Christian Dior F/W 11.12 Paris (See Post #1 for thread rules, before posting)

[ultramarine]

I stand by the intent of my argument.

Being drunk is no excuse for uttering hateful speech. Just as committing murder while intoxicated is still considered manslaughter. But the comparison isn't apt because hateful speech has intent. You don't walk around with antisemitic vitriol 'accidentally' spewing from your mouth. His depression, his alcoholism is not a justification for his behavior. It explains what he did, but it does not and it should not be a token for sympathy. Racists are among the most vile people on earth. To unequivocally hate a person because of their ethnic-religious background is ugly. I cannot understand how some people have the moral courage to say 'oh what a poor, unfortunate man'. He did not say that A-line skirts are hideous. He did not say that purple is an overrated color. He said he admired Hitler and proceeded to make hateful racist comments. Perhaps some people have forgotten what Hitler did. I'd recommend grabbing a history book, going to a holocaust museum or even renting a WWII movie to understand a sliver of the pain felt by the Jewish community. Please, please explain to me how his behavior can be justified?

And also, "who are we to judge?". We are members of polite society. When someone has the audacity (in the 21st century) to utter hateful speech, we have the moral obligation to criticize them. We have the democratic duty to condemn them and their reprehensible behavior.

Additionally, just so people understand by "living death" I did not mean that Galliano should be killed or anything barbaric like that. I (using creative expression) merely meant that he will, and should never have the capacity, to design again. Since creative expression is the raison d'etre of a desginer and he would not have the capacity, he'd be a living corpse. A shadow of the man he formerly was. I hope people did not misunderstand that portion of my argument.

<quote> First of all, Dior's house wasn't open until 1947, perhaps you mean that he worked for Lucien Lelong and Piguet during the war? Actually Lelong, as president of the Chambre Syndicale during the occupation actively fought the Nazi influence in French fashion, fighting them when the Nazi's wanted to move all of Paris' Haute Couture operations to Berlin.</quote>

Mutterlein, Christian Dior held a show on July 14th, 1940 which was attended by Sussanne Abetz, the wife of the German ambassador to occupied France. She was accompanied by many Nazis. Personally, I don't blame Dior for making garments for the Nazis. It was either that or effectively suffer the fate of Madame Gres. Nonetheless, many of the members of the resistance still viewed Dior with suspicion. The charge of collaborator was levied against him. My point was the house probably has to be very conscious of this historical problem. I mean he's no Coco Chanel but it's still a potential PR problem.
​

Erm ... darling. No one in this thread (or the Galliano one in the Rumor has it forums) has agreed with any of the statements from Galliano. So no one is saying YOU ARE WRONG.

What baffles me is the position of intolerance from other people. Im one of those "hate the sin, not the sinner". And most definitively I am a productive member of society (and I NEVER judge). What I disagree with most is about how this has been handled.

To expect people to be perfect is quite an obtuse way of thinking, we all are human and make mistakes, and yes, some people make little mistakes and some others make mistakes the size of Antarctica (like Galliano did). But are you saying he (or any one, not even Hitler) is worth forgiving?

And what I find unbelievable from Dior is how hipocritical and manipulative they have been about the whole ordeal. Does anyone really wants to do bussiness with someone who will just dump you like that? *snaps fingers*

PS Maybe I just think this way because Im a romantic.

PPS Im just having a hard time with all this conflicting rumours, yes, he may have said it .. but what about the context? For an anti semitic guy, he definitely enjoyed the hassidic (sp?) look

image from style.com via photobucket.com
Moderator note:

Im afraid the thread is veering slowly on off topic grounds. If you would like to discuss anything not related to the collection further (this is directed to ALL MEMBERS), you may do so by posting on the Galliano thread on the Rumor has it forums or using the PM tool.

Thank you.

