Critiquing the collections – Is there a method to the madness?

[Merveille]

Being a graphic designer I usually critique or favor collections with a bold general aesthetic; use of color, print and styling etc. Technicality doesn't fascinate me, I like outer visuals not exclusive to the clothing themselves but the variety and use of models, music, and general "identity" of the collection. Also, with established brands I like to see a clever and interesting take and continuation of the brands identity (another aspect of graphic design).

Also, being a male, I don't look for wear-ability, I look at clothes as if they were something I would hang on my wall (or save and look at for inspiration for my own graphic design).

 

[dior_couture1245]

I agree with what Spike said about knowing what to expect from the respective design houses . I am not going to expect a label like, let's say, Moschino Cheap & Chic to do something ground-breaking like I would at Balenciaga . You cannot expect a house to give something more than it can .

When I look at a collection, everything is important - from the cuts of clothes to something like the lighting . It all let's me understand it better .

I feel similarly.

I tend to find myself responding most strongly to collections that present a very saturated vision. And by that, I mean a collection that, first and foremost, consists of well designed and interesting clothes. But for me, that could be anything...for example, I find both Christopher Kane's vulgar fantasies and Raf Simons' sterile visions of modernity equally fascinating...there is no real set criteria because it's impossible to compare houses. It's really based on initial gut reactions. Nothing else.

But the clothes are not enough. Every detail of the show has to be taken into consideration. I don't believe a designer has any excuse to put on a poor, dull, generic show. Even the most minimal of runway shows can evoke incredible emotional responses (ie, Jil Sander, Calvin Klein, etc). The casting, the lighting, the set layout, the music, etc. all play such an important part because they contextualize the clothes...they offer us the most insight to what the designer is really thinking.

Since the collection is still so firmly on my mind, I'm using the example of Christopher Kane's Fall/Winter 2010 collection. While I adored the clothes at first sight, it wasn't until I saw a video of the collection that I was able to fully appreciate the concept...the haunting and melancholy soundtrack added an integral layer to an already solid collection. Same goes for Jil Sander Fall/Winter 2010. The clothes, as always, were masterfully designed and executed. But it wasn't until I watched the video...saw how the X shaped runway worked, heard the Lara Croft soundtrack...did everything make sense. Had Raf played a different soundtrack and had the models walking down a straight runway, I don't know if I would have "gotten" the collection, really.

So for me, it's about the show...and how every production element enhances what the designer has created.

 

[rosalynn]

The show is very important to me too - I nearly mentioned that in my post, but thought I had waffled on enough, so I'm glad you've gone into detail dior_couture1245 - you've put my thoughts perfectly into words.

 

[Thefrenchy]

First of all, I've to say I don't critique the collections here very often because I lack of fashion knowledge and I'm not really good when it comes to using fashion vocabulary in english Considering that, I'm always interested in reading elaborated critiques; even if I disagree with its author.

Two elements matter for me: 1. The cut, the colour palette, the spirit of the collection and 2. Would I wear that (or would I wear that if I was a woman -- when it's womenswear) ? / Would I use that if I ever had to style someone?

 

[WilhelmF]

Interesting thread. I have always wondered everyone else's criteria for collections, specially those who see beyond of what they "loved" or "hated" in a collection.

I personally like a collection when:
a) You can clearly see the designer had some interest in the constructions of the garments and the quality of them. How perfectionist the designer was at the time of presenting the show.

b) It invites us to look deeper in the whole execution of the show. For example, the inspirations or the ideas behind a collection. How intellectual the collection was. The music choice. The casting. How the show progresses. Functionality, etc.

c) It pushes the envelope. It explores unknown territory. Basically, when designers come out of their comfort zone and start to "experiment" with clothes.

Of course, in these times, it might be hard see all of these in just one collection. Designer's role has become really really demanding. In one hand, they have to present something "new" every season and well in the other hand, they have to think like a businessman, how to keep their business alive. Not everyone is in the mood of experimenting in these times but it is also quite intriguing and inspiring to see those who do that.

