Christian Dior S/S 2024 Paris

[jeanclaude]

Mary Grace is like a mixture between "King Midas" and "The sleeping beauty".

Everything she touches turns into gold; and everything she makes has a powerful barbituric effect too.

 

[yslforever]

For example: Saint Laurent constantly references the founder's hypersexuality, but without the gross fetishisation of (probably underage) Arab boys.

That’s a gratuitous statement; I have seen my fair share (probably hundreds, close to a thousand) of Yves erotic drawings and I can assure you not one model looks underage, they’re all very manly, hunky, hairy and with disproportionate male appendices. Some of the models are still alive btw. The p*rn*gr*ph*c sketches (yes there are erotic ones and also really explicit ones) are straight from a Tom of Finland scenario.

Back to the Dior collection, the more I look at it, the more I find similarities with Yamamoto. It’s less obvious than the Prada issue of the last collection, but I can see a direct diluted inspiration in many pieces. Am I the only one ?

 

[LadyJunon]

That’s a gratuitous statement; I have seen my fair share (probably hundreds, close to a thousand) of Yves erotic drawings and I can assure you not one model looks underage, they’re all very manly, hunky, hairy and with disproportionate male appendices. Some of the models are still alive btw. The p*rn*gr*ph*c sketches (yes there are erotic ones and also really explicit ones) are straight from a Tom of Finland scenario.

I found this out yesterday on Saint Laurent's Thread (page 3, post 45). Maybe, he wasn't aware of the content of the film, but he's credited as a sponsor.

Back to the Dior collection, the more I look at it, the more I find similarities with Yamamoto. It’s less obvious than the Prada issue of the last collection, but I can see a direct diluted inspiration in many pieces. Am I the only one ?

I can see subtle undertones of Demeulemeester and Neo-Theyskens in this collection too. Maybe it's the white shirting with black everything else.

 

[Constructionist]

Unless my eyes are deceiving me, it seems like the models had some kind of smudged top lip lipstick look, which I guess represents some sort of warrior feminism?

I think the collection however isn't bad, however this is Dior.
If this was an upcoming designer, it would pass, but a veteran at Dior should not be making barely passable looks.

Are there no standards in fashion anymore?

 

[Deleted member 1957]

The set is overly cluttered which turned me off the clothes but going by the reviews here maybe I should have a second look or try and find backstage shots.

 

[Frederic01]

Why does she continue to espouse nonsense like this? It is so annoying and ridiculous.

“When I look at the images of Mr Dior’s work, I remind myself that they were done probably with a male gaze.

Maria Grazia has to be the only designer working today at such an important brand to really struggle with the founders ideas and aesthetics, and to vocalise it so much. Every year we hear from her some kind of negativity about Christian Dior and how his clothes were so restrictive and terrible and not socially progressive enough.

And I have to ask why? If you start your design process from a place of reaction instead of a place of inspiration and joy, then why you designing for the Maison at all? I'm starting to think she has some kind of intense hatred for Dior at this point because seriously, when did you hear any other designer speaking so negatively about the founder of the house they are working for?

When did Raf Simons or Kim Jones or Hedi Slimane or Kris van Assche or John Galliano talk down and try to diminish what Monsieur Dior created? Not once. They respected the house they designed for.

What's more, I didn't hear this kind of rhetoric coming from Chiuri when she was at Valentino. She was perfectly fine making beautiful and interesting clothes there, and doing so without trashing the founders legacy so brazenly.

 

[ACastleOnACloud]

^ Oh, yes. I've noticed this, too. You have the people working in Chanel avoiding all the time skeletons in Coco's closet and in a way, idealizing her, (which I understand, I mean, both from a PR point of view and also because you can love someone's work and legacy without engaging in the most problematic parts of their life) and then you have Maria Grazia talking that way about Christian Dior, which to be honest, I've always got the idea that he loved women so, so much. I think he understood his work as a celebration of femininity.

Was his work for women socially progressive enough or whatever? That's up for debate but by vocalizing it so much, it does indeed feel that she comes from a place of reaction instead of a place of inspiration.

Why can't she even express it in a middle ground kind of way? Like "Christian Dior's work was very beautiful. Times have changed and I have to be inspired by his beautiful work to design for the woman of today".

I might not like that much Harris Reed's work for Nina Ricci (another Fashion House whose history is about the idea of femininity), but I like how he talks in interviews about how femininity has changed without trashing the House's past.

