I like (or can even appreciate from an artistic point of view) I'll give them credit.

And finally, I'd also say to me a collection is less important to me than the pieces in the collection. A collection itself might be all over the place with little or no vision, but to me if it's wearable, I don't mind as much as I can imagine other members would.

You can wake up now, I've finished!

[MulletProof]

Quote:

Originally Posted by honeycombchild it was perhaps a difference in the way people like women to be, like them to appear. There's still a massive space for taste within that.

I think you might be right on that. I do think that the expectations of your average male poster here tend to differ almost dramatically from those of female posters, regardless of sexual orientation. There are certain designers that make this obvious, you go to a Versace collection for instance and the biggest, most abundant praise is coming from male fans, there are very few women posting in these threads actually. On the other hand, take any Marni thread (not the most recent one but those throughout tFS brief history) and women tend to favor their collections while men are often repulsed by the styling.
Of course there are exceptions but anyway, that's what I've been noticing for years here, and I don't blame any party, I just think that the base of our expectations are very different sometimes, it can be what you want to project or what you want the opposite sex to look like, which is.. all rather complex for my 11 am here.

Anyway, I do think the first post here makes a lot of sense, but of course not all fall in the same category and then there are plenty of members that are ALL the categories and can appreciate craftsmanship or avant-garde clothing just like simple, feel-good pieces, and then have an opinion from a buyer point of view.. softgrey, helena, zazie, adorefaith.. they're all like that, I'd hardly fit them in any category mentioned, you can't never really tell what they're going to love or detest and for what reason..

[Merveille]

Being a graphic designer I usually critique or favor collections with a bold general aesthetic; use of color, print and styling etc. Technicality doesn't fascinate me, I like outer visuals not exclusive to the clothing themselves but the variety and use of models, music, and general "identity" of the collection. Also, with established brands I like to see a clever and interesting take and continuation of the brands identity (another aspect of graphic design).

Also, being a male, I don't look for wear-ability, I look at clothes as if they were something I would hang on my wall (or save and look at for inspiration for my own graphic design).

[dior_couture1245]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salvatore I agree with what Spike said about knowing what to expect from the respective design houses . I am not going to expect a label like, let's say, Moschino Cheap & Chic to do something ground-breaking like I would at Balenciaga . You cannot expect a house to give something more than it can . When I look at a collection, everything is important - from the cuts of clothes to something like the lighting . It all let's me understand it better .

I feel similarly.

I tend to find myself responding most strongly to collections that present a very saturated vision. And by that, I mean a collection that, first and foremost, consists of well designed and interesting clothes. But for me, that could be anything...for example, I find both Christopher Kane's vulgar fantasies and Raf Simons' sterile visions of modernity equally fascinating...there is no real set criteria because it's impossible to compare houses. It's really based on initial gut reactions. Nothing else.

But the clothes are not enough. Every detail of the show has to be taken into consideration. I don't believe a designer has any excuse to put on a poor, dull, generic show. Even the most minimal of runway shows can evoke incredible emotional responses (ie, Jil Sander, Calvin Klein, etc). The casting, the lighting, the set layout, the music, etc. all play such an important part because they contextualize the clothes...they offer us the most insight to what the designer is really thinking.

Since the collection is still so firmly on my mind, I'm using the example of Christopher Kane's Fall/Winter 2010 collection. While I adored the clothes at first sight, it wasn't until I saw a video of the collection that I was able to fully appreciate the concept...the haunting and melancholy soundtrack added an integral layer to an already solid collection. Same goes for Jil Sander Fall/Winter 2010. The clothes, as always, were masterfully designed and executed. But it wasn't until I watched the video...saw how the X shaped runway worked, heard the Lara Croft soundtrack...did everything make sense. Had Raf played a different soundtrack and had the models walking down a straight runway, I don't know if I would have "gotten" the collection, really.

So for me, it's about the show...and how every production element enhances what the designer has created.

[rosalynn]

The show is very important to me too - I nearly mentioned that in my post, but thought I had waffled on enough, so I'm glad you've gone into detail dior_couture1245 - you've put my thoughts perfectly into words.

[Thefrenchy]

First of all, I've to say I don't critique the collections here very often because I lack of fashion knowledge and I'm not really good when it comes to using fashion vocabulary in english Considering that, I'm always interested in reading elaborated critiques; even if I disagree with its author.

Two elements matter for me: 1. The cut, the colour palette, the spirit of the collection and 2. Would I wear that (or would I wear that if I was a woman -- when it's womenswear) ? / Would I use that if I ever had to style someone?

[WilhelmF]

Interesting thread. I have always wondered everyone else's criteria for collections, specially those who see beyond of what they "loved" or "hated" in a collection.