 

[loladonna]

It's interesting to me that some place a high emphasis on the runway show itself to rate a collection. I've never cared about the actual show or who the models were-- I can't name most models on the runway. When people are like "I love the dress on Vlada" I'm like "who?". I notice the models only in regard to how the clothes fit them. I focus soley on the clothes for the most part.

I actually prefer presentation style shows where the models are static and there are lots of views and angles of the collection via photographs. I feel like sometimes fancy shows distract people from bad collections. Pro critics come away from a show excited and write a glowing review based on the presentation but when you go back and look at the clothes there's nothing to be crowing about.

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

 

[ultramarine]

Well .. on top of all of this there's the questions are good reviews equating on how good or commercial of how much of a collection will actually sell?

I dont think so .. there are all those fashion reviewers who didnt get a particular collection which ended up making splashes all over the place ... same thing with fashion spotter ,.,, Izzie Blow was spot on but kinda missed ion Herchcovitch ,.,, whom I adore, btw

 

[tigerrouge]

I remember a tutor at University saying to me that you could usually always tell the difference between a heterosexual eye and a homosexual eye. One looks at is as the woman they'd want to stand next to, have on his arm, and the other looks at is as who he'd like to put on a pedestal and worship.

I wonder if they also had a theory about the aesthetics of things designed by gay women, as opposed to the work of straight ones, or maybe that's the point where the expectations of the world combust and the catwalk goes on fire.

Regardless of what direction anyone's genitals are pointing, age is a factor that influences views. In terms of assessing wearability, I'm not going use the same criteria as someone twenty years younger than me - yet both views will be valid.

 

[irulan]

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

I guess that depends on the quality of the designer and the respective collection. A lot of people who are into fashion like the idea of re-invention and something entirely new. Ralph Lauren is no designer whose work I follow, but let's say Christophe Decarnin would decide to wrap his Balmain girl into metres of floaty fabric for the next collection for the house of Balmain. If it was done beautifully, without the usual cheapness, I would embrace it. A true genius (though I doubt that Decarnin has that in him) shows in never-ending creativity.

I'm sure a lot of his fans and customers would miss the golfball shoulders, though.

 

[Chris_Couture05]

On critiquing collections I try to take in the collection before I make my judgment or statment. But there are certian designers that I usually love almost anything they do. Before I post anything I wanna know the full scope of what going on from the clothes to the accesories and the color palette, fit and finish, fabrics, theme and so on. Now even with all of this I still have know as most people do what to expect form certian houses based on there history and client base and design aesthetic.

With collections I do and dont like I try to point out all of these things and how they were represented in the collection. Usually with collections I beleive are very strong I will see most of this a will only point it out to show how good it was but the ones that I did care for, I still think it is necessary to point out these things to show people what you think could have been done better reather than just saying "what a honking load of crap this is". But even with that said I still sometimes will let my first emotion take control and say what I fell about the collection. There are even times when I may not like the collection and yet there are still very nice peices in the collection that I like to point out, case in point Dolce and Gabbana F/W 10.11.

Even with couture collection which I love I try to use the same method, although I am usually tougher on these because of the work that goes into these garments so there is a certian quality that I think everyone and myself included would like to see. I think the use of different and interesting fabrics in HC is something alot of people look for.

Another thing we have to take into account is that each designer has different eye and vision of their client. Valentino's eye is different from Galliano's and he is different from Lagerfeld. Each person has a vision of what they think a woman should dress. I dont think this is completly based on sexual orentation (because I do think that makes a small difference) but also each designers vision of who there woman is, what does she do, where does she live ect... This reminds me of something Dela Renta said "the most important client is the working woman." That is his vision of a woman and his bases for design, and Valentino loved beauty and elegance and this became the bases for his design. So knowing this I think better helps us to not judge each designer based on the works of other houses.