 

[Lola701]

^ Oh, yes. I've noticed this, too. You have the people working in Chanel avoiding all the time skeletons in Coco's closet and in a way, idealizing her, (which I understand, I mean, both from a PR point of view and also because you can love someone's work and legacy without engaging in the most problematic parts of their life)

Karl was very vocal in his dislike of Chanel, for her personality mainly and he always said how he admired the early days Chanel but from a more pragmatic POV, Chanel’s nazi connections had a lot to do with her trying to get back at Pierre and Paul Weirthemer, owner at the time and grandparents of Alain and Gerard Weirthemer who still owns the brand and who are Jewish.

‘It has to be a very mind blowing to be the owner of a brand which has the creator, iconic figure who wanted to get rid of your family and then have all this unwanted pressure to be vocal about it.

A Jewish family owner of the brand of a Nazi sympathizer is really a challenging subject itself.

I’m sure the family history is already one of the reason why the Weirthemers aren’t based in France.

 

[LadyJunon]

Why does she continue to espouse nonsense like this? It is so annoying and ridiculous.

Maria Grazia has to be the only designer working today at such an important brand to really struggle with the founders ideas and aesthetics, and to vocalise it so much. Every year we hear from her some kind of negativity about Christian Dior and how his clothes were so restrictive and terrible and not socially progressive enough.

And I have to ask why? If you start your design process from a place of reaction instead of a place of inspiration and joy, then why you designing for the Maison at all? I'm starting to think she has some kind of intense hatred for Dior at this point because seriously, when did you hear any other designer speaking so negatively about the founder of the house they are working for?

When did Raf Simons or Kim Jones or Hedi Slimane or Kris van Assche or John Galliano talk down and try to diminish what Monsieur Dior created? Not once. They respected the house they designed for.

What's more, I didn't hear this kind of rhetoric coming from Chiuri when she was at Valentino. She was perfectly fine making beautiful and interesting clothes there, and doing so without trashing the founders legacy so brazenly.

^ Oh, yes. I've noticed this, too. You have the people working in Chanel avoiding all the time skeletons in Coco's closet and in a way, idealizing her, (which I understand, I mean, both from a PR point of view and also because you can love someone's work and legacy without engaging in the most problematic parts of their life) and then you have Maria Grazia talking that way about Christian Dior, which to be honest, I've always got the idea that he loved women so, so much. I think he understood his work as a celebration of femininity.

Was his work for women socially progressive enough or whatever? That's up for debate but by vocalizing it so much, it does indeed feel that she comes from a place of reaction instead of a place of inspiration.

Why can't she even express it in a middle ground kind of way? Like "Christian Dior's work was very beautiful. Times have changed and I have to be inspired by his beautiful work to design for the woman of today".

I might not like that much Harris Reed's work for Nina Ricci (another Fashion House whose history is about the idea of femininity), but I like how he talks in interviews about how femininity has changed without trashing the House's past.

Part of me thinks that it's because of the situation MGC grew up in. She was grew in 1960s/70s South Italy, which means that she has lived through the second wave of feminism, which in Italy concerned marital laws, women's labour laws and reproductive rights. While the Dior woman was more socialite than housewife, the silhouette he created (fitted bodice, narrow waist, voluminous skirt) became the archetypal uniform for the 50s housewife (represented in the imagery in the set design).

MGC obviously has disdain for that archetype and therefore actively denounces and works against it. Pietro Beccari (who saw how commercially successful those first set of collections were) and Rachele Regini (her daughter who has a PHD in Gender Studies) probably pushed her further down that hole.

Ironically, lots of women in the "CosTube" community actually like that 40s/50s silhouette, because it's one of the few modern styles that doesn't actively working against feminine curves (unlike the more androgynous 60s and 90s/00s).

 

[ACastleOnACloud]

Karl was very vocal in his dislike of Chanel, for her personality mainly and he always said how he admired the early days Chanel.

Yes, I think I might have unintentionally overlooked this because both Coco and Karl were very unfiltered and brutally honest so it kinda felt like fair play when he was very vocal about her, while you have this idea of Christian being such a shy and kind man and then here's Maria Grazia being so critical time and time again, and I'm like "omg, leave him alone".

 

[Cocteau Stone]

In many ways, Maria needs to be careful about what she says re: Dior and its heritage.

She comes across as really contradictory. She expresses some disdain to Dior's image of hyper femininity, glamourous excess and it's punchiness with silhouette in way that a third wave feminist might look at it. But does she realise that her approach makes her idea of the Dior "woman" (more like girl in most cases) to be bit of a wallflower? Most of the designs the clients look for are often the "prettiest" and lightest of the lot, or they go for a deep dive in the archives where the designs chosen are the antithesis of her mantras.

