1883-1971 Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel
- Thread starter oanadobre
- Start date
Creative
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 693
I do not want a film about her, 
she is too important and so especial to be represented by an actress. It will break the mistery of her personality and her history for everybody who does not know her very good yet and I suppose it will make me to get veeeery annoyed. Besides she hated the other film that it is there about her...
she is too important and so especial to be represented by an actress. It will break the mistery of her personality and her history for everybody who does not know her very good yet and I suppose it will make me to get veeeery annoyed. Besides she hated the other film that it is there about her...i never knew much about her the person but i have seen her work like mostly everyone else. but from what i learned and analyzed, i never really considered her a true designer/couturier. but more like a stylist who had ideas about dressing at a very proper and lucky time. and she had the body and age and social standing to promote her idea on dressing and able to have others copy her.
so today i decided to read something about her from this book called 'power of style' by annette tapert and diana edkins. what it wrote about coco was so close to what i thought and also learned new things about her that i did not know.
i think what she actually did came up with for fashion was blow wildly out of proportion. not saying she didnt give anything to the fashion world but some of the credits given to her really should have been given to other designers even before her time...say like poiret and vionnet.
what i didnt know about chanel before i learned today was that she did not create a 'bang' on fashion like i thought she did. but i do credit her for being one of the first to do boxy tweed suits.
i agree very much on what the book said about how most people today or even in the past didnt love chanel actually for her designs but for she IS Coco Chanel, the woman who had feminine mystic and confidence and presence. and people dressed like her so they can have her presence.
if it wasnt for the revival of the house and karl lagerfeld, coco chanel and her perfume would just be another designer/icon in the 20th century, forgotten. the company sure knew how to blow the house out of proportion hehe.
so today i decided to read something about her from this book called 'power of style' by annette tapert and diana edkins. what it wrote about coco was so close to what i thought and also learned new things about her that i did not know.
i think what she actually did came up with for fashion was blow wildly out of proportion. not saying she didnt give anything to the fashion world but some of the credits given to her really should have been given to other designers even before her time...say like poiret and vionnet.
what i didnt know about chanel before i learned today was that she did not create a 'bang' on fashion like i thought she did. but i do credit her for being one of the first to do boxy tweed suits.
i agree very much on what the book said about how most people today or even in the past didnt love chanel actually for her designs but for she IS Coco Chanel, the woman who had feminine mystic and confidence and presence. and people dressed like her so they can have her presence.
if it wasnt for the revival of the house and karl lagerfeld, coco chanel and her perfume would just be another designer/icon in the 20th century, forgotten. the company sure knew how to blow the house out of proportion hehe.
Channelling Coco Chanel
From Audrey Tautou as the young Coco in a film, to Shirley MacLaine as the older Chanel on television, and with a third biopic en route, the legendary couturier is still making her stylish presence felt. By Rachel Shields
The Independent - Friday, 7 November 2008
When Coco Chanel uttered the now-famous phrase, "Fashion fades, only style remains the same", the French designer could not possibly have guessed how indelible her own mark on the world would be. As the woman who popularised the little black dress, the trouser suit and bobbed haircuts, Chanel's style legacy is unrivalled, and now, her personal narrative is up for grabs, with three biopics of the great designer currently either completed or in the pipeline.
While the name Coco Chanel is synonymous with style, none of these films focuses on her glittering career. Instead, film-makers have chosen to plumb the murkier depths of Chanel's private life, recreating her impoverished childhood and failed romances.
"Her story has been so embellished, it has become almost a mythical narrative," says Harold Koda, curator of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and author of Chanel. "It is like a soap opera, you really can't substantiate it."
Filming has just begun on the most prominent of these stories, Coco avant Chanel, to star the Amélie actress Audrey Tautou as Coco. Loosely based on L'Irrégulière, ou Mon itinéraire Chanel, a biography by Edmonde Charles-Roux, the film focuses on Chanel's early years and modest origins, about which she was notoriously reticent. "She was sensitive about her upbringing. It was hard for her to be in the middle of high society – she didn't feel like she belonged," says Carrie Stein, producer of the Living TV biopic Coco Chanel. The mini-series pulled in more than 20 million viewers when recently screened on the US channel Lifetime, and is slated to hit our screens early next year. "She knew her hats and dresses belonged, and that she had style and flair, but she wasn't comfortable, and maybe she always hid behind her clothes," says Stein.
The latest Chanel film to be announced is Chanel et Stravinsky: l'Histoire Secrète, which will explore the designer's relationship with the Russian composer, and is tipped to star Anna Mouglalis, currently the face of the Chanel perfume Allure.
Gabrielle Chanel, who would later count Picasso, Jean Renoir and Jean Cocteau among her friends, grew up in the Loire Valley, and gained the nickname "Coco" when performing for soldiers at a cabaret show. She set up her first shop on Paris's rue Cambon in 1910, with the help of a wealthy lover. "The period we are recreating is that of Coco before she was 'Chanel'," says Catherine Leterrier, costume director on Coco avant Chanel. "She was poor, but she had her own style. I wanted to show how she was different from the ladies of her time," says Leterrier. While the director Anne Fontaine will explore the woman behind the brand for much of the film, it will culminate in a runway show of classic Chanel designs. The film is set to be released in France in May 2009, with international screenings to follow later in the year.
