Designers Switching Houses & Moving to New Brands | Page 56 | the Fashion Spot

Designers Switching Houses & Moving to New Brands

Givenchy was a friend and admirer of Cristóbal Balenciaga...even to a point where the two share designs with each other. So Dior and Givenchy are not similar:



PS: There is more than Audrey Hepburn.
 
^ We all know there's much more than Hepburn here, but for the people working at Givenchy right now, it's been either streetwear galore or overreferencing Hepburn (AKA the traumatizing Arivenchy campaign). There's also the problem of treating Givenchy as a platform to get another, more prestigious job. To me, it's just incredibly sad to see such a great heritage maison being so mismanaged for years.
 
Haider is such an obvious no brainer to me.

I must assume there is a good reason if he isn't picked to replace MW.
From what is said in the scene, Haider has always kind of been a runner as if he wanted to escape the ambition people had for him. In result he turned out many propositions. I feel like him accepting Gaultier and Fila was a kind of signal to say « I’m ready ». Hopefully, Delphine remembers him…

Because for some times, he kinda reminded me of Alaia in the 90’s, who was barely presenting collections but who was at every fashion related events one could imagine (that led to him doing the Vuitton collaboration for example).


givenchy should be the boring ladies who lunch brand. Dior should have always remained shocking exotic french fashion. It was the perfect counter point to Chanel. Now its just as dull as chanel.
Dior is very conservative at heart. That’s why in the very funny way, they sold more clothes once Galliano did the back to basics than when he was doing the J’Adore Dior (they sold clothes too but the reach was more limited even if he made young people buy Dior).

Givenchy never had a clear identity in a way. Fashion like the use words of grandeur to describe his aesthetic because he was an aristocrat but in reality, he became famous for making separates, easy to wear and comfortable clothes. It was very feminine but never radical in a way…

If we want to talk about real shocking exotism in French fashion without using the obvious name of Poiret, I think that Schiaparelli and maybe in the 60’s, Ungaro is a name that comes to my mind. Ungaro who like Givenchy had that connection with Balenciaga but who unlike him, had the pleasure to work for him…

Ungaro in terms of prints, combinations of shapes and colors was real shocking exotic French fashion.



I think for Givenchy, the repertoire is so large that all you need is someone with a real strong POV and maybe that idea that those are clothes that are meant to be worn « in a daily life ».
That’s where Riccardo succeeded and where all his predecessors failed. Beyond the sweaters and prints that came in 2010/2011, Riccardo constructed a real, relatable and timeless wardrobe with from the start, a clear and define understanding of his aesthetic. He limited the color palette and repeated his message season after season before the breakthrough with FW07.


Tbh, Chitose Abe can do Givenchy.
 
Twitter.com
upload_2023-4-13_19-16-26.jpeg

Twitter.com
upload_2023-4-13_19-19-2.jpeg

These are from 1979.

Are we sure Givenchy wasnt ghost-designed by Karl ? These looks are very Karl. Particularly the front left dress in the group shot. Also The gown in the runway shot with the band across the top of the bustier.

I guess that was the language of the time and the references that were circulated for hubert and his contemporaries.

Anyhoo I think we can agree the Givenchy look is not particularly defined and has a lot to pull from.
 
Last edited:
^^
It’s interesting because it’s very conservative but in a funny way @Nimsay if we compare this to what Karl was doing at Chloe at the time, it couldn’t be more different. Karl’s Chloe was very radical…Already: either very structured or super flou!

But again, this has the conservatism of Couture…Very approachable, inoffensive.
 
It’s been crowded at LVMH lately. LV and Dior are doing wonders. Celine is performing really well and so is Loewe. I have nothing concrete but it feels like there’s no space for Givenchy there. They couldn’t care less too.

Now I really think Haider, while perfect on paper will only be another CWK tenure. Today’s consumer won’t appreciate the nuances of Haider’s work. Even Hedi Slimane isn’t likely to pull this off.

