Christian Dior Haute Couture S/S 2013 Paris

[dior_couture1245]

It's an OK collection with a realistic understanding of just how much minimalism a house like Dior can bear for it's couture - this should be able to please those with a somewhat traditional view of what couture shall look like...

A lot of the dress shapes are indeed dangerously close to Olivier Theyskens' work for Rochas and Nina Ricci, as had already been pointed out - Though his concepts of ornamentation and fabric usage always had a much more unexpected, edgy twist that I personally would have preferred over Simons' reliance on excessive floral embroidery.

Oddly enough, this collection falls rather flat with jackets and coats, taking into account though how ill some of the tailleur jackets are fitting, though, it may be for the better that he's focussed so much on the dresses.

The more I think about it, the more I'm actually really disappointed that Olivier is not in charge of Dior.

 

[Scott]

Instantaneous? First of all, he had as much time for his first HC collection as all the the other couturiers. Second of all, he's had two seasons under his belt. That's a long time for any experienced designer to get an understanding of the workroom and what its abilities are. It's certainly not the first time he's taken over a house with a talented atelier. Third, do you know how much LVMH pays him to do this? He's making more off this Dior deal than I will in my whole life. And fourth, there are at least half a dozen other designers who would not be having such ridiculous fit and construction issues if they were given one of the world's top workrooms to make due with. He deserves to be scrutinized.

so is this like a jealousy thing then?

it's funny because you talk about all this time he's had to get a grasp on things yet i've seen far less scrutiny over far worse from other designer's tentative seasons. for as much scrutiny you say he deserves i also think he deserves an equal if not larger share of patience. remember opulent dior is a very new territory for him and like we saw with jil sander,it wasn't immediate. i think it's going to be progression in finely tuning his vision.

 

[tricotineacetat]

so is this like a jealousy thing then?

it's funny because you talk about all this time he's had to get a grasp on things yet i've seen far less scrutiny over far worse from other designer's tentative seasons. for as much scrutiny you say he deserves i also think he deserves an equal if not larger share of patience. remember opulent dior is a very new territory for him and like we saw with jil sander,it wasn't immediate. i think it's going to be progression in finely tuning his vision.

I'd expect the executives at Dior to hire a creative director that can handle his job with proper experience, or at least have him a collection designer put to his side that can assist in translating ideas into flawlessly crafted couture... Of course, I haven't seen any of this in person but some of the tailoring leaves a lot to be desired, even on the runway pics.

While John Galliano's designs borderlined gaudiness towards the end of his tenure, I think it was safe to say that there was an understanding of the craft, something that Raf Simons even failed at when you look at his menswear line, whose quality up until today blows (compared to his omnipresently compared peer, Hedi Slimane). Equally so, you can look at Olivier Theyskens' technical expertise in couture and it's arguably on another level than what Raf Simons has honed in all these years at Jil Sander.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

so is this like a jealousy thing then?

it's funny because you talk about all this time he's had to get a grasp on things yet i've seen far less scrutiny over far worse from other designer's tentative seasons. for as much scrutiny you say he deserves i also think he deserves an equal if not larger share of patience. remember opulent dior is a very new territory for him and like we saw with jil sander,it wasn't immediate. i think it's going to be progression in finely tuning his vision.

Don't be so dense, Scott, my only point is that he's not doing this out of the kindness of his own heart, he is expected to make results and I don't see how this couture collection manages that.

And when other designers make collections that are this poor I call them out, too.

And on the contrary, I thought Simon's first collection for Jil Sander was just a few palette colors short of being a masterpiece.

 

[disco54]

Totally agree with you Mutterlein 100%
I feel this whole dress fiasco at the SAG awards will do considerable damage to Dior's HC business sadly, while his haute couture collection is critically acclaimed it will be a commercial flop. At the 5 digit price tags they command, there are much better options at other houses.