I personally like a collection when:
a) You can clearly see the designer had some interest in the constructions of the garments and the quality of them. How perfectionist the designer was at the time of presenting the show.

b) It invites us to look deeper in the whole execution of the show. For example, the inspirations or the ideas behind a collection. How intellectual the collection was. The music choice. The casting. How the show progresses. Functionality, etc.

c) It pushes the envelope. It explores unknown territory. Basically, when designers come out of their comfort zone and start to "experiment" with clothes.

Of course, in these times, it might be hard see all of these in just one collection. Designer's role has become really really demanding. In one hand, they have to present something "new" every season and well in the other hand, they have to think like a businessman, how to keep their business alive. Not everyone is in the mood of experimenting in these times but it is also quite intriguing and inspiring to see those who do that.

[loladonna]

It's interesting to me that some place a high emphasis on the runway show itself to rate a collection. I've never cared about the actual show or who the models were-- I can't name most models on the runway. When people are like "I love the dress on Vlada" I'm like "who?". I notice the models only in regard to how the clothes fit them. I focus soley on the clothes for the most part.

I actually prefer presentation style shows where the models are static and there are lots of views and angles of the collection via photographs. I feel like sometimes fancy shows distract people from bad collections. Pro critics come away from a show excited and write a glowing review based on the presentation but when you go back and look at the clothes there's nothing to be crowing about.

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

[ultramarine]

Well .. on top of all of this there's the questions are good reviews equating on how good or commercial of how much of a collection will actually sell?

I dont think so .. there are all those fashion reviewers who didnt get a particular collection which ended up making splashes all over the place ... same thing with fashion spotter ,.,, Izzie Blow was spot on but kinda missed ion Herchcovitch ,.,, whom I adore, btw

[tigerrouge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by honeycombchild I remember a tutor at University saying to me that you could usually always tell the difference between a heterosexual eye and a homosexual eye. One looks at is as the woman they'd want to stand next to, have on his arm, and the other looks at is as who he'd like to put on a pedestal and worship.

I wonder if they also had a theory about the aesthetics of things designed by gay women, as opposed to the work of straight ones, or maybe that's the point where the expectations of the world combust and the catwalk goes on fire.

Regardless of what direction anyone's genitals are pointing, age is a factor that influences views. In terms of assessing wearability, I'm not going use the same criteria as someone twenty years younger than me - yet both views will be valid.

[irulan]

Quote:

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

I guess that depends on the quality of the designer and the respective collection. A lot of people who are into fashion like the idea of re-invention and something entirely new. Ralph Lauren is no designer whose work I follow, but let's say Christophe Decarnin would decide to wrap his Balmain girl into metres of floaty fabric for the next collection for the house of Balmain. If it was done beautifully, without the usual cheapness, I would embrace it. A true genius (though I doubt that Decarnin has that in him) shows in never-ending creativity.

I'm sure a lot of his fans and customers would miss the golfball shoulders, though.

[Chris_Couture05]

On critiquing collections I try to take in the collection before I make my judgment or statment. But there are certian designers that I usually love almost anything they do. Before I post anything I wanna know the full scope of what going on from the clothes to the accesories and the color palette, fit and finish, fabrics, theme and so on. Now even with all of this I still have know as most people do what to expect form certian houses based on there history and client base and design aesthetic.

With collections I do and dont like I try to point out all of these things and how they were represented in the collection. Usually with collections I beleive are very strong I will see most of this a will only point it out to show how good it was but the ones that I did care for, I still think it is necessary to point out these things to show people what you think could have been done better reather than just saying "what a honking load of crap this is". But even with that said I still sometimes will let my first emotion take control and say what I fell about the collection. There are even times when I may not like the collection and yet there are still very nice peices in the collection that I like to point out, case in point Dolce and Gabbana F/W 10.11.

Even with couture collection which I love I try to use the same method, although I am usually tougher on these because of the work that goes into these garments so there is a certian quality that I think everyone and myself included would like to see. I think the use of different and interesting fabrics in HC is something alot of people look for.

Another thing we have to take into account is that each designer has different eye and vision of their client. Valentino's eye is different from Galliano's and he is different from Lagerfeld. Each person has a vision of what they think a woman should dress. I dont think this is completly based on sexual orentation (because I do think that makes a small difference) but also each designers vision of who there woman is, what does she do, where does she live ect... This reminds me of something Dela Renta said "the most important client is the working woman." That is his vision of a woman and his bases for design, and Valentino loved beauty and elegance and this became the bases for his design. So knowing this I think better helps us to not judge each designer based on the works of other houses.

All in all I think each person based on there own personal tastes and knowledge of fashion looks for what they think is acceptable when viewing a collection, and while most of these are opinions and opinions are subjective, there are those who post alot of really good facts and I like seeing that.