What a sad collection. She has no youth in her. Everything that Jil ever was is in Celine now. But the difference is that Celine does it better. Her style and her taste hasn't been relevant since the 90s. Minimalism has changed now and I don't think she can go along with it. And saying that this is better than what Raf Simons did for the brand truly is an insult. He pushed this brand further along than she frankly ever could.
I love what Phoebe Philo is doing at Celine, but her tailoring is definitely not at this level. The only other designer who is as good as this when it comes to shape and silhouette is Yohji Yamamoto.
I don't know how Raf Simons pushed this label exactly, unless relying on old silhouettes and retrograde ideas of femininity count as progress. It always seemed like he was more interested in dressing housewives, socialites, celebrities, fashion icons, women don't who have to take the subway, cross the street, run errands, who don't move in their clothes that much and only need to look "pretty" as objects of fashion.
Yeah, he made the label "trendy" and red-carpet viable. That doesn't necessarily strike me as a good thing. I'm glad he's moved to Dior. It seems his aesthetic suits that house better.
Besides, Jil Sander isn't just about minimalism. I'd say the chief aesthetic of the house has always been functionalism, practicality, a wardrobe of the working woman.
Honestly, when I heard that Jil Sander herself would be designing back to her house, I thought that it would be the end of the youthful appeal in Jil Sander. Surprisingly though, I find this collection completely young and fresh! It's so grown up, but at the same time it's playful and youthful! Brava, Jil Sander! Welcome back!!
__________________ Fashion is everything, everyone, and everywhere!
to say that jil sander's style and taste is irrelevant and then go on to say that pheobe philo does it better,is an even greater insult. we're talking about the original here....the woman who along with yohji yamamoto(i suppose in your eyes he would be deemed irrelevant too?) paved the way for talents like philo and the like. and frankly i don't see it.....not on the level jil does. phoebe does simplicity well but her cutting skills are nowhere near as precise and sublime as jil. and is that what it is,ageism? because she's not young and fresh we should put them out to pasture? sorry i don't ascribe to that mentality. frankly,raf was perfectly good but he was good in that he had his own vision for jil sander but it wasn't jil sander's essence. i always felt an immense detachment from the spirit of the house....as uemarasan explained.....jil made clothes for real people. raf made great story clothes.
This is a strong signal that Jil Sander is back, but on the whole not the strongest collection. The quality is good--the video demonstrates the exceptional fit and movement of the outwear--but the school girl uniform and calf boots are better suited at Miu Miu. I want something more grown-up from Jil Sander.
But still this is better than Raf Simons. Raf had his moments at the brand but his work immediately pales in comparison to Jil's own. For one, towards the end of his tenure for sure, his presentations were badly edited. Jil's is much more disciplined and thought-out.
With regards to comparisons to Celine, I think Celine was great in Phoebe's debut year of 2010 but after that it's gone WAY downhill. Phoebe isn't a minimalist at heart and I think she introduced too many elements too soon. With Jil at the helm, you can expect a consistent brand.
The fact that she only had one colour orange in the collection says it all. A well thought out collection. I really don't think you can compare her with Phoebe. I like them both but they have a very different take in minimalist. Think Celine is more about incorporating masculine tailoring IMO.
^^^Totally! Jil's skills are as enchanting and subtle as ever.
It's a "sad" collection because it's not young and fresh? I appreciate high fashion that isn't so obsessed with youth and/or newness for the sake of newness-- particularly from someone like Jil, who's designs are not bound to a certain age bracket: I see young and mature women wearing and looking great in these designs. And I guess "groundbreaking" is the new "genius" around these parts I suppose. I always wonder if those that always insist "groundbreaking" designs from designers actually would wear them...? I can appreciate dresses that resemble paperdoll cutouts made of felt purely for amusing purposes, but besides being a spectacle that pushes a brand's avant-garde standings, would someone actually want to wear it?
Designers like Jil design clothes that look immaculately constructed, people actually want to wear, looks good on them, and even want to keep around for years. Now that's a pretty groundbreaking concept in high fashion, if you ask me. And it's still distinctly "Jil" with the cuts and (I'm sure, ultra-lux and high-tech) fabrics. The likes of Jil Sander has never been about disposable or gimmicky fashions-- thank the fashion gods.
And this collection takes off where Jil last ended. Never really like Raf's take on Jil, so I'm glad she's reclaimed her own name where she belongs. The austerity, purity and severity of this collection is so refreshing compared to all the crap that's been thrown around lately. Thank you Jil for not polluting the fashionscape with the 60s, 70s and 80s. The woman knows restraint and timelessness like no one else. Her play on volume and fit all at once in a single piece of garment is masterful and achingly subtle. Not sure about those billowy shorts/skirts though; if they make models look that 'hippy", then what will the average woman look in them? But then again, Jil's customer is hardly the "average" woman... I would like to see a touch of embellishment to shake things up if it where up to me-- just something so the Zaras and TopShops of the world won't be able to rip her off so easily-- if only on a purely superficial level.
I may also be suffering from minimalism fatigue. And I'm taking the point being advanced by Uemarasan and Scott that perhaps Jil is more about utility. But..if, broadly, this be minimalism (utilitarian minimalism?, minimal utilitarianism?)...
