Controversial Opinions on Fashion

[Drusilla_]

Also the current EIC at i-D Magazine (Alastair McKimm) killed the magazine. If he's not using a celeb for the cover its the same 5 models every time (Bella, Anok, Mica, Rianne and that buzz cut chick), which im so bored and uninspired by like how did i-D go from being one of the best magazines out there to this current state of lackluster, unimaginative, dull *** covers?? I also have a bone to pick with their "activists" they hired as interns the whole magazine needs a clean up take everyone OUT.

it was one of the most exciting magazines to pick up in the 00s, it was THE magazine of the later 00s for me, but post-Vice takeover, which happened years before Alastair McKimm became the EIC, it just lost that zing.

Website where any and every pedestrian celebrity is declared 'iconic' for their fashion (I get it for Karen O but like....Alex Turner? Jennifer Love Hewitt? seriously?), cutting down from monthly in the 00s to seasonal, just seeming like they're desperately chasing relevance and trying to convince the Tiktok generation they're cool and not like other magazines (when they are, right down to the predatory male senior staff).

at least they still have show coverage though. I'm a bit worried about a future where the only online source of archive fashion show pictures/coverage will end up being Vogue and they charge you to look at it (as they already are). Even i-D doesn't have full slideshows anymore.

 

[gallianostan]

^agreed that Galliano deserves his namesake label back, also I'm done with people slating him for the anti-Semitic rant from 2011 when he's the only fashion person to have shown actual remorse over his behaviour.

 

[Drusilla_]

^I will correct that statement - I think it's fair to criticise him for the anti-Semitism, it's bad and people are entitled to feel however they feel about what he said and I don't mean to make light of it at all, but I also think that he's shown genuine remorse and regret for it, and in light of that, I think people acting like he shouldn't have had a career afterwards, are wrong.

He's certainly been far more genuine in his apology/efforts to make amends than any of the big names caught being anti-Semitic (including the very recent), racist or sexually harassing people on the job etc etc.

 

[tigerrouge]

Speaking generally -

It's always worth considering that sometimes, a big name will be removed from their position via a scandal, not because anyone in the industry really cares about the issue, but because people in the background were looking for ways to get rid of them, for reasons relating to their own self-interest, and a situation ensues.

Look at how many people in all types of industries are allowed to get away with years - if not decades - of bad behaviour that everyone knows about but does little to prevent, if they're in a position to do so. Then suddenly, that person is gone. The offender had people around them who benefitted from the person's presence and ensured their 'safety' and status as untouchable, but when those people develop reasons to change their minds, the safety net is pulled away, and the person is thrown to the wolves. Superficially, the world sees a scandal, but underneath, it was people pulling strings to benefit themselves, knowing the public won't look too far into it, because a scandal is a tasty thing to consume, while business connections are too boring and complicated to follow.

 

[Lola701]

Alexander Wang's tenure at Balenciaga was amazing and Demna could never be fab like he was!

Simply because I never thought I would ever read it in my life, this is rather controversial.

 

[gallianostan]

Alexander Wang's tenure at Balenciaga was amazing

 

[Drusilla_]

Speaking generally -

It's always worth considering that sometimes, a big name will be removed from their position via a scandal, not because anyone in the industry really cares about the issue, but because people in the background were looking for ways to get rid of them, for reasons relating to their own self-interest, and a situation ensues.

Look at how many people in all types of industries are allowed to get away with years - if not decades - of bad behaviour that everyone knows about but does little to prevent, if they're in a position to do so. Then suddenly, that person is gone. The offender had people around them who benefitted from the person's presence and ensured their 'safety' and status as untouchable, but when those people develop reasons to change their minds, the safety net is pulled away, and the person is thrown to the wolves. Superficially, the world sees a scandal, but underneath, it was people pulling strings to benefit themselves, knowing the public won't look too far into it, because a scandal is a tasty thing to consume, while business connections are too boring and complicated to follow.

yeah I agree with that, and it's true in John's case too, the forum had been complaining for a couple of years that he was getting repetitive and Dior shows were at the point of caricature, also the drug/alcohol problems had begun to take a toll. The scandal was the easy 'out' for LVMH to remove him, but it certainly wasn't the only factor in consideration.

I'll shoot with another controversial opinion - I actually like Sarah Burton's McQueen. It's kept to the McQueen DNA - dramatic looks, tailoring, never going to be a 'normcore' label - but I like the gentler direction it's taken under her, and I think people are mainly just not over Lee (understandable considering his sudden and tragic death btw, even I'm not quite over it and it's been 12 years) and a bit unwilling to forgive her for not being him.

and another - I don't think Raf and Dior were a good fit. I very much preferred his CK (and even his co-designed Prada) to his Dior.

 

[LadyJunon]

yeah I agree with that, and it's true in John's case too, the forum had been complaining for a couple of years that he was getting repetitive and Dior shows were at the point of caricature, also the drug/alcohol problems had begun to take a toll. The scandal was the easy 'out' for LVMH to remove him, but it certainly wasn't the only factor in consideration.