 

[rayoflight]

Looked at the hi-res pics and the video (in vain hope that the clothes would look better in motion) and the more I looked the more my disappointment grew. Any high praise, aside from the choice of venue and the basic theme, is completely unjustified, IMO. The pieces range from awkward to vile. If same symetrically styled dress has one straight seam and the opposite side is rumpled then honest to god there can be no talk about technical finesse and attention to detail, because that's not what I see there. Draping is horrible, by any standard, on so many dresses that it makes me want to claw my eyes out. I do appreciate the tries on the witty details, but if the execution of those details is so appallingly bad then what's the point? It's not showcasing the abilities of the atelier, it's sad and embarrassing. Main point being, Mr Simons doesn't seem to know much about construction of garments and choice of fabrics is questionable at more than a couple occasions. Technical knowledge in both draping and tailoring should be expected from a couturier, otherwise how would he be able to direct his atelier hands? Yeah, well, if that is not present, result is obvious. The archive pieces are ok (patterns already worked out for him), in fact they partially salvage the collection, but his own ideas... He has no clue how to realize them.
Aside from the technical flaws (and omg, yes, they are visible, haven't seen anything this sloppy since Gucci Premiere presented those first few godawful dresses), I have trouble understand who would be the customer... Because most of the dresses have no place for breasts. Women tend to have those. Women like, I dunno, Jennifer Lawrence? She wears those dresses and her cleavage looks awkward in the dress and dress itself looks like it's about to fall down. What's that about? It's not a a single mishap, it's intentional, judging from ALL the collections he has presented. Plus, those dresses with those flower bits attached to them, they are not pretty, is all I'm saying.

Inevitably I do compare Raf's work to Galliano's. Just like I did Galliano's to Ferre's. And with Galliano I looked and the clothes and I was like, wow, how did they do that dress! With current Dior I'm like, wow, why did they do that dress?

And by all that is holy, I've seen enough of Dior's original work to say that *this* is not return to roots by any means. Uh-uh, no way. Raf better get his act together, or leave.

 

[rip_ian curtis]

If my idea of the construction of the dress is correct, the sheer panels beneath are both beautiful and practical - instead of creating this dress by layering the silk, layer on layer, which would have made the dress bulkier and heavier, he has seamed the lower layers to the sheer fabric, so all one need to do is pull at the skirt to ascend some steps (for example, Jennifer Lawrence) and this beautiful lightness and hidden sexiness is revealed.
This technique brings back stories of couture jackets with semi-sheer linings as so the wearer can see exactly how the jacket is constructed, while it still be comfortable and of course, of a much lighter weight.

While I appreciate his efforts and these kind of hidden luxuries, I find that in this case the good idea was not executed very well. If the dress looks good only when standing straight I find it impractical. When Jennifer Lawrence sat down, bent or got up stairs, the upper part of the dress went up and her thighs were exposed almost up to the crotch. I don't find that very elegant...

 

[lepetitcouturier]

I thought that dress was interesting but poorly executed, like most of his dresses and couture pieces. It didn't leave me thinking "oh, she looks great" but rather "oh man, what's going on with that gap in her dress?" As interesting as the design detail was it felt unnecessary and gimmicky. What does it actually do to make a woman look better? Perhaps if the design didn't make what was surely super expensive fabric look so cheap, or if the construction didn't look so burdened and the shape so clumsy, it may have worked for me.

I have a lot of craft issues with Simon's Dior. He doesn't really seem to have an understanding of dress construction and that deficiency becomes even more of a handicap when it comes to the couture. Which is odd because he's now working with some of the best dressmakers in the world. He's mangling the skills of the petite mains, having them do these dresses which defy the natural properties of the fabric while creating heavy, unflattering, and most of the time ill-fitting structures that just look sloppy. I don't think any of the celebrities wearing Dior looked good, all the dresses look a bit like Project Runway red carpet challenges. If buying out Jennifer Lawrence and Marion Cotillard is supposed to increase the brand's profile they may be in for trouble, I highly doubt the average woman who responds to red carpet glamour is going to be attracted to Simon's dresses. I highly doubt any woman would choose those dresses unless they were being paid to.

Simon's two Dior collections have been uneventful. His creations, though interesting in their awkwardness, do very little to substantiate and redirect Christian Dior's dressmaking and tailoring legacy in the manner Simons thinks they do. Is this really the new look for women of the 21st century? A new way of dressing? Hardly. It's full of so much half-formed, po-mo, poorly executed thoughts that reads more like a BFA thesis show than something you'd expect from a world class luxury brand. His references to old Dior styles are obvious and trite. I would even forgive these confusing and sometimes ugly clothes if I thought they actually inspired desire or if they could actually make women look better and feel better, which is why I give leeway to designers like Zac Posens who can manage a stunning red carpet gown more often than not, but I don't think it's possible with Dior. And I'd even give his couture some leeway if I thought the RTW could pick up the slack, but I don't think that's going to happen either. I am very, very curious to see how Simons' Dior sells and if he stays for another three years.