The US series Coco Chanel, starring Shirley MacLaine as an older Coco, revolves around the designer's love affair with politician Arthur "Boy" Capel. "I didn't come at it from a fashion point of view," says Stein. "It's a Cinderella story of rags to riches, all based on fact." While the show was a hit with viewers, it doesn't appear to have gone down well with the fashion house. The label's chief designer Karl Lagerfeld is said to have collaborated on the costumes, but withdrew his support at the last minute and wouldn't endorse the film. A spokesperson denied the label had collaborated, but confirmed Lagerfeld would be supporting the feature films: "Karl Lagerfeld is not at all involved in the costume creations. However, Chanel and Mr Lagerfeld will be involved in making, for both movies, tweed suits for Coco Chanel at the end of her life."
Lagerfeld has been credited with reviving the house of Chanel, which had developed a stuffy image, during his 25 years at the helm. "It is Chanel today that makes us interested in Coco. Since the 1980s, the brand has come back – before that it had calcified," says Koda.
While clothes are central to the story of Chanel, the actresses tasked with bringing the legend to life have a difficult job. The designer was rumoured to have complained when Katharine rather than Audrey Hepburn played her in a Broadway musical of her life first performed in 1969. "Chanel would probably be horrified at the thought of Shirley MacLaine playing her," says Stein. "Obviously, Coco was French, but because we were making the series for an international audience, we opened it up. The minute MacLaine was suggested to me, it was done. Emotionally and psychologically, there are parallels between her and Coco."
While the story is framed around an older Coco, most of the film consists of flashbacks to Coco's twenties, when she is played by the Slovakian Barbora Bobulova. Keira Knightley – the face of Coco Mademoiselle perfume – is rumoured to have been considered for the part, and to have been offered the title role in Coco avant Chanel, which eventually went to the elfin Tautou.
"Audrey Tautou is amazing in that part, she is so Chanel," says Leterrier. "Our director thinks that she is driving a Rolls-Royce!"
'Coco avant Chanel' and 'Chanel et Stravinsky' will be released next year
From Audrey Tautou as the young Coco in a film, to Shirley MacLaine as the older Chanel on television, and with a third biopic en route, the legendary couturier is still making her stylish presence felt. By Rachel Shields
The Independent - Friday, 7 November 2008
When Coco Chanel uttered the now-famous phrase, "Fashion fades, only style remains the same", the French designer could not possibly have guessed how indelible her own mark on the world would be. As the woman who popularised the little black dress, the trouser suit and bobbed haircuts, Chanel's style legacy is unrivalled, and now, her personal narrative is up for grabs, with three biopics of the great designer currently either completed or in the pipeline.
While the name Coco Chanel is synonymous with style, none of these films focuses on her glittering career. Instead, film-makers have chosen to plumb the murkier depths of Chanel's private life, recreating her impoverished childhood and failed romances.
"Her story has been so embellished, it has become almost a mythical narrative," says Harold Koda, curator of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and author of Chanel. "It is like a soap opera, you really can't substantiate it."
Filming has just begun on the most prominent of these stories, Coco avant Chanel, to star the Amélie actress Audrey Tautou as Coco. Loosely based on L'Irrégulière, ou Mon itinéraire Chanel, a biography by Edmonde Charles-Roux, the film focuses on Chanel's early years and modest origins, about which she was notoriously reticent. "She was sensitive about her upbringing. It was hard for her to be in the middle of high society – she didn't feel like she belonged," says Carrie Stein, producer of the Living TV biopic Coco Chanel. The mini-series pulled in more than 20 million viewers when recently screened on the US channel Lifetime, and is slated to hit our screens early next year. "She knew her hats and dresses belonged, and that she had style and flair, but she wasn't comfortable, and maybe she always hid behind her clothes," says Stein.
The latest Chanel film to be announced is Chanel et Stravinsky: l'Histoire Secrète, which will explore the designer's relationship with the Russian composer, and is tipped to star Anna Mouglalis, currently the face of the Chanel perfume Allure.
Gabrielle Chanel, who would later count Picasso, Jean Renoir and Jean Cocteau among her friends, grew up in the Loire Valley, and gained the nickname "Coco" when performing for soldiers at a cabaret show. She set up her first shop on Paris's rue Cambon in 1910, with the help of a wealthy lover. "The period we are recreating is that of Coco before she was 'Chanel'," says Catherine Leterrier, costume director on Coco avant Chanel. "She was poor, but she had her own style. I wanted to show how she was different from the ladies of her time," says Leterrier. While the director Anne Fontaine will explore the woman behind the brand for much of the film, it will culminate in a runway show of classic Chanel designs. The film is set to be released in France in May 2009, with international screenings to follow later in the year.