 

[iluvjeisa]

love the colors and everything about this collection, i see no reason why everybody should say such bad things about it...it just does not look like a Dior collection, to me it looks like a Galliano show...the same style, the same models, the same hair and makeup...which is not supposed to sound banal and boring, but rather as something beautiful and exciting I am looking forward to see every season! And I am glad some things are over...after all the repetitevness of fashion makes it so boring, some things should stay in time and never be repeated!

Yes. It does look like his own brand. Hmm.

 

[pen6693]

Shoes look like last FW's shoes.

 

[prosperk]

With all due respect to Ultramarine's move to get this thread back on topic, a few editorial notes are due here before we close this off. It might be interesting to start a thread on Paris Fashion Under The Nazis. There again, it is a 'sensitive subject' and it would doubtless degenerate into an unpleasant slanging match as various posters, contradicted, freaked out.

Mutterlein, Christian Dior held a show on July 14th, 1940 [CD was in the army somewhere south of the demarcation line at the time] which was attended by Sussanne [Suzanne] Abetz, the wife of the German ambassador to occupied France. She was accompanied by many Nazis. Personally, I don't blame Dior for making garments for the Nazis. It was either that or effectively suffer the fate of Madame Gres. [Timeline? Madame Gres and Balenciaga were closed down in 1944 for exceeding cloth and materials quotas] Nonetheless, many of the members of the resistance still viewed Dior with suspicion [Really? Sources? His anti-German and Pétainist stance was fairly well-known] The charge of collaborator was levied against him [That's interesting. Do you have the details and the dates?]. My point was the house probably has to be very conscious of this historical problem [Their only Nazi-related historical problem involves the neo-Nazi Françoise Dior in the early 1960s]. I mean he's no Coco Chanel but it's still a potential PR problem.

Additionally, just so people understand by "living death" I did not mean that Galliano should be killed or anything barbaric like that. I (using creative expression) merely meant that he will, and should never have the capacity, to design again. Since creative expression is the raison d'etre of a desginer and he would not have the capacity, he'd be a living corpse. A shadow of the man he formerly was. I hope people did not misunderstand that portion of my argument.

You express this portion of your argument very clearly. To summarise, you do not believe in redemption but you do believe in retribution although you see killing people as barbaric. Subjecting them to mental and emotional anguish, which is a form of torture, for the rest of their lives is OK, though. Well, if you believe that this is the democratic duty of polite society, good for you. You should definitely run for election.

PK

 

[ultramarine]

Actually I agree, its an interesting topic.

Let me run it thru the mod team and get back at ya .. probably it should go in the "In depth ... " forum.

 

[breebee]

I think this looks like crap honestly. The outfits look like what would happen if I went through my mother's closet and tried to come up with Haute Couture. And I really don't like the styling. But there are some pieces that I think are outstanding. Not outfits, but there are some pants and some blouses that I adore.

 

[mikeijames]

i don't know why they even put on this show. they could have simply left the clothes in the showroom for the editors and such. they should have written this season off with the entire scandal. while i don't want to wade into the debate over his dismissal, it illustrates that working for a house of this stature remains a privilege not a right. there exist so many designers who study their way through the best schools and toil their way in lower level positions in respectable houses hoping for one day to rise to the level of john galliano. those who appreciate that know that some things must never get said. ever. we do not live in the nineteenth century or the twentieth century where one could overlook these things. i don't care if its actor mel gibson or senator george allen or tv star isaiah thomas. i don't care if its emotional or chemical or even rational. words, now more than ever, have consequences.

and that's the tragedy here. only a completely unserious or socially unaware client could wear these clothes this season, no matter how good they look. fashion, at its core, projects not just something about those who had a hand in designing it, but something about the wearer. it would take quite an individual to want to broadcast the scandal that these clothes find themselves tainted with....beautiful as they are.

and it's sad. john galliano is not the only person who harbors racist thoughts or anti-semetic words, but he happened to get caught. and this show proved so clearly that he had a hand in the execution of this line from concept to its final execution on the runway. and his absence even for the few days before the show left a clear mark.