I'll shoot with another controversial opinion - I actually like Sarah Burton's McQueen. It's kept to the McQueen DNA - dramatic looks, tailoring, never going to be a 'normcore' label - but I like the gentler direction it's taken under her, and I think people are mainly just not over Lee (understandable considering his sudden and tragic death btw, even I'm not quite over it and it's been 12 years) and a bit unwilling to forgive her for not being him.

and another - I don't think Raf and Dior were a good fit. I very much preferred his CK (and even his co-designed Prada) to his Dior.

In all honesty, I'm don't really care about John being fired from Dior, but I hate them for firing him from his own label. I'm happy he's back, but I don't care for his rendition of Margiela, which I feel is more suitable for an intellectual designer like Raf or Demna. I would have preferred him to go to Schiaparelli where he and his camp could've thrived without the need to resort to 50s couture clichés.

I agree with you that Burton is doing a good job with McQueen to the I feel that she is still the most qualified designer for the house (other than Lee himself). It may lack the dark, febrile tones and the showmanship of Lee's days, but it retains the softness, the romanticism, the sensuality and the high level craftsmanship that is often forgotten and ignored by today's "avant-garde".

While I understand why his cold modernist take doesn't resonate with Dior fans, I do believe that it was a step Dior had to take to liberate itself from the ghost of Galliano. I liked Raf's Calvin Klein too, I do believe that it was doomed from the start. The "Collection" line was already starting to suffer since Calvin Klein was known more for sagging underwear than the high fashion it started with. On top of that, it's hard to sell and market untraditional aesthetics to American audiences (compare American designers in who show in Milan/Paris to those who show in New York). I like his Prada too, but I think he and Miuccia need a stronger design director if they're aiming for longevity.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ LOL God— Raf’s overwrought intellectualism has came off so forced, so desperate, so burdened, so compensating (and forever immortalized in Dior and I— in a bad way., that I’m sure he wouldn’t think so)… and Demna is very much student-level when he’s on intellectual-mode (LOL @ his current "intellectual" stunt to provoke discussion). Both are best when they’re not trying so hard to prove their intellect and simply design fashion (much like Hussein Chalayan back in the day.).

Frankly, Galliano’s approach to the intellectual/academic/conceptual had always been so much more effortless; At his best, he is so much more layered, nuanced, with a wicked sense of intellect that’s so playfully, slyly and masterfully veiled behind his much more approachable and epic romanticism. Very few designers possess that balance, that layered sensibility, that richness of the intelligence, the conceptual and the theatrical as Galliano at his very best; only Gaultier and McQueen the man also possessed such talent. They were/are the triple threat of fashion visionaries. Those of us that were privileged enough to have grown up and come to age alongside their reigns, no doubt to some degree, retain an unwavering high standard of creative vision. Even if you weren’t a fan or a customer of theirs— you admired their talent, nonetheless. You see their impressions in that next generation of Greats: Olivier Theyskens, Riccardo Tisci, and Nicolas Ghesquiere.

 

[gallianostan]

Very few designers possess that balance, that layered sensibility, that richness of the intelligence, the conceptual and the theatrical as Galliano at his very best; only Gaultier and McQueen the man also possessed such talent. They were/are the triple threat of fashion visionaries. Those of us that were privileged enough to have grown up and come to age alongside their reigns, no doubt to some degree, retain an unwavering high standard of creative vision. Even if you weren’t a fan or a customer of theirs— you admired their talent, nonetheless.

ugh this made me so sad. though i doubt it'll happen, i hope we do get to see truly great designers like them again.

 

[Avonlea]

I want Testino to come back. His work on instagram is phenomenal.

Maybe I am desensitized but the whole Balenciaga controversy didn't make any impression on me.

Mcqueen was at his best in 90s. After that his collections got costumey. Platos Atlantis looked like a bad fashion student's project.

With less and less people buying print, monthly publications make no sense. I would much rather have 2 thick and well curated issues
instead of 10 rushed pamphlets.

I loved Raf's Dior.

 

[gallianostan]

Mcqueen was at his best in 90s. After that his collections got costumey. Platos Atlantis looked like a bad fashion student's project.

i've always maintained that ss2001 was his creative peak while at his own label. simply sublime. the only other collection he did on that same level is probably givenchy hc ss1998.

 

[LadyJunon]

Mcqueen was at his best in 90s. After that his collections got costumey. Platos Atlantis looked like a bad fashion student's project.

I agree.

I only really noticed a permanent shift to that Galliano/Victorian look from Spring'05 onwards. The most frustrating thing is that the press were celebrating that his work becoming more commercial, while at the time criticising him for "not advancing the conversation of fashion".

It's a bit of a shame, because I loved how forward-facing and apologetically cold and sharp his clothes could look at times.

 

[Drusilla_]

Very few designers possess that balance, that layered sensibility, that richness of the intelligence, the conceptual and the theatrical as Galliano at his very best; only Gaultier and McQueen the man also possessed such talent. They were/are the triple threat of fashion visionaries. Those of us that were privileged enough to have grown up and come to age alongside their reigns, no doubt to some degree, retain an unwavering high standard of creative vision. Even if you weren’t a fan or a customer of theirs— you admired their talent, nonetheless. You see their impressions in that next generation of Greats: Olivier Theyskens, Riccardo Tisci, and Nicolas Ghesquiere.

