Do you think fashion critics write something real instead of compliments?

[ched]

That's what I keep asking, but maybe I'm not a very good sales person.

 

[modela]

A review nowadays is nothing but an overview of a show .

 

[Toccata]

Here's the first review for American Vogue, 1912. THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE!

oldmagazinearticles.com

 

[jmrmartinho]

im in love with this thead....my prblem is not they being to nice, my problem is that basicly they say nothing. Theres no point of view, theres just a description of the colection (i have my eyes, i dont need someone to describe me it) and small coments about the colections that are just nothing.
I used to read Style.com reviews but im kind of bored by that reason....most of the times i dont get if they liked or not the colection....i just feel the same about it

 

[AD122915]

I feel like Style.com/Vogue automatically praises certain labels no matter what, such as Balenciaga, Lanvin and Prada. For the past 6 years they've done nothing but marvel about the collections and list them as their personal favorite collections of the season.

AMEN!
even when you look at the style.com's top 10 of the season, you are just left speechless with your jaw dropped asking yourself whether they are serious....

I cannot remember reading anything negative in the reviews at style.com. But then it's an American site so you have to read between the lines

It would be nice to see a very informed description of why a collection does not work.

the 2 reviews that really touched me (in a bad way) was Gucci FW09 and Dior HC FW11 reviews by - of course - Tim Blanks. First, he says Gucci is very commercial... too commercial for a house of that name and that "her commercial style makes a crowd of critics mentally drum its fingers with impatience" (source: style.com)... and then he goes on and on about Dior HC FW11... of course, that collection was not Galliano, everybody saw that, but Dior has been becoming very commercial since 2007.... it basically built its own HC clientele (as well as RTW) that would get their desired outfits designed and made in the atelier and decided to reduce the quality of the show (imo by decreasing the costs of the show), especially after the 2007 crisis. So my way to explain the HC FW11 controversy is that it didnt matter to Dior what collection they will present... they have their own stable clientele that will get their garments designed by their individual wishes and basically decided to produce D-rated couture show, with the cheap runway, soundtrack, make-up and hair.. and simple clothes... i even remember reading how they were bragging that everybody went home early day before the show cuz everything was done (as if it was something to be proud of)... Yes, economically it works... but HC is not supposed to be economical thing... they forgot the main essence of haute couture - art... the glory of old heydays of couture.. the pinnacle of fashion... not to produce something uninspiring cheaply and fast, the customers will come anyway.... it will not ruin Dior... but it will ruin Haute Couture... the only treasure left of old days.... and then comes Tim criticizing Gucci for being uber-commercial and then posting that 'review' on Dior... it only shows he gives certain positive/negative reviews based on the brands name, not the collection itself...

*sidenote: I CAN remember negative stuff on style.com, especially by Sarah Mower, whose reviews either send me to sleep or just leave me perplexed by her laziness and poor research.

good eye

dont you think tim blank's videos are boring enough? everyone is saying bravo, beautiful collection, fantastic, gorgeous, nice, amazing...blah blah blah.

i really preferred when style.com used Ftv first looks on their site... it briefly covered everything.. backstage, hair styles described by hair artist, make-up explained and done by make-up artist (u were told what and why), then you had the most reminiscent outfits of the show described by the DESIGNER (not sum empty words of Tim Blanks), models opinions, celebrities attending and their opinions as well as some fashion critics... i felt like it in 4-8 minutes captured the entire event from many angles and you had a good idea what it FELT to be there.... Tim was not contributing to the society at all... then in 2007 came those Tim Blanks reviews -.- 2-3 minutes about Tim Blanks liking the collection and talking to important people... so humble yet not-saying-anything-important... now Tim Blanks contributes to the society even less....

now, the only thing i dont like about those First Look videos is that from time to time they feature completely unnecessary gibberish model talk.... you just see they approach some model who does not even know what show she is at today and as soon as she is asked about the collection she takes a loooong pause and runs with her eyes around the room thinking intensively what to say... and then she goes: "eeeeeehhhmm.... <pause> the collection is really prettyyyyyyyy..... its just so beautifuuuuul.... so feminineeee..... the clothes are amaziiiing...... i.... i really like it....." you hear that in every video...

im in love with this thead....my prblem is not they being to nice, my problem is that basicly they say nothing. Theres no point of view, theres just a description of the colection (i have my eyes, i dont need someone to describe me it) and small coments about the colections that are just nothing.

totally agree.... it only says the inspiration of the collection (that they prolly read on the introduction card guests receive at the show - the ones with the introduction of the collection, complete list of outfits and credits) and then especially lately they pick certain outfits from collection and simply describe them.... hmm, so deep :-/

 

[FashionPower]

and then she goes: "eeeeeehhhmm.... <pause> the collection is really prettyyyyyyyy..... its just so beautifuuuuul.... so feminineeee..... the clothes are amaziiiing...... i.... i really like it....." you hear that in every video...

