Chanel Exhibition at the MET

[softgrey]

faust - I don't think it is boring. Chanel was as much a revolutionary as Yohji or Chalayan in her day. I guess it depends upon the 'story' that goes with the exhibition. How the clothes are explained by the narrative.....or what narrative the clothes actually take. I think that it would be hard to depict Chanel's radical spirit in the absence of anything (from the time) against which to compare it, or even simply an explanation of the sartorial & gender norms of the time.

about the story or narrative-apparently there is;'t much of one...
if you check the first nytimes thing i posted in the highlighted bit...
the exhibit sounds very stark and dry...it actually sounds very boring to me...

to be honest...not to burst anyone's bubble..but all of the met's costume institute exhibits are boring...i really think they need to get visual designers or stylists to design the exhibits and not 'curators' and 'art historians'...they just don't put together visually compelling shows...i barely even bother going to them anymore...hardly any fashion people do...i guess tourists might go just once for the experience...i also don't think they have a very good budget...

the best one in the recent years was probably dangerous liasons...hamish bowles (editor-at-large for vogue) was guest curator and they did the exhibit in the main part of the museum in the area that was the same period as the clothing...so that at least the clothing was shown in some context ( an not in some dark and dreary basement)...and he did naughty little clever things like have one mannequin laying on the floor 'passed out' from 'the vapors'...translation-her corset was too tight...

i hope this is better than i think it is...

ps-what was the last met exhibit-birds of a feather i think?...did anybody go to that?...i didn't...and i don't know anyone else who did either...

 

[helena]

yes I can imagine that being the case softgrey. Maybe thats what Faust means by it being boring. Its a pity. It could be an amazing exhibition but it need some kind of spark about it - music, lighting, a narrative - a bit like the Westwood exhibition which I though was so well done. I get the impression that its just a showcase for a luxe brand rather than a proper exploration of what Chanel is and was to fashion.

 

[softgrey]

right...and that's because it is partially sponsored by chanel...
and that's why the new stuff is in there...

cause it's basically just a big ad for chanel...look at all the editorial coverage they've gotten....this is great for the 'brand'...


and i agree...westwood was very well done..they didn't have a lot of space, but they used it so well..and you really got a sense of the evolution of the label and her designs...plus it was cool to hear adam and the ants and the sex pistols in that context... B)

 

[droogist]

my dear droogist, its wellknown that Coco had a 'problem' with Vionnet and Sciap , so did those designers with her.. and yes, its true Coco wasnt Mother Teresa BUT, remember at her time people HAD to keep appearances and stay polite, so i'm positive that she never used the term 'ugly' that's too 2005, its too cheap a term for mlle Chanel to use in public.. she never thought herself as 'beautiful' either, so i'm positive it's Her Karla taking liberties on Coco's quotes and this makes me MAD

I see your point Lena. Looking over the Kaiser's sketch again, I think it's actually unclear whether it's a direct quote attributed to Mlle. Chanel, a paraphrase, or something from the fervent mind of KL himself. In my previous post, I was just trying to say that I didn't find the comment completely out of character for Mlle., as her bluntness was at times legendary. I didn't really intend it as a criticism...I like Coco and I like Karl, too.

 

[Lena]

I never really liked what Lagerfeld did with pret-a-porter although I think he does a much better job with couture. Do you remember the surfer themed collection - disgusting? and the chanel leathers that he did in the late 80's - I thought all that was just hideous.

i find his work hideous both in pap and for couture, he's just trying far too hard, Chanel was fresh and this is a point he will never reach, he's just too heavy ..could be a cultural thing? he never persuaded me he was a right choice for the House of Chanel.. he never understood what Chanel was all about

 

[kit]

God !!! How the memories keep rolling back .

Back in the days , when I did some photographic modelling for Lucie Clayton in Manchester , I acquired a girlfriend who was very ' Cheshire Set ' , ' OK , yah !!! , ( with a ' Cheshire chinless ' father and a tweedy cashmere twin setted mother , I'm sure you get the picture ....... ' etc etc ) .

Anyways , I met her one afternoon at the agency , she having just returned from Paris , where ' Mummy ' had bought her a suit from CHANEL .

It was in variagated nubbly Nicky Sekkers pink tweed , the classic four pocketed , monogrammed buttoned boxy jacket and knee length skirt . The jacket had two small lead weights sewn into bottom of the two front seams to make it hang correctly .

Genius .

I think I agree with Lena and Colin McDowell in being of the opinion that Dame Karla has prostituted much of Mlle Chanel 's legacy . On the other hand , however , would the house still exist without his marketing genius , or Gucci still exist witout the marketing acumen of a certain Tom Ford ?

I'm a purist in such matters , but purists are BORN to be disappointed .

 

[helena]

Lol lena - so you aren't a fan of KL then!!! I have always though a female designer would be better for Chanel. It was a fiercely female label after all.

Kit - my mum always said that Chanel woould be turning in her grave if she saw what was happening.

I remember when they brought out the fine jewellery line - what???? Chanel hated real diamonds & rubies - she loved costume jewellery. There was a certain democracy there.