The US series Coco Chanel, starring Shirley MacLaine as an older Coco, revolves around the designer's love affair with politician Arthur "Boy" Capel. "I didn't come at it from a fashion point of view," says Stein. "It's a Cinderella story of rags to riches, all based on fact." While the show was a hit with viewers, it doesn't appear to have gone down well with the fashion house. The label's chief designer Karl Lagerfeld is said to have collaborated on the costumes, but withdrew his support at the last minute and wouldn't endorse the film. A spokesperson denied the label had collaborated, but confirmed Lagerfeld would be supporting the feature films: "Karl Lagerfeld is not at all involved in the costume creations. However, Chanel and Mr Lagerfeld will be involved in making, for both movies, tweed suits for Coco Chanel at the end of her life."
Lagerfeld has been credited with reviving the house of Chanel, which had developed a stuffy image, during his 25 years at the helm. "It is Chanel today that makes us interested in Coco. Since the 1980s, the brand has come back – before that it had calcified," says Koda.
While clothes are central to the story of Chanel, the actresses tasked with bringing the legend to life have a difficult job. The designer was rumoured to have complained when Katharine rather than Audrey Hepburn played her in a Broadway musical of her life first performed in 1969. "Chanel would probably be horrified at the thought of Shirley MacLaine playing her," says Stein. "Obviously, Coco was French, but because we were making the series for an international audience, we opened it up. The minute MacLaine was suggested to me, it was done. Emotionally and psychologically, there are parallels between her and Coco."
While the story is framed around an older Coco, most of the film consists of flashbacks to Coco's twenties, when she is played by the Slovakian Barbora Bobulova. Keira Knightley – the face of Coco Mademoiselle perfume – is rumoured to have been considered for the part, and to have been offered the title role in Coco avant Chanel, which eventually went to the elfin Tautou.
"Audrey Tautou is amazing in that part, she is so Chanel," says Leterrier. "Our director thinks that she is driving a Rolls-Royce!"
'Coco avant Chanel' and 'Chanel et Stravinsky' will be released next year
Last edited by a moderator:
BerlinRocks
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 11,220
- Reaction score
- 11
annonce for french tfs-ers ....
tonight and tomorrow a 2 part-tvfilm about Gabrielle Chanel ...
well it has begun for tonight ... and it's pretty good ... i can't tell on which book it's based, though ...
maybe the Henry Gidel's biography of Coco ....
see the teaser here : http://www.programme-tv.net/news-tv/divertissement/3782-teaser-coco-chanel/
Barbora Bobulova (young Coco) et Shirley MacLaine (old Coco) ...
I think it's the lifetime tvfilm ...
isn't it ?
i forgot to add it's on France 2 !!!
tonight and tomorrow a 2 part-tvfilm about Gabrielle Chanel ...
well it has begun for tonight ... and it's pretty good ... i can't tell on which book it's based, though ...
maybe the Henry Gidel's biography of Coco ....
see the teaser here : http://www.programme-tv.net/news-tv/divertissement/3782-teaser-coco-chanel/
Barbora Bobulova (young Coco) et Shirley MacLaine (old Coco) ...
I think it's the lifetime tvfilm ...
isn't it ?
i forgot to add it's on France 2 !!!
Last edited by a moderator:
BerlinRocks
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 11,220
- Reaction score
- 11
bouh ... that was sooooo short !!!!
i think it really does lack something ... i mean it's SHORT ! so short ! i want more .......
where is the period during the WWII ? before the WWII ?
it's like a teaser for the upcoming movies ....
i'm a bit disappointed ... but that was still lovely to watch a movie about Coco ....
i think it really does lack something ... i mean it's SHORT ! so short ! i want more .......
where is the period during the WWII ? before the WWII ?
it's like a teaser for the upcoming movies ....
i'm a bit disappointed ... but that was still lovely to watch a movie about Coco ....
Paper magazine Jan 7, 2009-
A New Book Explores The Softer Side of Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel
It's neither a confidant, a former muse, or dedicated biographer who has published the most touching book on legendary designer Coco Chanel to date. Instead, it's photographer, Douglas Kirkland who was none of these, yet so much more to Chanel in the brief time he knew her. His latest book, published by Glitteratti is titled simply, Coco Chanel: Three Weeksand chronicles in pictures and words, the time Kirkland spent with Chanel in Paris in 1962. At the time he was a bright-eyed 27 year-old who had been sent to Paris to spend three weeks with Chanel by his employers, the new defunct Look Magazine. In twenty-one days Kirkland shadowed and photographed the 79 year-old wherever she went, from fittings with house models to personal moments of reflection. The level of intimacy and access he enjoyed was unparalleled , especially considering how private Chanel grew in her old age. By the end of the trip, the unlikely duo had grown so close that Chanel invited Kirkland to travel with her on a ski holiday. Kirkland relayed the good news to his editors at Look who promptly asked him to decline the offer and return home. Time passed and Kirkland moved on to become an award wining photographer shooting other legends such as Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor and Marlene Dietrich. Yet as we sat down recently to discuss his memories of Chanel it was clear that only one captured his heart as completely as he captured hers.
Zandile Blay: You took these pictures about forty-six years ago, so what compelled you to publish them as a book now this book at this point?
Douglas Kirkland: Well, there are a number of reasons. This is my thirteenth book, but this is one that's the most special to me. And why? Because it's Chanel, it's a special period in my life, I grew up a great deal. I mean, my eyes were opened in a way that they never had been before. By Mademoiselle, she did that. And she guided me in an amazing way. Why this time? Well, among other things we sort of discovered in the process of putting it together that it was a hundred and twenty fifth anniversary of her birth. So there's that reason, but also, I had the material obviously all these years, original negatives, and I kept looking at them and thinking...I mean, I felt that there was something very special there, and the more I looked into it the more special they seemed.