Because minimalism is about purity of form, about line, - if a designer fails to make any statement in the silhouette (or inject something from outside minimalism) the work can very quickly disappear into the trap of being all too vanilla, drab, pious, modest, provincial. This collection, I'm afraid, is frightfully dull. In all of those ways. What can we really say of the Jil Sander Jil Sander woman? That she's clean, that she works, that she's quiet, that she's modest. I'm sorry but she really isn't very interesting at all. She's a repressed throwback.
To those who would give a positive review, help me see it - Is there really anything novel or interesting about the silhouettes of this collection?
Last edited by Tentacl Ventricl; 23-09-2012 at 01:47 PM.
^^^If you don't find Jil's designs interesting, then I don't think you need to be convinced otherwise. It's just fashion.
I enjoy the straightforwardness of Jil's approach to design; she's never injected gimmicks, novelties or a theme to her collections, nor her shows. I appreciate that about her. Not that I don't enjoy a great spectacle, or a strong concept, I just appreciate Jil's no-sense, strictly-utilitarian approach to presenting her brand and her vision of modern fashion as unfussy, uncluttered and spare. I love her rejection of anything nostalgic, or referential. Her cuts are beautiful, wearable and thoughtful. I noticed a dominating matronly-feel to his collection with the volume and modesty-- but in the same garment, there are also strict, fitted and sensual lines. It's a subtle fusing. I enjoy that restraint and discipline about Jil. She doesn't need to cut a huge exaggerated silhouette to make a statement.
(As a side note, as much as Muiccia is one of the outstanding designers working presently, her latest collection with the flower as a symbol and concept for her collection is a huge turn-off for me; it's all so Art School-thesis and pretentious.).
One could find all kinds of meaning in Jil Sander’s show and her return to the label after an eight-year absence. There was the white set with a concave, spherical ceiling that resembled an architect’s idea of a modern, corporate conference room. One woman — Ms. Sander herself — was going to speak that day and the audience, seated around the square platform, was going to listen.
There were the words on the first line of the program note: “Reset to zero.” This implied that Ms. Sander was going to erase, more or less, the designs of Raf Simons, even the progressive ones. She now held the controls, and there was a good chance she would bleach his modernist palette. (She did.) And there were the clothes themselves, beginning with the opening outfit: a masculine vest that essentially morphed into a feminine dress with a surprising (for her) bit of swing. And there were the closing dresses in white cotton with rubberized polka dots. Hadn’t Ms. Sander done a circle print in her last great collection before she fell out with her company’s owner and left?
Maybe the most important thing to take away from her show on Saturday was how powerful the Jil Sander brand is. At the most basic level it has survived three different corporate owners in the past decade. But Ms. Sander’s minimalist concept has proven to be incredibly durable and also expansive. I detected some of Mr. Simons’ contribution in the airy volumes. Well, why not? Ms. Sander might feel she has something to say about those shapes, as well as dress designs she has done in her own history at the brand, and which Mr. Simons explored. The point is she demonstrated just how everlasting and rich minimalism is in fashion. And almost by default, Jil Sander has become its chief pilot.
Among the worthwhile looks in this engaging collection were the slightly nipped-waist jackets worn over a loose white cotton top and boxy shorts, the plain summer dresses with slightly spherical, elbow-length sleeves, and the updated version of a dirndl with a shapely cotton blouse. Also appealing were the variety of cascading cotton shirts — a wardrobe staple next spring. The accessories, especially high-heeled ankle boots with a contrasting, turned-down beige flap, kicked up the new fashion quotient quite a bit. And they had editors chattering on Twitter.
Suzy Menkes -
MILAN — How to give minimalism maximum impact is once again the focus of fashion.
The art movement that dominated the 20th century is looking for ways to have an impact on the new millennium, now that its founding features like a fascination with mechanics have been challenged.
Both the digital era and a renewed reverence for the work of human hands have undermined the original Modernist stand. And now that the paintings of Italian futurists are hanging on the walls of the Museo del Novecento in Milan, artists have to find a new way of proclaiming that the future is now.
Jil Sander is the archetypal figure to have reinterpreted mid-century Modernism. Her fashion life has been dedicated to streamlining style and to recognizing the dynamic place of women in society. But where should the designer take that vision now that she has returned to her own label after eight years and a series of stop-go comebacks?
“For us, our culture is to go for beauty, excellence and sensitivity of artisan handwork,” Ms. Sander said after a show that was warmly received as a powerful part of the summer 2013 Milan season.
Backstage, an emotional Ms. Sander explained her return process after having brought her spare style to the mass market by working for three years with the Japanese fast fashion company Uniqlo.
Ms. Sander said 3-D was the spirit of a collection where clothes tended to stand away from the body; and of a show in which the fiercely white set, with a central circle of even whiter hue, anticipated a beautiful finale. Ms. Sander’s iconic white tailored shirt was shown worn with an airy skirt scattered with shimmering appliquéd dots.
The designer took up where she had left off, showing dresses and skirts, with a scattering of slim pants and none of the androgynous pantsuits that are being resuscitated.
Instead, Ms. Sander used the roundness of a skirt, the impact of a black insert at the shoulder or even the curve of a two-tone zippered boot to add a third dimension to her spare lines. The colors were black and white, with a touch of burgundy or ink blue and a dash of scarlet.
It was a fine effort and might have been considered a triumph of vision and will — if it had not been for the memory of the emotional collections created in her absence for the Jil Sander label by the designer Raf Simons. But fashion has turned a page and this was an irreproachable return.