Alexander McQueen S/S 2012 Paris

[Marc10]

Absolutely breathtaking. Sarah is so up there, there's no one quite like her. And the fact that someone have a single complaining about her work is BEYOND me. Just look at those dresses, the level craftmanship, the fabrics, the silhouette... There's no one doing what she's doing right now, not even couturiers.

 

[Alexei]

And why not?

Couldn't agree more with your post.

 

[ArtManiac19]

Alexander McQueen Spring Summer 2012 DETAILED VERSION!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[masquerade]

I also thought Sarah did a great job with taking over McQueen. But the thing is, I feel like she's not taking it further. Every collection she's done since Lee's death seems to follow the same rules and I feel like that's not what the McQueen brand is supposed to be about.
I'm not impressed by this collection at all, sadly. It's too safe and I'm really bored by seeing these tiered and ruffled dresses and gowns every season, and I almost get a Valentino vibe from some of those looks

hit the nail on the head

I think we want too much from Sarah. She's not McQueen, she's trying to carry on this label the best she can. I loved it!

but she is working under his name and label. i don't think anyone would say the things we were saying if she was working at a label under her own name, but we can't help but compare her because this is his legacy.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

Sarah sure made the label more accessible, easier to wear for women everywhere and not just women like Daphne Guinness. and while i really love this collection, i would also like to see her inject something new into McQueen. maybe she can't do dark cause she's not a tortured soul like Alexander was?

and i'm surprised by how many people started to call him 'Lee' now. what were you, bffs of his when he was alive?

Lee was actually his first name (not Alexander), wasn't it? Was Lee what his friends called him? Didn't know that, if so... I certainly didn't mean to use it too casually.

Weird, though, how some designers are often referred to by their first names, while others are almost always referred to by their surnames. Case in point, how many people here just refer to Sarah Burton as Burton? It's always "Sarah".

 

[neonsprinkles]

It's delicate balance. I give her a lot of credibility for taking on the role to continue the McQueen label. That being said, this feels like it's her weakest collection (it feels as if the mask elements, amazing detailing, were an afterthought to tie the entire collection together).

The colors were too mushy and whenever she introduced a look that was "dark" it was "mushy dark", as if she struggled with it and decided to just make it black and add belts. The choices of color seemed sporadic....her collection last season (both the show and the look book) was solid and it looked as if she was very comfortable with that collection (it literally softened the edges to the McQueen identity). With this one...hmm.......

This collection comes across more as an experiment (lack of cohesion, mushy colors, mushy silhouettes) but I have faith in her and look forward to see her next collection.

 

[Street_a_Licious]

Lee was actually his first name (not Alexander), wasn't it? Was Lee what his friends called him? Didn't know that, if so... I certainly didn't mean to use it too casually.

Weird, though, how some designers are often referred to by their first names, while others are almost always referred to by their surnames. Case in point, how many people here just refer to Sarah Burton as Burton? It's always "Sarah".

from what i gathered from the press during his death, Lee was what his friends and family called him. professionally he was known as Alexander McQueen.

it's like people calling Marilyn Monroe 'Norma' now, just cause it was her given name.

 

[sweetpop]

I think the detail of the clothes and the masks are absolutely exquisite!

I thought this was a great collection, but seem to be in the minority thinking this.

The detail is exceptional. No, it isn't McQueen, that's because it isn't McQueen. Nobody was McQueen but McQueen. I am amazed how well SB has stepped into the breach in the most emotionally charged circumstances I can imagine.

The suits at the beginning were a bit samey, but the rest of the collection to me seemed very strong and with a clear vision. It had bite to it with the masks, but was also feminine and had a touch of Sarah to it.

Of course this isn't as good as something McQueen would have done, but it definitely does his name justice. I think when you consider the mess some other houses are in, McQueen is in safe hands.

Anyway, I anticipate being torn to shreds in 10... 9... 8...

Actually, I really like what you said! ^^ I think Sarah's just trying to take it slowly; after the madness of designer Kate Middleton's dress, although I'm sure she wants to prove to everyone that she's not just a wedding dress designer, I don't fancy that she wants to fling every idea she's got into one collection so then it ends up just being a hot mess of flying material. I think it's easier said than done than to just tell her to 'move forward'. I feel that she's still a little tentative right now. Sure, she's working under the label 'McQueen' but she's allowed to set her own pace and put a little bit of herself into her collections, right?

 

[christian zh]

Full Show | High Quality

 

[Not Plain Jane]

from what i gathered from the press during his death, Lee was what his friends and family called him. professionally he was known as Alexander McQueen.

it's like people calling Marilyn Monroe 'Norma' now, just cause it was her given name.

