^ Instead of whipping something up every season quickly (which is where most of the very well-known young designers are going) I'd like to see young minds in apparel design focus on making each garment special.
...and ask why we feel the way we feel in certain things...and not forget traditional dress-making techniques and their amazing quality.
A garment is usually testament to just how passionate a designer is about their craft, y'know?
Too many useless clothes.
Pastry, thanks for your thoughtful reply and this post.
Sorry I have missed this thread, and I am very much in agreement with you here.
I've also considered Muxu's point that, that these hip new yountg designers did spend time on the collections, especially with legions of interns and passionate fashion students. However, spending time working on a collection and spending time developing themselves are two diffferent things.
I have no idea how long Margiela, CdG, Chalayan, etc. take to get to where they are, but even from the early days, there are distinct differences from the Kanes, Rodartes and Marios of today. The greats are talented and accomplished in a LARGE repertoire of skills in fashion - concept development, design, tailoring, cut, construction, details, decoration, techniques, textures, prints, colour, etc. In other words, they are well-rounded, are in possession of a huge pool of creative talent and a variety of skills to draw on to develop the concept and evolution of each collection. This is why every collection is an eye-opener, and they always pioneer a direction that others play catch-up on. Some are of course more specialized, eg. Yohji and Rick Owens for mind-boggling tailoring and cut, Dries v Noten for prints, materials, textures, colours, but they are outstanding in their niche and they become pioneers in their signature work.
The meteoric rise of the younger designers these days is based on a kind of a craze for one or two of their particular design collections, eg. the crazy embellishment of a Kane dress or the artsy print of a Basso & Brooke, and a lot of media hype. Kane can design a new type of decoration on a dress, eg. Art Deco latticework this time, and perhaps patchwork textures next, on the same body-hugging dress, but he can't invent a new type of dress. Or a new coat or trousers. He can't cut or tailor.
I see the same limitation with the Rodarte sisters. Someone posted some earlier works, a flouncy dress, a pant suit, a long dress, etc. to "prove" they have "range", but that misses the point. Any student can cook up a flouncy dress, a men's shirt, etc. The question is whether they have delivered other startlingly good collections with a different approach than this collage method, demonstrating their talent in invention of forms, shapes, and other areas, and they haven't.
I collected vintage pieces of the greats - every piece is a work of art, not because they're shouting "look at me" but they have an intrinsic quality that makes them fascinating and special even years on.
It may be unfair to pile on the young designers for their success in the popular media, but there's got to be some realistic perspective on their work - otherwise, they may not progress from here and other equally deserving unknown designers (and there are many out there) are starved of attention and oppprtunity.
I'm sure the next CdG is out there, sadly, we haven't found her.