ZB: The photo you took of Chanel as she is walking through a garden by herself simply grabbed my heart.
DK: You just picked the most important picture in this book to me. You did. It's the last picture in the book, it's also the last picture I took of Mademoiselle. I'd been with her three weeks, and my editors at Look had mixed feelings within the publication whether this story should be done or not. Myself and the fashion editor really wanted to do it, we pressed to have it done, and we arrived in Paris and I was able to do it. I was able to shoot, and Mademoiselle opened her world very much to me and the story of course is: this is the last day I spent with her. It was a Saturday, and she knew the time was winding down but she said to me, "Why don't you come on Holiday with me to Switzerland and keep photographing?" I thought, this is just getting bigger and better! I mean, I was ready to explode I was so happy. I knew this coverage was rich because she had opened herself so much to me and I just thought it's gonna be bigger and better than ever. I could barely wait to get back to the small office we had in Paris and type up what was called the telex in those days, which was a very clunky machine. I sent a message to New York and I told them, "Mademoiselle has asked me to come to Switzerland with her," and I got a two word reply, "Come home." And that was it; they didn't want me to go anywhere.
ZB: Do you regret it? Do they regret it?
DK: Oh, they don't regret it, they're gone. In fact, that's a whole other story. Now, let me talk about this picture specifically. So on, um, what seemed like the last day, Mademoiselle asked me to have lunch with her at the (some French word I couldn't understand). It was very elegant, and as usual she pointed out things to me. She was becoming, in some ways, a part-mother, part caring sister, I don't know how to refer to her, and I never fully understood the dynamic. Here I am a twenty-seven year old, slightly ungainly boy from the country, and here is Mademoiselle, the essence of elegance and chic, but she was interested in me, and she wanted to help me. So we had the lunch, and we rode out of the city to Versailles, she wanted to show it to me. She'd asked me if I'd ever seen it and I said no I haven't, she said, "OK, I'm going to show it to you," and we went out. It was a cold day, amazingly, even though it was July. It was probably 17 degrees Celsius or something that day and it started to, sort of a misty rain, very light rain and I gave her my raincoat, my Burberry, and she put it over her shoulders to protect herself from the rain and she went walking on her own. Sort of a quiet time, a private time, and it was a time I felt I shouldn't bother her. Something else was in her head. But at a certain instant, I couldn't restrain myself. I saw her there, and I felt maybe it wasn't appropriate, but I'm glad I did it now. I lifted the camera up, with a tele-lens, took this one click, and that was the last picture I took. That is it. As she walked in Versailles, you'll see that I'm sort of looking through a fence here, that's because I didn't want to be seen, but also it framed her in a beautiful way. So that's the essence of that picture. It's so meaningful to me because that's my memory, my ultimate memory of Mademoiselle. She was physically small, but as an individual in business, and the world of fashion and everything else, one of the greatest giants of all time. So that's what this picture means to me.
ZB: Did you get the sense that she was lonely, at that point in her life?
DK: I never did get the sense that she was lonely. It's possible, but I don't know, because she was so surrounded by a sea of people and she was always occupied, always busy. I think she was quite driven, she was raised from poverty. In fact, she was literally born in a poor house for the destitute. When she was 12, her mother died, and her father disappeared. She was raised in an orphanage by nuns, which is where she first learned to sew, and she later learned a more sophisticated way of sewing from some of her relatives when she was off in summertime. She lived an incredible life. She lived in England and the Duke of Westminster asked her to marry him, and she refused. She had many opportunities to be with a man if that's what she wanted, but she seemed to be surrounded by everything and her life seemed full. The mannequins, the models, the girls working for her, they surrounded her and she enjoyed being in their world. She loved to gossip with them, and you can see it in some of these other pictures. They're playing together. That's who she was. So they were, in many ways, her family. That was part of her world. Isn't that amazing?
ZB: What do you think makes this particular book on Chanel different from the myriad of books about her?
DK: Well, that's very simple. What makes this book different than any other? Frankly, and honestly, this is a very personal story. It's this personal story told from an individual whose life was changed. I saw something on the internet about the book which read, "There are many Chanel books, with a lot of facts and figures in them, and very significant information, but this is the most personal one." This is an easy read, it's a personal story, and I'm literally telling a story to the reader. So that's the essence of it. I'm talking to you, the person holding the book.
ZB: So do you think that 50 years from now, she'll still continue to be relevant?
DK: Chanel is here forever. She changed fashion, she changed culture, and she changed how people dress. In her early life, before she had any command of fashion, when she was just a young woman, women were wearing tight corsets and they couldn't move around and it was very uncomfortable. Fashion was like a cage. Like a prison. She opened it up so people could live comfortable, like this classic suit she created. And it all came together. Shorter hair, shorter skirts, it became the essence of what people wanted, and what we're comfortable with. And that's not going to go away. And, today, in 2008, when Francoise, (my wife) and I travel, when we step out, whether it's Shanghai or in Moscow or in Los Angeles, we keep seeing the name Chanel. In the airports, everywhere. Chanel is everywhere. Pick up a magazine. You'll find Chanel all over it. That's the imprint that she had. I mean, she did so much. So that's what Chanel means to me.
