Christian Dior Haute Couture F/W 2006.07 Paris

I am really getting sick of people saying that Haute Couture is simply about showcasing raw, conceptual, statement-making clothes that are only meant to provoke extreme reations - either way, you hate it, or you love it.

Some people probably don't remember that in the past, it was simply about private, made-to-measure dressmaking for a handfull of people that could afford it, and it was not only about big dresses but also daytime suits and so on.

In that regard, I have to give Karl Lagerfeld credit for his reality-based, wearable, yet edgy couture collections that show very well what the difference is like between ready-to-wear and couture... it's the craft that matters, it's in every little piece of embroidery and beadwork, hand-sewn armhole etc.

Fashion for me is not an artform, it's applied arts, it's design and design has to function to a certain extent - which most of these clothes from Galliano don't do at all.
 
Believe it or not I just watched the show on the dior site and i like that track "Samson" by regina spektor... quite moving :)
 
tricotineacetat said:
Some people probably don't remember that in the past, it was simply about private, made-to-measure dressmaking for a handfull of people that could afford it, and it was not only about big dresses but also daytime suits and so on.

Fashion for me is not an artform, it's applied arts, it's design and design has to function to a certain extent - which most of these clothes from Galliano don't do at all.

For the most part, I entirely agree with the second point. In fact I agree in every other case than couture, precisely because I agree with your first point too. I think Couture's traditional place in the industry has been on the decrease for a very long time (probably starting around the time of the indutrial revolution even) and now there simply isn't enough room (or clients) for all couture designers to fit. Couture as artform is a new niche that some designers have adopted and although, ideally, I much prefer the idea of traditional couture, I'm happy to admire and try to embrace the new 'art' couture, if its exciting and not too wince-inducing (as dior sometimes is) and especially if underneath the arty bits are beautiful clothes.
00300f.jpg

Take away the 'armour' piece (easy to do in made-to-measure) and the dress is as wearable and conventionally lovely as anything in the armani prive collection (something I feel follows the more traditional lines of couture).
 
Okay, I do agree that there are some bits and pieces poking out from underneath the costume-y stuff that is easily wearable... so with regards to my comment, I might have generalized a bit (On the contrary though, I was having a hard time finding anything wearable in the last couture outing).

The question is, however, what is all the entertainment good for in the end? Is it because he (Galliano) thinks that the clothes themselves are not worth being shown on their own without all the gimmick-y extravaganza? Dior couture has declined over many seasons now, relying too heavily on spectacle and less about craftsmanship or finding a good balance between creativity and wearability (McQueen, being a fairly independent designer still compaired to the house of Dior, is already doing better offering wearable, yet dramatic couture clothes in his mainline collection with equally good craft).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^ I agree with you there, looking at the dress Hana wears above...its pretty boring, but the makeup and props make it look something its not...
 
^ I agree, which is why I said in my last post that it's a shame that most couture clients would do away with the armor, because in that look for example, it's the armor that makes it interesting rather than just a pretty gown.

Imo, Galliano was somehow trying to find that balance between creativity and wearability in this collection that he once did so well. I guess I feel that way because I look at the majority of the looks presented and see so much that can be adapted for the clients, and very easily at that. Where as last season was so much about very directional thinking and new ideas, this one seems a lot closer to what he did when he first started at Dior, beautiful clothes that were made interesting (or distracting, depending on the viewer) by injecting whatever theme was on his mind into the designs mixed with a heavy dose of styling.

I think this collection could have done without the over the top set, in a way it makes the clothes seem even more out there then they really are. The presentation didn't need to be so "produced" because the clothes are spectacle enough...does that make any sense?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tricotineacetat said:
I am really getting sick of people saying that Haute Couture is simply about showcasing raw, conceptual, statement-making clothes that are only meant to provoke extreme reations - either way, you hate it, or you love it.

Some people probably don't remember that in the past, it was simply about private, made-to-measure dressmaking for a handfull of people that could afford it, and it was not only about big dresses but also daytime suits and so on.