I can't help but agree with this - those of us who grew up/came of age with peak Gaultier/Galliano/McQueen and then Ghesquiere/Theyskens/Tisci, do tend to be a bit spoilt when it comes to the standards by which we judge collections, because they are just that high both in creativity and technical ability. Whatever present-day designer gets pushed as the next It thing/their successor, the comparison hardly ever holds up.

On another note - new-Gucci was the big success story of the mid-late 10s, and I enjoyed it, but it totally felt like Meadham Kirchhoff with less technical/pattern innovation. If MK had actually lasted into the latter half of the decade, the comparison would be more obvious.

 

[gallianostan]

i really, really did not like mugler (80s and 90s mugler) at all, and the renewed interest in the brand's archives, especially among younger faSHUN enthusiasts and the twitter/tiktok generation, makes my skin crawl.

 

[Beun]

I hate logos and monograms. They are tacky, ugly and are only relevant if you want to flaunt your buying power, or if you are a lazy designer who wants to hide her/his absence of talent, taste and ability to construct interesting garments.

 

[Drusilla_]

i really, really did not like mugler (80s and 90s mugler) at all, and the renewed interest in the brand's archives, especially among younger faSHUN enthusiasts and the twitter/tiktok generation, makes my skin crawl.

that particular vision of women from the 80s/early 90s (the Mugler/Claude Montana type) has never been my cup of tea, I understand its place in the era and its appeal to some/influence on later designs but for me it's a no thank you.

The tiktok kids can have Mugler, as long as they don't twig to the existence of certain other designers from the era and end up sending vintage prices for those sky-high too e.g. Gigli, the way it did with vintage Vivienne Westwood and Gaultier pieces (which were never cheap to begin with!).

 

[Lola701]

i really, really did not like mugler (80s and 90s mugler) at all, and the renewed interest in the brand's archives, especially among younger faSHUN enthusiasts and the twitter/tiktok generation, makes my skin crawl.

It’s funny, I almost share the same sentiment about Mugler. I appreciate the genius, the quality of his clothes and the forward thinking approach of his fashion but I’ve never been a fan of his aesthetic and the same for Montana. For me, the 80’s are Alaia, Chanel by Karl, Gaultier and Gianni. The 90’s are a little bit different too…
It’s the same with Lacroix. I can appreciate the genius and the beauty behind it but it wasn’t my thing…

But I think it’s interesting to see how the younger generation framed their entire vision of a designer’s work on some specific collections that aren’t necessarily specific of their aesthetic. And that’s maybe based on the same clips they were exposed to on IG. We see it lately with Gaultier. In his vast repertoire, except for the corsets it seems like people really focus today on his prints on Lycra.

 

[LadyJunon]

It’s funny, I almost share the same sentiment about Mugler. I appreciate the genius, the quality of his clothes and the forward thinking approach of his fashion but I’ve never been a fan of his aesthetic and the same for Montana. For me, the 80’s are Alaia, Chanel by Karl, Gaultier and Gianni. The 90’s are a little bit different too…
It’s the same with Lacroix. I can appreciate the genius and the beauty behind it but it wasn’t my thing…

But I think it’s interesting to see how the younger generation framed their entire vision of a designer’s work on some specific collections that aren’t necessarily specific of their aesthetic. And that’s maybe based on the same clips they were exposed to on IG. We see it lately with Gaultier. In his vast repertoire, except for the corsets it seems like people really focus today on his prints on Lycra.

GenZ's approach to vintage designer only seem to acknowledge that extremely simple and approachable. That's why their only acknowledgement of John Galliano is slip dresses and why Vivienne Westwood is just a choker to them.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Replace “simple’ and “approachable” with basic and accessible. When the fashion education/reference and inspiration/aspiration of an entire generation is conveniently contained and easily digested by apps and SM, rather than doing the countless hours of dedicated blood/sweat/tears of researching in books, vintage publications, thrift stores, schools, museums etc, the output is going to be predictably just a tad shallow. and utterly disposable. And when those frames of references are literally framed within the dimensions of their iPhone, only the most basic of shapes stand out. Thus the popularity of the most primary of designs and shapes, bright colors and exaggerated of proportions: Very Mugler.

Mugler was always a better, stronger, powerful costume designer than a RTW designer. And that the best of his designs are pure pop art kitsch that was a reflection of the very shimmering plastic, loudly colorful and ultimately camp drag era of his reign, makes perfect sense why this generation of influencers and its followers would so predictably be attracted to his aesthetic: It’s very Pop, very faSHON 101. Take away the Vegas showgirl costumes (many were very exquisitely executed, to be fair), the Warhol color-palette, the drag pageant circus, and the RTW is just a lot of very plain geometric shapes in basic bright colors— which is very much the sensibility of this fashion generation. (Those lapel-less suitings with the huge shoulders in bright primary colors were always the ugliest designs— but they absolutely stand out when you’re desperately seeking followers to be a faSHON influencers on Insta.)