There's almost a spinelessness and no true conviction to her ideals that doesn't seem that kind to other expressions of femininity all because it doesn't fit her scope. The lack of kindness and appreciation of other forms of it makes her seem more insular than she really is in her judgment of character.

She needs to realise her preaching is rather empty. Dior isn't the place for it, and it comes across that after all these years here she still has little idea as to what her clientele actually is like particularly in this day and age. Maria also needs to understand that in many ways, she's become the thing she hates. Like why are you here if this is how you feel about it?

 

[LadyJunon]

In many ways, Maria needs to be careful about what she says re: Dior and its heritage.

She comes across as really contradictory. She expresses some disdain to Dior's image of hyper femininity, glamourous excess and it's punchiness with silhouette in way that a third wave feminist might look at it. But does she realise that her approach makes her idea of the Dior "woman" (more like girl in most cases) to be bit of a wallflower? Most of the designs the clients look for are often the "prettiest" and lightest of the lot, or they go for a deep dive in the archives where the designs chosen are the antithesis of her mantras.

There's almost a spinelessness and no true conviction to her ideals that doesn't seem that kind to other expressions of femininity all because it doesn't fit her scope. The lack of kindness and appreciation of other forms of it makes her seem more insular than she really is in her judgment of character.

She needs to realise her preaching is rather empty. Dior isn't the place for it, and it comes across that after all these years here she still has little idea as to what her clientele actually is like particularly in this day and age. Maria also needs to understand that in many ways, she's become the thing she hates. Like why are you here if this is how you feel about it?

The irony of Maria's tenure is that when I see her Couture dresses off the runway, they almost always have the same alterations done to them. The waistline is often dropped down to the wearer's natural waist and a inner corset seems to be added to the bodice to give shape and I seldom see her more rectangular designs on actual people.

As for her ready-to-wear, I never see it beyond the runway. The only times I've seen it is in the shop windows and on show invitées. I imagine that MGC's tenure is almost exclusively supported by bags.

 

[Kimihiro]

Dior is an ideal, a dream of femininity.

The irony of Maria's tenure is that when I see her Couture dresses off the runway, they almost always have the same alterations done to them. The waistline is often dropped down to the wearer's natural waist and a inner corset seems to be added to the bodice to give shape and I seldom see her more rectangular designs on actual people.

As for her ready-to-wear, I never see it beyond the runway. The only times I've seen it is in the shop windows and on show invitées. I imagine that MGC's tenure is almost exclusively supported by bags.

Idk there but I’m from Asia and it’s everywhere it can be.

 

[Nimsay]

Maria is not anyone to question Thee Christian Dior.


Thats what has upset me throughout her tenure- like we didnt ask for you Maria. We can dress like Italian Matrons without you Maria.

youre only here because John had his Hitler-Gate. If it wasnt for that youd still be tailoring Cotillion dresses somewhere in Italy.

 

[MulletProof]

Anyone is more than okay to question "the" Christian Dior. It's capitalism, and he wasn't doing charity work and handing out s*it for free, he was operating for profit so he, and anyone who goes through the trouble of trying to sell you a product, is not above criticism or questions. Someone who's spent time working in the company he founded is more than qualified to question his legacy, the way he worked, and the sociopolitical context that informed his creativity. From a purely historical point of view, it is educational to revisit those years and see the impact in his work. I do think that much likeACastleOnACloud says, there should be a middle ground, you don't want to come off as lacking gratitude, or worse, lacking the sense of humor to see your own complicity in whatever legacy you deem detrimental, and lacking of course the modesty to not see a company will always be bigger than an individual, no one really IS a company, not of this magnitude, so you probably do want to avoid having a rude awakening later and acknowledge your own size and humble contribution with the full awareness that at some point the company will move on from you, carry on just fine and most likely throw away what you think you're changing for the better, and smoothly bring back what you exposed as bad.

What's the source of that quote, @Frederic01 ?

Bottom line is that she's not in the 'girl's girl' category, you can just tell that from a mile away as a woman, that's the only thing that, to me, is problematic with her super loud take on feminism. And in general her clothes are nice and harmless, but boring, and do not merit a show in a 'design week', let alone 85723 shows in 12 months in every far away location you can think of..

 

[Frederic01]

^^^^ @MulletProof !


ANDERSCHRISTIANMADSEN