In that regard, I have to give Karl Lagerfeld credit for his reality-based, wearable, yet edgy couture collections that show very well what the difference is like between ready-to-wear and couture... it's the craft that matters, it's in every little piece of embroidery and beadwork, hand-sewn armhole etc.

Fashion for me is not an artform, it's applied arts, it's design and design has to function to a certain extent - which most of these clothes from Galliano don't do at all.

very well said. somebody pointed out that the dress hana was wearing was boring but the make up's interesting. in the end, it should be about the clothes. i have a feeling the overt theatrics masks the fact that his clothes aren't as interesting as the show. i certainly haven't seen a lot of interesting dior couture dresses worn in real life that would overshadow its shows.
 
^ Well, that's not necessarily due to the fact that John's designs are boring, but rather that the clients tastes are boring.
 
^ :D some of his designs worn in public are quite striking actually. the dior mermaid dress charlize theron wore is one of my favorites and started a trend, but none in my opinion came close to its appeal.
 
^ I actually agree, I think the dresses the celebs choose to wear by John are terribly bland looking (Charlize did look great in that dress though.)

I wish just one person would take the risk and wear a runway creation, even one of the tamer ones.
 
^ that wasn't the dress in discussion. it's this blue mermaid dress she wore at the golden globes 2005. and yes, that bow was hideously paired with the oscar dress. i also agree that most of dior couture's dresses on the red carpet are bland. quite generic looking in my opinion. the exact opposite of the extravagant runway show itself. (yahoo)

01vt3.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
5AvenueMarceau said:
For the most part, I entirely agree with the second point. In fact I agree in every other case than couture, precisely because I agree with your first point too. I think Couture's traditional place in the industry has been on the decrease for a very long time (probably starting around the time of the indutrial revolution even) and now there simply isn't enough room (or clients) for all couture designers to fit. Couture as artform is a new niche that some designers have adopted and although, ideally, I much prefer the idea of traditional couture, I'm happy to admire and try to embrace the new 'art' couture, if its exciting and not too wince-inducing (as dior sometimes is) and especially if underneath the arty bits are beautiful clothes.
00300f.jpg

Take away the 'armour' piece (easy to do in made-to-measure) and the dress is as wearable and conventionally lovely as anything in the armani prive collection (something I feel follows the more traditional lines of couture).

exactly! take away the seemingly gazillion decorations and you have a generic looking dress (case in point) that one won't be able to tell if it's dior couture. his older, earlier works when he started were so much better in my opinion.:flower:
 
here are some of the most prominent dior dresses from recent memory. same idea, different spins (sorry couldn't find bigger pics- yahoo/getty):
02vx9.png


charlize theron (yellow ruffled column), kim cattrall (the orange version sans train), daryl hannah (pink ruffled dress that was short in front, long at the back), liz hurley (leopard printed) and jacquetta wheeler (pale blue at the met). they're very pretty but lacks innovation and identity. the shows are good to watch though.
 
I agree with all said, when I saw the thread of Galliano's old stuff (because I am to young to have seen it when it first came about) a while ago I was astounded at how much I prefered it to his present work. The dress I used as an example I agree that it is obviously not forward thinking or interesting, but I still think its lovely, albeit in an obvious boring way, not matching in the slightest the work of mcqueen or even fellow couturier Riccardo Tisci (because I quite enjoyed Givenchy).
My post was merely the tact I take when trying to understand the other side of the argument, the way I've tried to make sense of the theatrics.

Everyone has such fascinating opinions on haute couture and what it should be, there should be a thread!
 
Leccuces on my hands...

I would
borrow or steal
a piece of this Couture Collection
just for give pleasure to my eyes
just for tender my hands...
:lol:
I-f I c-o-u-l-d
 
52954375.jpg

Paz Vega wore this dress, which was from SS 05 couture, wasn't it? I think it looks particularly stunning.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,899
Messages
15,202,903
Members
86,934
Latest member
yearofclimax
Back
Top