A New Book Explores The Softer Side of Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel
It's neither a confidant, a former muse, or dedicated biographer who has published the most touching book on legendary designer Coco Chanel to date. Instead, it's photographer, Douglas Kirkland who was none of these, yet so much more to Chanel in the brief time he knew her. His latest book, published by Glitteratti is titled simply, Coco Chanel: Three Weeksand chronicles in pictures and words, the time Kirkland spent with Chanel in Paris in 1962. At the time he was a bright-eyed 27 year-old who had been sent to Paris to spend three weeks with Chanel by his employers, the new defunct Look Magazine. In twenty-one days Kirkland shadowed and photographed the 79 year-old wherever she went, from fittings with house models to personal moments of reflection. The level of intimacy and access he enjoyed was unparalleled , especially considering how private Chanel grew in her old age. By the end of the trip, the unlikely duo had grown so close that Chanel invited Kirkland to travel with her on a ski holiday. Kirkland relayed the good news to his editors at Look who promptly asked him to decline the offer and return home. Time passed and Kirkland moved on to become an award wining photographer shooting other legends such as Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor and Marlene Dietrich. Yet as we sat down recently to discuss his memories of Chanel it was clear that only one captured his heart as completely as he captured hers.
Zandile Blay: You took these pictures about forty-six years ago, so what compelled you to publish them as a book now this book at this point?
Douglas Kirkland: Well, there are a number of reasons. This is my thirteenth book, but this is one that's the most special to me. And why? Because it's Chanel, it's a special period in my life, I grew up a great deal. I mean, my eyes were opened in a way that they never had been before. By Mademoiselle, she did that. And she guided me in an amazing way. Why this time? Well, among other things we sort of discovered in the process of putting it together that it was a hundred and twenty fifth anniversary of her birth. So there's that reason, but also, I had the material obviously all these years, original negatives, and I kept looking at them and thinking...I mean, I felt that there was something very special there, and the more I looked into it the more special they seemed.
ZB: The photo you took of Chanel as she is walking through a garden by herself simply grabbed my heart.
DK: You just picked the most important picture in this book to me. You did. It's the last picture in the book, it's also the last picture I took of Mademoiselle. I'd been with her three weeks, and my editors at Look had mixed feelings within the publication whether this story should be done or not. Myself and the fashion editor really wanted to do it, we pressed to have it done, and we arrived in Paris and I was able to do it. I was able to shoot, and Mademoiselle opened her world very much to me and the story of course is: this is the last day I spent with her. It was a Saturday, and she knew the time was winding down but she said to me, "Why don't you come on Holiday with me to Switzerland and keep photographing?" I thought, this is just getting bigger and better! I mean, I was ready to explode I was so happy. I knew this coverage was rich because she had opened herself so much to me and I just thought it's gonna be bigger and better than ever. I could barely wait to get back to the small office we had in Paris and type up what was called the telex in those days, which was a very clunky machine. I sent a message to New York and I told them, "Mademoiselle has asked me to come to Switzerland with her," and I got a two word reply, "Come home." And that was it; they didn't want me to go anywhere.
ZB: Do you regret it? Do they regret it?
DK: Oh, they don't regret it, they're gone. In fact, that's a whole other story. Now, let me talk about this picture specifically. So on, um, what seemed like the last day, Mademoiselle asked me to have lunch with her at the (some French word I couldn't understand). It was very elegant, and as usual she pointed out things to me. She was becoming, in some ways, a part-mother, part caring sister, I don't know how to refer to her, and I never fully understood the dynamic. Here I am a twenty-seven year old, slightly ungainly boy from the country, and here is Mademoiselle, the essence of elegance and chic, but she was interested in me, and she wanted to help me. So we had the lunch, and we rode out of the city to Versailles, she wanted to show it to me. She'd asked me if I'd ever seen it and I said no I haven't, she said, "OK, I'm going to show it to you," and we went out. It was a cold day, amazingly, even though it was July. It was probably 17 degrees Celsius or something that day and it started to, sort of a misty rain, very light rain and I gave her my raincoat, my Burberry, and she put it over her shoulders to protect herself from the rain and she went walking on her own. Sort of a quiet time, a private time, and it was a time I felt I shouldn't bother her. Something else was in her head. But at a certain instant, I couldn't restrain myself. I saw her there, and I felt maybe it wasn't appropriate, but I'm glad I did it now. I lifted the camera up, with a tele-lens, took this one click, and that was the last picture I took. That is it. As she walked in Versailles, you'll see that I'm sort of looking through a fence here, that's because I didn't want to be seen, but also it framed her in a beautiful way. So that's the essence of that picture. It's so meaningful to me because that's my memory, my ultimate memory of Mademoiselle. She was physically small, but as an individual in business, and the world of fashion and everything else, one of the greatest giants of all time. So that's what this picture means to me.
ZB: Did you get the sense that she was lonely, at that point in her life?