 

[almudena]

and that's the tragedy here. only a completely unserious or socially unaware client could wear these clothes this season, no matter how good they look. fashion, at its core, projects not just something about those who had a hand in designing it, but something about the wearer. it would take quite an individual to want to broadcast the scandal that these clothes find themselves tainted with....beautiful as they are.

You are talking about celebrities, not normal clients here, right? You believe that the LVMH RP will really let this whole season.... just go by? I would see them trying as hard as they can to actually put Dior clothes and products as soon as possible on actresses, celebrities etc exactly for reasons of damage containment, to mark a clear line between Dior the label and Galliano the man. Regardless of the fact he designed this stuff.

As far as normal clients are concerned, I see sales continuing as usual.

 

[chloehandbags]

i don't know why they even put on this show. they could have simply left the clothes in the showroom for the editors and such. they should have written this season off with the entire scandal. while i don't want to wade into the debate over his dismissal, it illustrates that working for a house of this stature remains a privilege not a right. there exist so many designers who study their way through the best schools and toil their way in lower level positions in respectable houses hoping for one day to rise to the level of john galliano. those who appreciate that know that some things must never get said. ever. we do not live in the nineteenth century or the twentieth century where one could overlook these things. i don't care if its actor mel gibson or senator george allen or tv star isaiah thomas. i don't care if its emotional or chemical or even rational. words, now more than ever, have consequences.​

and that's the tragedy here. only a completely unserious or socially unaware client could wear these clothes this season, no matter how good they look. fashion, at its core, projects not just something about those who had a hand in designing it, but something about the wearer. it would take quite an individual to want to broadcast the scandal that these clothes find themselves tainted with....beautiful as they are.​

and it's sad. john galliano is not the only person who harbors racist thoughts or anti-semetic words, but he happened to get caught. and this show proved so clearly that he had a hand in the execution of this line from concept to its final execution on the runway. and his absence even for the few days before the show left a clear mark.

Actually, to be fair, I don't think anyone would have just overlooked what he said, during most of the 20th Century, either? ​

If anything, during the mid-to-latter part of the 20th Century, it would probably have been viewed as even more unacceptable, for obvious reasons.​

However, surely, if he really harboured racist, or anti-semitic, thoughts or words, he would have said something sober, at some point? Whereas, as far as I can gather, he has never said anything of the sort, sober?​

I suppose I just don't understand how a true racist could keep quiet, for year upon year and never say anything, including to any of his his Jewish friends, until he was completely smashed?​

Surely, something would have come out, at some point?​

Almost everyone I've ever known who, it has transpired, has held dodgy views about one thing or another, has not managed to keep quiet about them for weeks, let alone years.​

You're normally left in very little doubt what people with 'isms' opinions are, very quickly, aren't you?​

OK, I suppose if someone was supremely good at hiding their true self they might manage it and I guess you wouldn't know in that case(?); but it would still seems like no mean feat, to me, to cover such strong views, for so long, if they were truly heartfelt?​

 

[mikeijames]

You are talking about celebrities, not normal clients here, right? You believe that the LVMH RP will really let this whole season.... just go by? I would see them trying as hard as they can to actually put Dior clothes and products as soon as possible on actresses, celebrities etc exactly for reasons of damage containment, to mark a clear line between Dior the label and Galliano the man. Regardless of the fact he designed this stuff.

As far as normal clients are concerned, I see sales continuing as usual.

i don't make a clear line between the celebrity client as opposed the average client. first, the activity of one drives and motivates the other. second, when the average luxury consumer goes out to purchase luxury goods, most do not go out to do so to make political stances. most do it as a point of personal pleasure and as an act of conspicuous consumption. while those who live in the public eye certainly won't get photographed laughing it up in a christian dior boutique right now -- it's like someone getting caught having a thousand dollar lunch with mel gibson -- i cannot imagine that the contingent of dior clients who keep themselves up to date on the news of the world would simply overlook this incident, after all, they don't just wear these clothes around their house. they wear them to charity events, they wear them to society lunches, they wear them in corporate board rooms, they wear them to their children's school. and if you think these women want to give a second thought about the implications of their clothes in a negative way, you're highly mistaken. yes, there exist some who could care less about things like this, but for those who have to concern themselves with what they're clothes say about them. but for the rest, it's radioactive.