Givenchy was a big brand recently and it won’t work as something boutique, people won’t buy it as such. It needs to be big. LVMH should bet on it big. Revamp management, tighten distribution, get someone with a strong pov to come up with striking visuals, strong clothes and good merchandising sensibilities. It’s a huge ask but I don’t know, investing low on Givenchy feels like keeping it on limbo.
 
Givenchy is almost too aristocratic and conservative for its own good. It can't be too radical because it delineates itself further from it "means" but if it leans too far into it's ladylike essence people get frustrated or bored. In terms of an identity, there isn't exactly one besides figures unless we include the Bettina blouse, which only highlights Givenchy's penchant for separates.

It's a tough brand, something I think Tisci even noticed because despite his success there, it took a while before it meshed with both the industry at large and the clients. The idea of a revamp would leave a lot confused because you still have to choose things from the archive to give it that essence of Givenchy, but there's so much to choose from yet very little consistency if that makes sense. With Dior it's the Bar, sense of fullness/excess of fabric, various lines like the H, Y, Oblique, that "lily of the valley"/flower in my garden femininity etc. and Chanel has the suit/tweed, certain cut of pants, pearls/costume jewelry, the camellia, a certain style of LBD etc., so there's always the option of several through-lines that still lets you know "yes that is Dior/Chanel" whereas Givenchy doesn't exactly have that.

Givenchy was a great designer, no denying that, but it always felt that the client dictated his approach rather than going in with a strong POV that clients were interested in. Again, nothing wrong with that but for the sake of longevity when a conglomerate wants to keep the brand going, it puts the creative director in a difficult position.

@Lola701 and @Mutterlein, either Haider or Chitose would be great, especially to see them in a couture setting beyond their Gaultier stints. It is more of a matter of whether or not they want to commit themselves to a design house that seemingly takes a longer while for the brand to warm up to their creative directors as it is obvious that the suits at Givenchy/LVMH are an impatient bunch.

Also Dior has always been very conservative when you start reading between the lines. Despite being able to court a younger clientele, those that really bought Galliano for Dior often edited the hell out of the clothes to fit their ideals. Especially notable when you look at what the couture clients bought. The "exotic" just helped with the excitement and branding especially for the shows, so in a way that was Galliano's approach to the Dior grandeur re: fabric excess/"lily of the valley" dramatics. His earlier collections (my personal favourite of his alongside his time at Givenchy) was very decorous and old money in feeling with enough accessibility to the fantasy for clients to see what they wanted to buy whilst reaching new clientele because it had a newness to it. Then the "exotic"/fantasy got too costumey, so her pared it back, then it got too costumey again so went back to basics, then it happened all over again.

Similar things happened to Raf, but it became too clinical, cold, too far removed so clients got sick of it because it wasn't traditional enough for the main buyers of the clothes. This is why Maria is doing so well, despite many of us (myself included in parts) wanting to deny it.
 
Even if I didn't like some of his collections, I think his tenure was pretty strong. He proved that he's a flexible designer who can easily adjust his vision to the wishes of the board. He's also leaving on a pretty high note, I think his last collection was fantastic. That's why I hope he'll get hired elsewhere as soon as possible.
 
Lanvin, Bruno Sialelli to Part Ways
The French house plans to revamp its creative organization, putting an emphasis on leather goods and accessories, along with a new Lanvin Lab.
By Miles Socha
Bruno Sialelli, creative director of Lanvin, is to part ways with the French house as it adopts a new creative configuration accentuating leather goods and accessories — plus special projects, WWD has learned.

It is understood Lanvin staffers were informed Friday that Sialelli would be leaving the brand after four years in the role, and that the house would establish Lanvin Lab and invite proven and rising international talents for “creative partnerships.”

The first guest talent is to be revealed in the coming weeks. It is understood the “lab” will incubate new ideas and concepts for the house alongside its main product lines.

Lanvin is assembling a creative team and “industrial support” for leather goods and accessories, which today account for more than half of the brand’s global business and are seen as a key driver for future growth.

The leather goods pole and Lanvin Lab are to operate alongside the main ready-to-wear collections for men and women. It is understood the brand will continue doing runway shows during Paris Fashion Week.