DK: I never did get the sense that she was lonely. It's possible, but I don't know, because she was so surrounded by a sea of people and she was always occupied, always busy. I think she was quite driven, she was raised from poverty. In fact, she was literally born in a poor house for the destitute. When she was 12, her mother died, and her father disappeared. She was raised in an orphanage by nuns, which is where she first learned to sew, and she later learned a more sophisticated way of sewing from some of her relatives when she was off in summertime. She lived an incredible life. She lived in England and the Duke of Westminster asked her to marry him, and she refused. She had many opportunities to be with a man if that's what she wanted, but she seemed to be surrounded by everything and her life seemed full. The mannequins, the models, the girls working for her, they surrounded her and she enjoyed being in their world. She loved to gossip with them, and you can see it in some of these other pictures. They're playing together. That's who she was. So they were, in many ways, her family. That was part of her world. Isn't that amazing?
ZB: What do you think makes this particular book on Chanel different from the myriad of books about her?
DK: Well, that's very simple. What makes this book different than any other? Frankly, and honestly, this is a very personal story. It's this personal story told from an individual whose life was changed. I saw something on the internet about the book which read, "There are many Chanel books, with a lot of facts and figures in them, and very significant information, but this is the most personal one." This is an easy read, it's a personal story, and I'm literally telling a story to the reader. So that's the essence of it. I'm talking to you, the person holding the book.
ZB: So do you think that 50 years from now, she'll still continue to be relevant?
DK: Chanel is here forever. She changed fashion, she changed culture, and she changed how people dress. In her early life, before she had any command of fashion, when she was just a young woman, women were wearing tight corsets and they couldn't move around and it was very uncomfortable. Fashion was like a cage. Like a prison. She opened it up so people could live comfortable, like this classic suit she created. And it all came together. Shorter hair, shorter skirts, it became the essence of what people wanted, and what we're comfortable with. And that's not going to go away. And, today, in 2008, when Francoise, (my wife) and I travel, when we step out, whether it's Shanghai or in Moscow or in Los Angeles, we keep seeing the name Chanel. In the airports, everywhere. Chanel is everywhere. Pick up a magazine. You'll find Chanel all over it. That's the imprint that she had. I mean, she did so much. So that's what Chanel means to me.
I'm looking for her biography book,so far from my research on Amazon I'm considering these:
Chanel and Her World (Edmonde Charles-Roux)
Chanel: A Woman of Her Own ( Axel Madsen )
Are these good?
Maybe other recommendations?
P.S. I saw recommendation on "Chanel: Her style and her life" by Janet Wallach earlier on this thread ,but unfortunately it's not available on Amazon (neither other online bookstores)
Thanks in advance
Chanel and Her World (Edmonde Charles-Roux)
Chanel: A Woman of Her Own ( Axel Madsen )
Are these good?
Maybe other recommendations?
P.S. I saw recommendation on "Chanel: Her style and her life" by Janet Wallach earlier on this thread ,but unfortunately it's not available on Amazon (neither other online bookstores)
Thanks in advance
^^ Hi! Chanel and her World and and Her style and her Life are both great, but are a little more about her clothes and friends-lots of pictures and so on- plus they are both very expensive (I've seen the first one for over $100)- if you can find them...
The Alex Madsen book is the way to go- more about her and her life, very readable and available in paperback for much less money...Edmonde Charles-Roux' Chanel -Her Life and her World (not the same book as above, despite the similar title) is the classic biography- staggering detail, but almost too much unless you are really into it (hard to follow in some spots...)You can always check ABE Books, BTW, which is where I find everything- it is a clearing house for book stores and tends to be very cheap- much less than Amazon in most cases...Hope this is some help!
The Alex Madsen book is the way to go- more about her and her life, very readable and available in paperback for much less money...Edmonde Charles-Roux' Chanel -Her Life and her World (not the same book as above, despite the similar title) is the classic biography- staggering detail, but almost too much unless you are really into it (hard to follow in some spots...)You can always check ABE Books, BTW, which is where I find everything- it is a clearing house for book stores and tends to be very cheap- much less than Amazon in most cases...Hope this is some help!
Last edited by a moderator:
From TimesOnlineUK 3/28/09-
Why there's no true story of Coco Chanel
Mystery surounds the couturier from her illegitimate birth in Saumur through her depiction as revolutionary and man-hater
Like a baby in a pram, fashion is always ready to throw away the old toy for the prospect of some new and shiny bauble dangled before it. That’s why fashion reputations soon fade and even the greatest names become nothing but footnotes for academics. In fashion as in everything else, how- ever, the bigger the noise, the longer its echoes — and, as in most areas of life, the one who gets in first makes the greatest impact.
Yet some survive by breaking down the glass wall between fashion and the real world to become names known to all. In the 20th century, there were three, Christian Dior, Yves Saint Laurent and Chanel — and the most widely known was Chanel, not because of what she achieved, but because of what she came to symbolise. Add to that a name easily recognised, remembered and pronounced (even now, within fashion, many are stumped by the pronunciation of Schiaparelli, Ghesquière and many others), and an iconic perfume recognised the world over, and you have the basis for a kind of immortality.