This is exactly how I feel, and it's exactly what I've been saying since the second the first model walked out. Simons hasn't really had two collections to master his "couture." We CANNOT forget all the hooplah that was going around his last four collections where he "studied couture techniques" and blah blah blah. So if he was so knowledgeable about couture then he wouldn't be putting out terribly tailored suits and dresses that drape terribly. The last five looks that have gotten so much praise are seriously ugly. They're awkward too. And it's not even a construction problem. This collection was just ugly.

 

[Zazie]

Hmm...I honestly don't see the shabby construction and poor fit in this collection, I see a different way to construct for many of the dress, eg. a new shape for trapeze, a new design for the column gown, etc. Every look is streamlined and precise, nothing looks unintentional.

Perhaps those who saw the bad construction, etc. can post close-ups to illustrate such instances of bad couture work?


I haven't read any critique about poor tailoring either, from reviewers and journalists who have an up-close inspection. Again, if these were noticed, I would be interested to hear from those journalists who have examined this collection and saw the flaws and mistakes.

As for ugliness, it really is personal after all. Some would hate this, some would love this. This is why there are all sorts of "styles" out there, from frilly Marchesa to minimalist Jil Sander, to suit the wide spectrum of preferences.

The test of the pudding is in the tasting - sales matter, and the fact that Jennifer Lawrence made it to many Best Dressed Lists and her dress was one of the most talked-about outfits...the MOST talked about outfit in fact, is to me a crucial first score for RS.

 

[Nymphaea]

His main problem are his ideas and fabric choices/combinations. The execution eg. the sewing and fit is done by his seamstresses and they have tons of experiences so that’s not the problem, they just sew what he wants and do it perfectly. The problem though are his ideas: the shape of a design, the fabric choices and the combination of this. In my opinion this leads to more than a few not likable outfits. Because of this his looks seem to be a bit amateurism, a bit underdeveloped, not enough edited. I’m seeing he IS trying, but in most cases he hasn’t hit the jackpot. And when you are appointed to design Dior haute couture, I think it is not wrong to expect some kind of high end result and Raf hasn’t accomplished this yet. I see what he wants to accomplish and it can become magnificent, but for sure he isn’t there yet. I hope/want that he will be there in the near future, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[narcyza]

I really miss Galliano. This collection it's just awful.

 

[dior_couture1245]

Don't be so dense, Scott, my only point is that he's not doing this out of the kindness of his own heart, he is expected to make results and I don't see how this couture collection manages that.

And when other designers make collections that are this poor I call them out, too.

And on the contrary, I thought Simon's first collection for Jil Sander was just a few palette colors short of being a masterpiece.

That's exactly it. I love Raf Simon's work - for his own line and for Jil Sander, in particular.

I don't think he deserves any particular leeway or slack here because it is only his second couture show. Especially because his first collection(s) for Jil Sander, which were his first collections for womenswear ever, were such masterpieces - right off the bat. He hit the ground running and won.

In my opinion, the whole issue boils down to Raf truly not being suited for Dior. There's a reason why his success at Jil Sander was instantaneous - the brand's DNA fit him like a glove and he flourished because of it. I just don't see the match here.

Unless he can get himself and his Dior woman out of the history books and the archives and figure out what Dior means for today - I'm not interested. Regardless of whether or not you cared for Galliano's aesthetic, you can't deny that he was able to take the old codes of Dior and make them feel new by breaking them down and ripping them apart and infusing them with contemporary art, music, movies and street culture.

And what's with the one-dimensionality of the collections at Dior so far. Where are the poetic stories of a young married couple and their daily, intimate lives? Where is the story of 1920's Europe's fascination with African tribalism? Where is the story of a woman reclaiming her natural state by going back to the desert? So far these collections at Dior seem mostly to be about flowers. How pedestrian.