“Lanvin is poised for a new chapter,” Siddhartha Shukla, deputy general manager, said in a statement shared exclusively with WWD. “As we reimagine the brand, embracing the values instilled in it by Jeanne Lanvin over 130 years ago, we situate the house at the vanguard of fashion and culture at a time of extraordinary and inspiring change.

“Our model exalts Lanvin’s rich heritage and sophistication in a uniquely modern matrix of creativity,” he added.

Since joining Lanvin from Loewe’s menswear design team in 2019, Sialelli has kept a relatively low media profile, while witnessing a number of changes at the Paris-based fashion house, which last December started life as the flagship brand of a publicly traded company.

Sialleli worked under three different management regimes. He was brought in by then chief executive officer Jean-Philippe Hecquet, spent 15 months under Arnaud Bazin’s leadership, and since the end of 2021 has reported to Shukla, a merchandising and communications pro who had joined Lanvin from Theory, where his last title was chief brand officer.

Since Shukla’s arrival, the brand has undergone a visual reset, with a rejiggered logo and two black-and-white Steven Meisel campaigns — plus a comprehensive reset of its product strategy. Recent collections have hinged on a quieter form of chic linked to its claim to fame as the oldest fashion house in Paris — in line with a wider trend to heritage luxury.

Sialleli’s last collection was for the fall 2023 season, an understated effort focused on elevated everyday dressing, tailoring, chemise dresses and subtle nods to the house’s 1920s heyday.

Earlier in his tenure, Sialleli had pursued buzzy dalliances with Batman and Babar the Elephant on menswear, which skewed more casual during his tenure, and conscripted Paris Hilton to front its women’s campaign.

Besides Loewe, the Frenchman worked at Balenciaga, with Nicolas Ghesquière and Alexander Wang, as well as Acne Studios, where he was the senior designer for womenswear, and Paco Rabanne.

In a statement, Shukla said, “We are grateful to Bruno for his passion and commitment to the house and wish him the best as his creative journey continues.”

Sialelli commented: “I am deeply proud of what we have achieved at Lanvin over the past four years and wish to thank Lanvin and my team who through their unique talents and dedication have accompanied me in this great adventure.”

His next move could not immediately be learned.

Lanvin Group, formerly Fosun Fashion Group, is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and posted a good set of numbers for 2022, lifted by the flagship Lanvin brand, whose revenues jumped 67 percent to 121.3 million euros.

The brand has been drawing in younger customers with leather goods and sneakers, like its fat-laced Curb model.

The house has seen a succession of designers since dismissing its beloved creative director Alber Elbaz in 2015 after an acclaimed 14-year tenure. They included Bouchra Jarrar and Olivier Lapidus.

wwd.com
 
Despite being forced to shift his aesthetic twice, he did well, creatively and commercially at Lanvin. I'm sure that he could get a gig at a more reputable house.
 
he did the best they allowed him to do.

Lanvin is dead. and i highly doubt that this lab idea will work out.
 
I found his tenure really bland, tbh. Yes, he was faced with an impossible task. Yes, he was commercially sound (a bit too much, the online presence of Lanvin is mostly limited to sneakers and the usual logoed tchotchkes).
But who can really say what his Lanvin stood for, really?
Not bad these days means immediately forgettable.
 
Twitter.com
View attachment 1229232

Twitter.com
View attachment 1229233

These are from 1979.

Are we sure Givenchy wasnt ghost-designed by Karl ? These looks are very Karl. Particularly the front left dress in the group shot. Also The gown in the runway shot with the band across the top of the bustier.

I guess that was the language of the time and the references that were circulated for hubert and his contemporaries.

Anyhoo I think we can agree the Givenchy look is not particularly defined and has a lot to pull from.

Givenchy lead the couture boom in the 1980s. That haughty, stuffy, poufy, giant jeweled earring look---that very Dynasty look----was the Givenchy look.
 
Focusing on leathergoods and accessories is a great way to make money. But I'm unsure of this Lab project. It doesn't work with AZ Factory. I just don't understand this start-up culture at all
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
215,399
Messages
15,301,174
Members
89,393
Latest member
hellrazah
Back
Top