Certainly, extravagant claims have been made on Chanel’s behalf, not least the sweeping judgment of Diana Vreeland, high priestess of 20th-century fashion and editor in chief of American Vogue in the 1960s. “Chanel invented the 20th century for women” is a claim more hyperbolic than factual, but, like so much in fashion, it is accepted without question. She didn’t, any more than she invented the little black dress, the other claim made on her behalf. What Chanel did — and I love her for it — was fight the establishment with all the guerrilla tactics of a born outsider. She hated authority and hated those who wielded it — in her day, even more so than now, men. To know why, we need to look at her background.
Gabrielle Chanel’s illegitimate birth in 1883, to a peasant family, is shrouded in mystery. It seems likely that she was born in Saumur, in western France. When she was a child, her mother died and her father abandoned her to be brought up by the nuns, with iron discipline and frequent beatings. Strange and farouche, Chanel never trusted a man again, and hated all forms of authority for the rest of her life. Yet, although she hated to recall those early days, they had a great effect on her fashion thinking. She was the first couturier to use men’s fashion and dress as the basis for womenswear, and she chose the black and white of the nuns’ habit to give women’s clothing an authority that she remembered from her convent days.This was Chanel, however, a woman so fatally scarred by her early years that she could not resist using fashion to avenge the lowly position in which society had placed her. Attracted to the upper classes because they were the ones who held the power in the first decades of the 20th century, she still couldn’t resist pulling them down. In the aftermath of the first world war, there was barely a family in France or Britain that was not in mourning. Women wore black, often for several years. Chanel found it boring. But she thought back to the nuns, as well as noting the dress of servants in the early 1920s, and decided that what was needed to make black chic was white — at neck and cuffs. It also gave her a frisson to dress the rich and fashionable in the same way as their servants.
Her class war continued with the men. In a determined bid for power, she became the mistress of rich — always rich — and powerful males able to set her up in business and open all social doors. She used them as they used her: as trophies to attract more trophies. Much has been written about her love affairs, but Chanel remained silent on the subject. There is no record of her admitting to having any of them. I believe that when her father abandoned her, he made it impossible for her to love men, love being based on the one thing she could never give them: trust. But she wore their clothes and adapted them for women — whether to demean masculinity or to empower women remains debatable.
It has been suggested many times that Chanel was more at ease with women than with men, but her contempt for most of her sex, allied to her vicious, uncompromising tongue, terrified most women. Again, she was attracted to power players. She was a close friend of the socialite Misia Sert, who exercised authority over the social, artistic and fashionable world of Paris throughout the 1920s. In her last years, it was the independence of American women — who enjoyed much more freedom than those in Europe — allied with their clean, fresh fitness, that attracted her. She adored the 1950s model Suzy Parker, for example.
Was Chanel a lesbian? It has been hinted at many times, but it seems unlikely. But she was fond of the world of male homosexuals, to which Sert introduced her — not because they were gay but because they were clever. Her high-profile lovers, such as “Boy” Capel, the Duke of Westminster and Grand Duke Dmitri, had all inherited their position and were generally considered rather limited, whereas Cocteau, Dali and Diaghilev were important for what they had achieved. As a self-made woman, Chanel always admired and envied the achievements of others.
So, why has her name survived where those of other designers, equally important in her time, have disappeared from current currency? Was it because she was a woman? Hardly: Paquin and Lanvin beat her to that. A modernist? No: Poiret, who released women from the Edwardian constriction of corsets, got there first. The fact that she put women in informal casualwear? No: her contemporary and detested rival, Patou, was ahead of her.
Coco Chanel was not always a trailblazer, but this shrewd little businesswoman had learnt a thing or two on her climb to the top. Above all, she understood the job, which was to sell clothes. Unlike other couturiers, she professed to be happy when she saw cheap copies of her clothes on the streets of Paris. Having started at the bottom of the social heap, she knew all about dreams and the need for aspirations. For her, the models who paraded down her catwalk were as important as the clothes because “a good model makes women in the audience envious and this makes them insecure, so they buy in order to re-establish their self-esteem”. This was 60 years before Versace invented supermodels in the form of Kate Moss and Naomi Campbell. Such prescience is entirely typical of her unique combination of earthy reality and romantic dreams.
What did Chanel have that has created a mania that shows no sign of abating? Vreeland once explained it to me: “She understood all women because she had been all women. She despised men, yet she loved men. She had been bullied and shamed, and she bullied and shamed in her own way. But, above all, she wanted women to have the freedom that men took as their own right.” That is why Chanel’s name remains as strong as ever.
Why there's no true story of Coco Chanel
Mystery surounds the couturier from her illegitimate birth in Saumur through her depiction as revolutionary and man-hater
Like a baby in a pram, fashion is always ready to throw away the old toy for the prospect of some new and shiny bauble dangled before it. That’s why fashion reputations soon fade and even the greatest names become nothing but footnotes for academics. In fashion as in everything else, how- ever, the bigger the noise, the longer its echoes — and, as in most areas of life, the one who gets in first makes the greatest impact.