All in all I think each person based on there own personal tastes and knowledge of fashion looks for what they think is acceptable when viewing a collection, and while most of these are opinions and opinions are subjective, there are those who post alot of really good facts and I like seeing that.

 

[softgrey]

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

it's important for any designer to have a VOICE or POINT OF VIEW...
preferably their own unique one, and not just an echo of someone else's...
without this they can never build a loyal customer base (fans are good, but customers are what really count)...
and if they just change suddenly, they risking losing the customers they already have...
so there are practical reasons for developing and defining an aesthetic for the brand...
that is what the brand stands for and what people look for when they shop ...

younger brands who create a totally different look from season to season risk failure if they can't come up with a well defined look within 3-4 shows...

mullet---
really...you can't tell what i am going to say....???
i always think i am very clear on what i like and don't like...

but - i guess it's true...
even if i don't personally like something, i can respect the fact that it might be successful for other reasons...
i guess i am not really 'shopping'...
i am reviewing the products and their viability at market...
it's def a business point of view...

**and i think that most of the professional critics/editors are very well educated on the history of fashion and all it's related topics...
so we see the references, the repeats, and can recognize in an instant if something is truly new and innovative...
that's why everyone seems to agree...

as opposed to someone who is new to fashion and is just in awe of everything because they have never seen any of it before...


**the old saying goes that if the fashion editors leave the show and actually want to wear the clothes- then you KNOW you will have a successful season...because if they like it, EVERYONE will...they are the toughest to impress...

 

[Salvatore]

It's interesting to me that some place a high emphasis on the runway show itself to rate a collection. I've never cared about the actual show or who the models were-- I can't name most models on the runway. When people are like "I love the dress on Vlada" I'm like "who?". I notice the models only in regard to how the clothes fit them. I focus soley on the clothes for the most part.

I actually prefer presentation style shows where the models are static and there are lots of views and angles of the collection via photographs. I feel like sometimes fancy shows distract people from bad collections. Pro critics come away from a show excited and write a glowing review based on the presentation but when you go back and look at the clothes there's nothing to be crowing about.

To those who based their critiques on what they expect from a designer's past work would you "penalize" them for changing their aesthetic? If Ralph Lauren decided to do rock-star urban decay or something would that render his collection a fail even if you liked the clothes? Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

Well yes, I think it is fair to base a collection off of a show because the show is there to link with a personality and to cause some sort of imagination to inspire the buyers . If a designer does not take the time to present the best from them possible, it really says a lot to me . I am not saying it has to be strobe lights and video screens with moving platforms and such, but that the show should be cohesive so that to sell the clothes . Alexander McQueen said something like that he knows his large shows are what inspire his customers to buy something as simple as black pants . Shows are like live commercials to me .

For example, the best collection ever to me was Gucci FW 2003 (both men and women) for the simple fact the shows were built around to sell the clothes . The music, the casting, the lighting, and set all were chosen perfectly and at the end of the day, I said I wanted to be that man that came down the catwalk . Mission accomplished . It's hard to get that from a presentation and without the show, I don't think it would have made that much of an impact as it did . Also, things always look better in motion . At Altuzarra, I had no idea those red dresses at the end flowed like they did and that made me love them . On the contrary, some really do up the spectacle to somewhat hide what we're seeing . In the case of McQueen's (RIP) SS 2010 collection, it was an amazing show, but the clothes were nothing special . But I guess it was enough to seel the black pants .

I have to agree with you that a lot of emphasis is put on the model here which is weird . Many times, however, certain ones do a very good job at selling the entire vision and to show pieces better .

As for the thing about Ralph Lauren, he could do rock-star urban decay or anything outside of the norm from him, as long as at the end of the day it's Ralph Lauren because we know his target customer . If the entire aesthetic is changed, then it's not really Ralph Lauren which is what attracted people in the first place therefore it would be a fail to me .

Like said before, I look at the aesthetic of the house and build off of that .