I see what you're saying. However, I've definitely heard Alexander McQueen called "Lee" in several interviews by people in the industry - that could be where a bunch of us picked it up - whereas I don't recall people calling Marilyn "Norma". But who knows, when the new movie with Michelle Williams comes out, they may start.

 

[abadonna]

if it brings up such a debate, it must be sensational
personally love it!

 

[softgrey]

for the record...
most of us who have been posting at tFS for many years now have been calling him Lee for years...

*partly just because it's easier and faster to type...
*and partly because it's his REAL name...
and only people who were really big supporters and fans or industry insiders knew that for many, many years...

 

[Lee MG Tisci]

.

 

[wild roses]

Gothic. Victorian. Vampire. were all words that came to mind when I watched this collection. I think it has more substance and more artistry to it than other collections.

Regarding the Burton-fit-for-McQueen discussion. I think she is following in his footsteps, but she is putting her own imprint on the label. Except for the wedding dress, I don't think she'll pull a "YSL does beatnik" for Dior move. (She's more like Marc Bohan for Dior: fits the label but carries it a different direction.)

 

[Jesuz]

I hope one day the spirit of Alexander takes over Sarah's body and torture her and help her make out-of-this-world collections, like when artist used to dive into dark knowledgments and methods to get their works done and those dark thoughts ended up owing them.

I see this collection and see something beautiful pretending to be dark. "Oh the dress is beautiful but let's cover the face and make it dark 'to keep it McQueen'". Just dont know.

 

[Zazie]

It doesn't have to be "dark" to be McQueen, he had showcased a huge range of complex tailoring skills for coats, jackets, shirts, suits, etc., in a variety of materials, tartan, wool, cotton, leather, etc. not just BIG ball gowns in chiffon frou frou, gold, silver, beads, pailletes, beads, etc. He had always used his impeccable Saville Row skills to deliver on his wilder, edgier goth/punk dramatic sensibility - he would be offended to be a "wedding dress" couturier.

His last great collection for me was the "Isabella Blow" tribute. It got too costume/Daphne Guinness for me after.

It seems Sarah Burton's more of an assistant in helping him to refine the details, to add couture touches and finishes to his broader vision. She should have her own "Vera Wang" or "Marchessa" like label, since she has found a lot of success with this sort of elaborate confectionery gowns with a tight bodice and skirts the size of small apartments. Adding masks or scary looking hats doesn't make it any "edgier".

This, however, isn't "McQueen". Surely it isn't difficult to find a young designer with a wide range of skills and a deeper, more expansive vision. A Ricardo Tisci type comes to mind.

BTW, what a beautiful set, effective without the expensive, over the top "show" stage like Chanel or LV.

 

[justaguy]

I love this collection!

What Sarah brings is a little closure to McQ's creativity. No doubt she realizes it cannot be duplicated, but by combing some of Alexander's signature work with her own, she can start the transition into a new direction for the brand.

I think we're going to see some great creative designs ongoing.

 

[Spike413]

And why not? This idea that a designer that takes over a brand name has to pretend to be that same designer is totally absurd to me. Mcqueen the designer is dead, if his ideas could be so easily aped by another person he would not be much of a genius.

Sarah Burton is a different designer altogether, taking over a brand means she's allowed to use a lot of elements of the Mcqueen aesthetic, it does not mean she needs to start designing what in an hypothetical world if Mcqueen was alive the public believes he would be designing, or even worse simply copy some of the theatrics of past Mcqueen collections.

I think this collection is simply gorgeous, she's an amazing designer and she keeps up with the high standards set by the label, something that in my view is an herculean task that very few designers nowdays could accomplish with this class.

I don't think anyone's asking her to attempt to replicate what McQueen did, but it certainly wouldn't hurt if what she was doing felt a little more "Alexander McQueen" in spirit. Obviously her aesthetic should make it's way in, and it has, but at the end of the day the rough edges, the perverse twist, the hint of darkness or aggression was as much what Alexander McQueen - the label and the aesthetic - was about as the romance and beauty. Soften the edges too much, get rid of all the darkness, and it no longer feels like a genuinely McQueen collection. You can't just ignore or erase such important facets of a house's image.

I doubt anyone could deny that these are beautiful creations, but the collection as a whole is not only too theatrical - and make no mistake, even at his most wild there were plenty of honest to goodness clothes for actual customers in McQueen's collections - the clothes are too one note. There's nothing to balance out the pretty, the ethereal lightness. I can see why it appeals to people but it's not McQueen.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

There's nothing to balance out the pretty, the ethereal lightness

Really, you don't think there is some darkness and edginess? Maybe not enough, but it is there, nonetheless.

 

[Spike413]

^ No, I really don't. I mean I suppose those fully masked pieces are kind of dark in a way, but other than that this is fairly light.