sarah mower put it quite correctly on vogue.com:

But how to end the show without him? His last appearance on this runway—costumed in a black wig and black velvet suit to impersonate Nureyev—was at the end of his couture show in January. This time, however, a white-coated crowd of ateliers emerged from the wings: the multiskilled Christian Dior team, ushered onto the rostrum to take credit for seeing this terrible season through. That seemed fitting, and emotional—and it made for a symbolic gesture of the brand’s solidity and continuance. What will happen next—who will step into this most treasured and sharply demanding of positions—is of course already open to wild speculation and gossip. But for the time being? Galliano left this house with some of the season’s loveliest and most circumstantially condemned evening dresses—fashion’s least likely choices to ever be worn in public.

 

[mikeijames]

Actually, to be fair, I don't think anyone would have just overlooked what he said, during most of the 20th Century, either? ​

If anything, during the mid-to-latter part of the 20th Century, it would probably have been viewed as even more unacceptable, for obvious reasons.​

However, surely, if he really harboured racist, or anti-semitic, thoughts or words, he would have said something sober, at some point? Whereas, as far as I can gather, he has never said anything of the sort, sober?​

I suppose I just don't understand how a true racist could keep quiet, for year upon year and never say anything, including to any of his his Jewish friends, until he was completely smashed?​

Surely, something would have come out, at some point?​

Almost everyone I've ever known who, it has transpired, has held dodgy views about one thing or another, has not managed to keep quiet about them for weeks, let alone years.​

You're normally left in very little doubt what people with 'isms' opinions are, very quickly, aren't you?​

OK, I suppose if someone was supremely good at hiding their true self they might manage it and I guess you wouldn't know in that case(?); but it would still seems like no mean feat, to me, to cover such strong views, for so long, if they were truly heartfelt?​

i don't agree with this asssessment at all. just as there exist a number of posters in this forum who may never enter a christian dior boutique who swoon over every handbag and frock the house puts out, there exist those who harbor affinities for prejudice who may never express those affinities in public ways. since the dawn of the twentieth century, the "isms" have not vanished as some might try to argue, but they have gone into the closet. while it may have social consequences to express thoughts of sexism, racism, religious intolerance, or homophobia, it does not mean that everyone just shed themselves of those ways of thought.

regardless of the depth of the views or the strength of the feelings inside of john galliano, no one can dispute the level of venom contained in the statements caught on film expressed by the man. the problem with celebrating this collection on the runway in this way in the media universe in which we now live remains that these clothes and this collection will run right along side those hateful words and those damaging images.

could you imagine if this collection made use of military reference points as one of the recent pre-fall collections did?

style.com

 

[Chris_Couture05]

Not really loving this collection. There are parts of it that I really like but then the rest is just crap. The best part were the gowns at the end of the collection. Its too bad that this is his last collection, but I am exctied to see what is yet to come for Dior.

 

[Fatalefashion]

Christian Dior - F/W 11.12 - Full Fashion Show (Exclusive on You Tube)

 

[mackos]

The collection does not do anything for me, that is not Christian Dior I will remember.

I'm loving those fur neck muffs, though, they're totally desirable.

 

[JuiceMajor]

oh it will beinteresting if THEYSKENS takes over!! I think he will be a good candidate to succeed Galliano. This collection blow!

 

[TianSoFine]

After watching the video, I've just realized that the clothing in this collection looks a lot better in motion.

I will agree that a celebrity client is different from a non-celebrity client. Celebrities won't be wearing Galliano's Dior because it is now viewed as "tainted" by the designer's words, so they convey a tainted message. A non-celebrity client, however, does not convey messages to they world through their choice of clothing. People in their everyday lives are not judged by what they wear nearly as much as celebrities are.