Yet some survive by breaking down the glass wall between fashion and the real world to become names known to all. In the 20th century, there were three, Christian Dior, Yves Saint Laurent and Chanel — and the most widely known was Chanel, not because of what she achieved, but because of what she came to symbolise. Add to that a name easily recognised, remembered and pronounced (even now, within fashion, many are stumped by the pronunciation of Schiaparelli, Ghesquière and many others), and an iconic perfume recognised the world over, and you have the basis for a kind of immortality.
Certainly, extravagant claims have been made on Chanel’s behalf, not least the sweeping judgment of Diana Vreeland, high priestess of 20th-century fashion and editor in chief of American Vogue in the 1960s. “Chanel invented the 20th century for women” is a claim more hyperbolic than factual, but, like so much in fashion, it is accepted without question. She didn’t, any more than she invented the little black dress, the other claim made on her behalf. What Chanel did — and I love her for it — was fight the establishment with all the guerrilla tactics of a born outsider. She hated authority and hated those who wielded it — in her day, even more so than now, men. To know why, we need to look at her background.
Gabrielle Chanel’s illegitimate birth in 1883, to a peasant family, is shrouded in mystery. It seems likely that she was born in Saumur, in western France. When she was a child, her mother died and her father abandoned her to be brought up by the nuns, with iron discipline and frequent beatings. Strange and farouche, Chanel never trusted a man again, and hated all forms of authority for the rest of her life. Yet, although she hated to recall those early days, they had a great effect on her fashion thinking. She was the first couturier to use men’s fashion and dress as the basis for womenswear, and she chose the black and white of the nuns’ habit to give women’s clothing an authority that she remembered from her convent days.This was Chanel, however, a woman so fatally scarred by her early years that she could not resist using fashion to avenge the lowly position in which society had placed her. Attracted to the upper classes because they were the ones who held the power in the first decades of the 20th century, she still couldn’t resist pulling them down. In the aftermath of the first world war, there was barely a family in France or Britain that was not in mourning. Women wore black, often for several years. Chanel found it boring. But she thought back to the nuns, as well as noting the dress of servants in the early 1920s, and decided that what was needed to make black chic was white — at neck and cuffs. It also gave her a frisson to dress the rich and fashionable in the same way as their servants.
Her class war continued with the men. In a determined bid for power, she became the mistress of rich — always rich — and powerful males able to set her up in business and open all social doors. She used them as they used her: as trophies to attract more trophies. Much has been written about her love affairs, but Chanel remained silent on the subject. There is no record of her admitting to having any of them. I believe that when her father abandoned her, he made it impossible for her to love men, love being based on the one thing she could never give them: trust. But she wore their clothes and adapted them for women — whether to demean masculinity or to empower women remains debatable.
It has been suggested many times that Chanel was more at ease with women than with men, but her contempt for most of her sex, allied to her vicious, uncompromising tongue, terrified most women. Again, she was attracted to power players. She was a close friend of the socialite Misia Sert, who exercised authority over the social, artistic and fashionable world of Paris throughout the 1920s. In her last years, it was the independence of American women — who enjoyed much more freedom than those in Europe — allied with their clean, fresh fitness, that attracted her. She adored the 1950s model Suzy Parker, for example.
Was Chanel a lesbian? It has been hinted at many times, but it seems unlikely. But she was fond of the world of male homosexuals, to which Sert introduced her — not because they were gay but because they were clever. Her high-profile lovers, such as “Boy” Capel, the Duke of Westminster and Grand Duke Dmitri, had all inherited their position and were generally considered rather limited, whereas Cocteau, Dali and Diaghilev were important for what they had achieved. As a self-made woman, Chanel always admired and envied the achievements of others.
So, why has her name survived where those of other designers, equally important in her time, have disappeared from current currency? Was it because she was a woman? Hardly: Paquin and Lanvin beat her to that. A modernist? No: Poiret, who released women from the Edwardian constriction of corsets, got there first. The fact that she put women in informal casualwear? No: her contemporary and detested rival, Patou, was ahead of her.
Coco Chanel was not always a trailblazer, but this shrewd little businesswoman had learnt a thing or two on her climb to the top. Above all, she understood the job, which was to sell clothes. Unlike other couturiers, she professed to be happy when she saw cheap copies of her clothes on the streets of Paris. Having started at the bottom of the social heap, she knew all about dreams and the need for aspirations. For her, the models who paraded down her catwalk were as important as the clothes because “a good model makes women in the audience envious and this makes them insecure, so they buy in order to re-establish their self-esteem”. This was 60 years before Versace invented supermodels in the form of Kate Moss and Naomi Campbell. Such prescience is entirely typical of her unique combination of earthy reality and romantic dreams.
What did Chanel have that has created a mania that shows no sign of abating? Vreeland once explained it to me: “She understood all women because she had been all women. She despised men, yet she loved men. She had been bullied and shamed, and she bullied and shamed in her own way. But, above all, she wanted women to have the freedom that men took as their own right.” That is why Chanel’s name remains as strong as ever.
Spiral1532
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2005
- Messages
- 2,761
- Reaction score
- 8
According to Karl, red-haired Linda Evangelista at the Chanel S/S 1992 collection looked "just like" Marie-Helene Arnaud at the 1954 Chanel re-opening collection.
I don't see the resemblance though.
I guess I'd have to see pics of Marie at the 1954 collection.
Similar Threads