 

[softgrey]

kit-
i remember the first time i saw a weighted jacket and skirt...it was also chanel...
i was enthralled......brilliant construction...

did you see the margiela jacket that is essentially that jacket turned inside out..so that the chains are on the outside...modern brilliance...imo...

 

[Lena]

i honestly dont think Chanel should exist after Mlle died , its different with Gucci which was less a 'personality' house and actually only a leather good firm..
did Karl helped the Chanel business? well, for me, he ruined it, since by now everyone yawns on Chanel and maybe considers that this was the way the House of Chanel always was like.. which is far from truth of course...

Mlle, always did her own thing, while Dior was doing 'new look' Mlle did her famous two piece, she was a born rebel and had such a good sense of humour, proportions and a feeling for what felt good without being 'rich' over decorated or snob..
she borrowed from guys wardrobe, she made a stylistic revolution.. where is the Chanel charm since Karl took over? lost forever right? repetitive collections with flashed of silly 'trendiness' well, he ruined it for me, thats for sure.

would have been so much better if the House closed down after Coco's death..
i bet those of you that will visit the MET show, will see the obvious difference in the way karl and Coco 'handled' fabrics and shapes.. its a complete different story, even though some of Karl's shapes are a copy from Mlle's ...he lacks the finesse if you know what i mean

(i hope i make any sense, can get heated when discussing Coco versus Karl, hence usually i just keep my opinions to myself on this issue )

 

[Lena]

I remember when they brought out the fine jewellery line - what???? Chanel hated real diamonds & rubies - she loved costume jewellery. There was a certain democracy there.

absolutely, that was such a treason to Coco's viewpoint..
she was such non-a-snob just becuase she came from 'low background' and this is what Her Karl absolutely lacks.. a feeling of 'real people' living 'real lives' he's totally absorbed by his 'rich' background, which ruins it completly.. and makes his work too baroque for the House of Chanel

(ok, thats it, stepping down, enough with Karl)

 

[helena]

lena - your opinions are good. I like some heat sometimes....yay to passion!

I agree, they should have let Chanel die. I have always said that (and so has my mum).

 

[kit]

I hear what you say , Lena

I get what you mean , Softie .
You cannot beat REAL craftsmanship and artistry .


I'll have to stop my ramblings ( it must be the pills !!! ) , in the allyways and byways of fashion memory and get with what's REALLY happening - like Carpe Diem , Linea , CCP , etc .

 

[softgrey]

LOL......kit...

gimme some of them pills...!!...and let me stroll with you down some of those byways...isn't that what this exhibit is all about.......

maybe i should consider popping some pills before i go to see it...

 

[softgrey]

absolutely, that was such a treason to Coco's viewpoint..
she was such non-a-snob just becuase she came from 'low background' and this is what Her Karl absolutely lacks.. a feeling of 'real people' living 'real lives' he's totally absorbed by his 'rich' background, which ruins it completly.. and makes his work too baroque for the House of Chanel

(ok, thats it, stepping down, enough with Karl)

...woo!!...go lena..!!...

tell it like it is..!!...
i can't say i've hated everything karl has done...or that i've loved everything that chanel has done...
but on this point i fully agree...

very well said...

 

[travolta]

kit, what would be the rest of the etc?

 

[travolta]

Lol lena - so you aren't a fan of KL then!!! I have always though a female designer would be better for Chanel. It was a fiercely female label after all.

if not karl, who?

 

[helena]

travolta - not sure - like i said i think it should be left to die. I think the only person who compares in terms of radicalism is Rei Kawakubo (but she comes from a very different heritage). Ann dem perhaps? But not sure she has the 'lightness' of touch Lena spoke about. I have siad before that I am not a fan of reinventing houses - I prefer people to develop their own names & brands that mean something in todays world. Everything has its time to live & its time to die, its the natural way of things.

 

[mdankwah]

^I'm also not a big fan of reinventing houses but if that's the case then the designer should be able to bring their own stamp to the house. I am in no doubt about the credibility of what Karl has done at Chanel but at the same time people start to get bored when they are fed the same ideas over and over again. I only wish Karl could do something with Chanel apart from using the same old tweed jackets and quilted bags every season.

 

[kit]

kit, what would be the rest of the etc?

All the ' destroyed , bash it out of existence at astronomical prices schtic ' that is raved about on the forum like Carpe Diem , CCP , Haute - reaching for ' intellectual philosophising ' , when they are only clothes , after all .
Martin Margiela and Rei Kawakubo are the originals , the newcomers are just jumping on the bandwagon for an ' artsy ' ride .

I'm a devotee of Yves Saint Laurent and Claude Montana . Nuff said . I'm passe . So what ? Fashion and tastes are ephemeral by nature , so we ALL become outmoded , sooner or later .

I can get ALL the philosophising about clothes that I want from the great Issey Miyake .

I'm no doubt setting myself up as an ' Aunt Sally ' , ready to be knocked down .

Whatever .

 

[helena]

oh kit, you are priceless. I love it. Thankyou - this place is better for having you around .