(I think I just rambled . )

 

[softgrey]

^^no- it was good...

i also def agree with spike..

i sometimes call myself a 'fashion wh*re'...**
as a joke!!!...
just because i am never loyal to any one brand or label...
i like what i like and it really doesn't matter who the designer is...
what matters is the design itself...

 

[dior_couture1245]

It's interesting to me that some place a high emphasis on the runway show itself to rate a collection. I've never cared about the actual show or who the models were-- I can't name most models on the runway. When people are like "I love the dress on Vlada" I'm like "who?". I notice the models only in regard to how the clothes fit them. I focus soley on the clothes for the most part.

I actually prefer presentation style shows where the models are static and there are lots of views and angles of the collection via photographs. I feel like sometimes fancy shows distract people from bad collections. Pro critics come away from a show excited and write a glowing review based on the presentation but when you go back and look at the clothes there's nothing to be crowing about.

I would say that I place so much emphasis on the show in the sense that I find fashion very cinematic. A fashion show is like a movie. You can have an incredible, powerful script, and yet, if the acting, the costuming, the lighting, the music, the setting of the film are sub-par, the movie is not successful, and it's disappointing to see the potential of the script go to waste.

Likewise, you can have an incredible, powerful collection, and if the casting, lighting, setting and music are sub-par, the potential of the collection is not fully realized. Of course, if you were to observe the clothes up close on a rack, they still are beautiful on their own, but a jacket is a jacket. It may be strikingly well made and gorgeous on the hanger, but on the right model, in the right lighting, with the right music...it's so much more than a jacket...it becomes something very special and very memorable.

 

[loladonna]

^Reading the responses I can now see where the thematic shows make sense to sell the clothes to the actual buyers who are present. I guess being a spectator on my computer the runway show isn't as important to me. I'm not going to be tricked by awesome lighting and music into thinking a dress that looks great on a 5"10" 105lb woman is going to flatter me though.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I really never know if I'll like a show beforehand or not. I've come to expect quality from certain designers, but you never quite know.

I care about the show because it gives an idea about the overall aesthetic. The styling, make-up, music...I basically see fashion shows as another form of popular performance art, and as such, the experience is very important in itself.

I began being interested in fashion from the perspective of photography and pop culture, but I'm getting an growing appreciation for the craftsmanship aspect.

 

[DJGroove]

Are designers really pigeon-holed in what they can offer from season-to-season?

Sticking to the aesthetics, having a signature touch...

It's like with film directors or photographers. I don't expect and don't want Tarantino to go all Wes Anderson, and I do want to see Tony Leung in Wong Kar Wai next film.

 

[irulan]

^Reading the responses I can now see where the thematic shows make sense to sell the clothes to the actual buyers who are present. I guess being a spectator on my computer the runway show isn't as important to me. I'm not going to be tricked by awesome lighting and music into thinking a dress that looks great on a 5"10" 105lb woman is going to flatter me though.

Exactly. You automatically think "How's that going to look on me?"
Lighting, styling, music won't matter when you put it on in the shop.

 

[Merveille]

i sometimes call myself a 'fashion wh*re'...**
as a joke!!!...
just because i am never loyal to any one brand or label...
i like what i like and it really doesn't matter who the designer is...
what matters is the design itself...

My thoughts exactly. I don't get the concept of being "loyal" to a particular brand or designer. It could be my favorite designer on Earth but if they release a mess collection I am gonna call it a mess.

 

[dior_couture1245]

Exactly. You automatically think "How's that going to look on me?"
Lighting, styling, music won't matter when you put it on in the shop.

But why shouldn't it matter?

Fashion is a business. Yes. I accept that and I understand that. But I don't see why it shouldn't be important for designers to present their collections in the best way possible.

I find myself wandering into designer boutiques and department stores often...and I when I have the time, I really take my time to examine individual pieces up close. I have yet to come across an item of designer clothing that is shockingly poorly made. Most designer clothing has hanger appeal, some more than others, of course, but on the whole...these pieces sit well on their own...that's why they cost what they do!

The fashion show is what separates one great collection from another.