I've been so surprised, and disappointed, to see that Raf's Dior woman is such an antiquated debutante - when his early Jil Sander woman was such a modern force to be reckoned with - and his Raf Simons' man is such rebel.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

Hmm...I honestly don't see the shabby construction and poor fit in this collection, I see a different way to construct for many of the dress, eg. a new shape for trapeze, a new design for the column gown, etc. Every look is streamlined and precise, nothing looks unintentional.

Perhaps those who saw the bad construction, etc. can post close-ups to illustrate such instances of bad couture work?


I haven't read any critique about poor tailoring either, from reviewers and journalists who have an up-close inspection. Again, if these were noticed, I would be interested to hear from those journalists who have examined this collection and saw the flaws and mistakes.

As for ugliness, it really is personal after all. Some would hate this, some would love this. This is why there are all sorts of "styles" out there, from frilly Marchesa to minimalist Jil Sander, to suit the wide spectrum of preferences.

The test of the pudding is in the tasting - sales matter, and the fact that Jennifer Lawrence made it to many Best Dressed Lists and her dress was one of the most talked-about outfits...the MOST talked about outfit in fact, is to me a crucial first score for RS.

Most people talked about the dress because they thought it ripped...because that sheer gap didn't really make any sense and Jennifer Lawrence didn't know it was there:

"It's a tiered dress, which I didn't understand until I sat down and saw my thighs through sheer material and thought, 'What's going on?!' So yes, that was a surprise, but not a malfunction?

As one astute commenter posted on Vogue's website about the incident:

"I would venture to say that any garment that is structured so that parts of your body is shown when you don't expect it nor want it to is not a fault of the garment, but is really a consequence of bad design."

As for construction, just take a look at the jacket closures, it's as if the pull lines from the bad fit were intentional, the pucker in the seams, the way the fabric crumples and bulges around the body, etc

 

[dior_couture1245]

As for construction, just take a look at the jacket closures, it's as if the pull lines from the bad fit were intentional, the pucker in the seams, the way the fabric crumples and bulges around the body, etc

Yes.
Look at the bodice here-

The puckering at the closure here-

How ill fitting this jumpsuit looks-

The puckering and poor fit of this bodice-

I could go on and on. These pictures are indisputable.
(style.com)

 

[tricotineacetat]

I was about to post a picture of the very same pant suit above - Despite the issues on the closure, have a look at the crumpled seams at the lapel edges/facing - You get the idea . There are also unpleasant creases on the shoulder as well as around the bust, which makes me wonder whether the jacket lacks structured interlining as a men's suit or a YSL couture tuxedo would have had.

 

[Morphe]

Totally agree with you Mutterlein 100%
I feel this whole dress fiasco at the SAG awards will do considerable damage to Dior's HC business sadly, while his haute couture collection is critically acclaimed it will be a commercial flop. At the 5 digit price tags they command, there are much better options at other houses.

Actually no, it has been reported that it has been selling really well, twice as better than previous years.
"Fiasco" is an overstatement.

 

[lepetitcouturier]

That's exactly it. I love Raf Simon's work - for his own line and for Jil Sander, in particular.

I don't think he deserves any particular leeway or slack here because it is only his second couture show. Especially because his first collection(s) for Jil Sander, which were his first collections for womenswear ever, were such masterpieces - right off the bat. He hit the ground running and won.

In my opinion, the whole issue boils down to Raf truly not being suited for Dior. There's a reason why his success at Jil Sander was instantaneous - the brand's DNA fit him like a glove and he flourished because of it. I just don't see the match here.

Unless he can get himself and his Dior woman out of the history books and the archives and figure out what Dior means for today - I'm not interested. Regardless of whether or not you cared for Galliano's aesthetic, you can't deny that he was able to take the old codes of Dior and make them feel new by breaking them down and ripping them apart and infusing them with contemporary art, music, movies and street culture.

And what's with the one-dimensionality of the collections at Dior so far. Where are the poetic stories of a young married couple and their daily, intimate lives? Where is the story of 1920's Europe's fascination with African tribalism? Where is the story of a woman reclaiming her natural state by going back to the desert? So far these collections at Dior seem mostly to be about flowers. How pedestrian.

I've been so surprised, and disappointed, to see that Raf's Dior woman is such an antiquated debutante - when his early Jil Sander woman was such a modern force to be reckoned with - and his Raf Simons' man is such rebel.

