Unpopular take, but here I go:
After seeing the Dior exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum, I can honestly say the house had become a bit redundant. *GASP*, yes, I said it. Aside from the masterful tailoring, the exquisite fabric, and the mesmerizing dresses that were on display, I found myself wanting a bit more of an edge to be offered. An edge at Dior?- YES!!! After combing through the work of the man himself, Yves, GF, and Bohan, I noticed a real balanced approach that while beautiful, become overly focused on similar shapes, lines, and an overall narrative that failed to embrace both chance and change. Out of the many, many delightful and gorgeous pieces, there was one dress made in scuba that caught the light so perfectly I couldn’t take my eye off it- guess who made it, hint, it was not MB or GF , but rather MGC. And yes, for those who have not seen it, the entire show was full of gems from all eras, yet, in the case of this specific piece, seeing the cut and shine made it stand out amongst the other pieces in the show.
Outside of Galliano’s work, the soul of the house has been missing for quite sometime. The failed attempts to find a creative director that truly pushes the CD legacy into the modern have all but failed in the past, say, 23/24 years since JG departure. And while I find both MB and GF’s work modern, and Raf Simons tenure “ok” (even that wonderfully made documentary could not make that first couture collection special) I constantly found myself wanting an element of freshness has alluded the atelier since MGC’s arrival.
She is most definitely scrutinized for her references as
@LadyJunon pointed out, and rightfully so, though, I often find myself looking forward to her collections for the sole reason of seeing SOMETHING new- whether that be in good or bad taste. How many times must we witness the princess seam being used? Or a “beautiful” floral print, bias cut dress, lady-like gown etc. etc. ettttcccccc. I understand the “BUT ITS DIOR!!!” Argument in its entirety, but must we constantly reflect on the past for respects sake? She has questionable references, a majority of her work is in-cohesive and regressive, but I can appreciate and love when someone goes out on an edge and challenges pre-conceived notions.
For this collection, were those stamped prints super tacky? Yes of course. Does she rely on tulle too much?Again I would agree. However, we have never seen a side of Dior that actually embraces the street and comprehends what it means to be a woman that lives a life outside of a socialite status. Again, I am in no way, shape, or form claiming to be a fan or her work overall, but as I mentioned previously, there is something refreshing about someone who explores an alternative route. If that means she fails, than so be it- though the way she is selling proves otherwise-though in the meantime it is both exciting and nerve wrecking to witness the house’s current state.
In short- I am intrigued.