I never realized that until you said it. All of his shows so far have had to do with flowers because they were Dior's obsession. But he's acting like Dior didn't have any other inspirations. I didn't realize that out of Galliano's fifteen years there, his only collection specifically inspired by flowers was Fall 2010 Couture.

This collection has terrible seaming aswell, if you look on Kinga's jacket, the seams are just extremely unattractive.

And why am I the only one who thinks the makeup is just sloppy? The lips look like they're covered with cold sores.

 

[Littleathquakes]

Actually no, it has been reported that it has been selling really well, twice as better than previous years.
"Fiasco" is an overstatement.

I don't think that has anything to do with the collection, really. As new empires are being built, money will be spent. There was a recent article in tfs' own Buzz section about the rise in the Russian HC clients (whereas before that, we saw the growing demand from China). To me it seems like HC relies more on the whim of good luck and new made fortune than any actual fashion itself. And of course, these new HC clients see a new head designer and they want to be patrons of arts, like many clients before them claim the same.

 

[Morphe]

Still, that so-called "fiasco" won't do sh*t to the sales.

 

[Zazie]

Most people talked about the dress because they thought it ripped...because that sheer gap didn't really make any sense and Jennifer Lawrence didn't know it was there:



As one astute commenter posted on Vogue's website about the incident:



As for construction, just take a look at the jacket closures, it's as if the pull lines from the bad fit were intentional, the pucker in the seams, the way the fabric crumples and bulges around the body, etc

I confess I often wear clothes that don't make any "sense" , my favorite pair of silk pants are slashed open at the knees, another old pair of pants by Kostas Murkudis is slashed where the side zips should be and the entire pants held up by a detached skin-colored elastic band, an old Thimister dress I own is slashed open at the waist, with one side of the skirt falling - they all show quite a bit of skin, but somehow, discretely. They are not overtly sexy, even though they're daring, because they are unexpected, i.e. not the usual cleavage exposing, thigh raising deal. This must be why I really like this dress instead of the usual red carpet fare. I don't know if I would hold it against Raf Simons for doing the unexpected, in fact, I expect him to.

As for the pictures, I must say those two mint outfits are the worst, not only because of the puckering. The blue dress seems alright to me, perhaps because the duchesse satin is folded and tucked into an elaborate big skirt?

The black suit isn't great, too tight at the waist. For the other parts, could it be the lack of stiffness of the satin silk? It does look like there should be a stitch-stiffened lining at the shoulders and lapel, but I wonder if the puffiness is somehow intended, as it doesn't appear to be pick-stitched at the edge, which is unusual for such jackets as that would have flattened the lapel and given it better shape.

But...what about the other 43 elaborate concoctions? Not only the column gowns but the wedding dresses were stunning and impeccably formed.

I don't think the flowers were played up that much this time either, it's mostly about the shapes, lots of interesting shapes, trapeze, voluminous skirts, thankfully constructed *without* panniers, the easy way out, like every Galliano collection.

I've also seen much much worse details from Galliano, one of the reasons why I finally lost respect for his work. I can't find anything more senseless than giant origami birds on a gown, they are seldom seen off the runway either. And don't get me going about Galliano's Dior HC theatrical make-up... they make these sequined red lips look like demure virgins. Can't understand why the clownish exaggerated makeup under Galliano is tolerated, but not these..

I did like early Dior by Galliano, he made it all about strutting divas and sex kittens, the cheeky kind. And he created a lot of theatrics and drama, yet the clothes were fine in their insouciance, though not to my taste. At a certain point, though, it just looked recycled, fatigued and the work went down the hill. That strutting supermodel, transvestite or Pigalle thing just gets tired, and to me, dated, like "Voguing" or JPG's conical bras.

Raf Simons is the diametrical opposite, and I feel closer to the original Monsieur Dior himself, with his strict silhouette and of course YSL's and Marc Bohan's Dior. This is the Dior of my mom's generation, exemplified by their elegant perfumes such as Diorissimo, Miss Dior, etc. He is carefully re-shaping what Dior is about, by hewing close to the original in its elegance. He does have to learn to convey a modern feminity ..fast.

So if sales go up, and I don't think it's a fluke, I think Dior did make a sane choice, and I hope to see Galliano back at his own label, sobered up and delivering a challenge and an alternative for his fanbase.