Something like this?
@ 0:22

 

[AD122915]

Something like this?

lol... good one... here's another one...

priceless Sigrid at 2:45 - "It'ssssss simple but so beau-ti-fuuul (dull face on)..... and its just..... I dont know.... (rolling her eyes all over the room for the answer)... for me, it's... very.. prettyyyyy.... and... elegaaaant.... and I love the... <pause>... Lanvin clothes..."
then right after comes Tanya at 3:10 where she looks like shes about to pass out - "It's very strong, very powerful... ehm... very.... EHM... I dont know... EHM... its just very Lanvin... very interesting..." <I dont think a good way to describe Lanvin is to say... its very Lanvin> xD
then fortunately energized Natasha saves it right after being all powered up (as if she had 10 red bulls with 25 coffees) and describes the Lanvin clothes... others models also have nice opinions ... Maryna, Amanda (if we exclude Constance and Edita as well, lol) and i think its nice insight since the models not only see the clothes (as fashion critics) but also wear them and know how they feel....
for me, watching first looks gives me better show review than reading bazillion of those style.com blank articles... but as I said.... not everything models say is worth puttin in the video.... and i could seriously post tens of first looks like this...

 

[senorgemma]

Out of curiosity, does anyone have a link to a more ideal collection review? Any designer/season, I'd just be interested to compare it to a style.com one

 

[Kristen May Lee]

See Cathy Horyn! The real deal!

 

[softgrey]

i don't think that backstage model interviews count as 'reviews' of any collection...
...

they are not fashion critics ...

back on topic...
i saw an interview with carine roitfeld who actually said that even if she doesn't like a collection that much, if it's a designer that she likes personally, she'll still try to find something nice to say...

maybe it's just a matter of polite professionalism?...
after all...every designer has an off moment...
no one gets it right every single time...
it's not possible...

 

[ched]

Well, if it's a designer whose work you like typically, that makes sense. If you're friends but don't actually respect their work at all, that would seem to be a breach of journalistic integrity. Hopefully that is not what she meant to say.

 

[Kristen May Lee]

Take note

To everyone on here concerned about this topic here's an article* where Cathy Horyn talks with Sarah Burton about this very idea.

Cathy Horyn Reminds Fashion Writers to be Reporters First, Says 'It's Not About [Getting Invited to Shows]'
By Hayley Phelan for fashionista.com
October 26, 2011

A rare bit of advice for aspiring fashion journos from New York Times‘ fashion critic Cathy Horyn: Bone up on your reporting skills and stop fretting about getting into the shows.

In this video for Nowness, created by Dustin Lynn, we get a rare glimpse at Horyn studio visit, this one at Alexander McQueen’s Paris atelier with creative director Sarah Burton. The two industry heavies have a candid and fascinating chat about the industry, which they agree, is changing and not necessarily in a good way.

“So many people want to be the designer now,” Burton says. “What I find quite sad is that you can’t find many pattern cutters, many people who want to do the craft [of making clothing.]” She suggests folks aspiring to design are more interested in the fame that goes along with being a “designer” rather than the love of the craft of making clothes.

Horyn thinks aspiring fashion writers have gotten off track too. She thinks young writers worry too much about getting invited to the shows, when they should be doing actual reporting. “I tell young people that you can be a really good reporter…You don’t need to go to the shows per se, but start talking to people and find out what’s going on in the houses. Be a really good Bob Woodward of the fashion world. And they wonder, what if I don’t get invited to the show? And I’m like, it’s not about that. You want to have information that nobody else has. Those are reporting skills.”

Horyn‘s right: All you need to do is take a look at the Spring 2012 runway reviews to see that they’re mostly all positive, if not downright glowing. Perhaps it’s because with the advent of the internet the fashion industry feels smaller (even if it is growing), or perhaps it’s editorial’s dependence on advertisers but, whatever it is, it does appear that when it comes to reviewing collections, fashion journalists are shying away from giving negative criticisms or breaking unsavory news, in fear that next season they won’t be invited back. Like Burton’s lost pattern-cutters, it seems many aspiring young writers are more motivated by the glory, rather than the work.

Not Horyn, though. The veteran journalist never hesitates to give her critical opinion, which, after 25 years in the industry is more often than not astute (if scathing). After all, this is the woman who Armani once banned from attending their shows because of a negative review she gave. Yet, she’s also one of the most respected journalists in the industry (and perhaps, sadly, a dying breed) which is why aspiring fashion writers should heed her advice.

*Moderator Note: please post the full articles instead of only a link.

 

[VersaceVixen009]

i don't think that backstage model interviews count as 'reviews' of any collection...
...

they are not fashion critics ...

back on topic...
i saw an interview with carine roitfeld who actually said that even if she doesn't like a collection that much, if it's a designer that she likes personally, she'll still try to find something nice to say...

maybe it's just a matter of polite professionalism?...
after all...every designer has an off moment...
no one gets it right every single time...
it's not possible...

Exactly. The models are paid to represent the designer and their collection, whether they like the collection personally or not.

 

[softgrey]

Well, if it's a designer whose work you like typically, that makes sense. If you're friends but don't actually respect their work at all, that would seem to be a breach of journalistic integrity. Hopefully that is not what she meant to say.

it would be really difficult for anyone to be friends with someone whose work they don't respect at all...don't you think...

she means someone like ricardo tisci- who she is personally friends with...
and who she wears a lot but maybe doesn't always have the best collections...

i mean- you're not going to publicly trash your friends...
no matter what...
not if you are a real friend anyway...

the fashion industry is pretty incestuous and a very small world...
plus- no one wants to p*ss anyone off...
it's not good for your career to get advertisers or potential advertisers angry at you and by default, angry with the publication you work for...

it's a tricky line to walk at times, no>?

what i would like is if some 'reporters' had some info or some perspective to their stories which is unique or original or just something that i cannot find through any other media channel...
that's what i want to see more of...

i think the wall street journal does a very good job now that they have pumped up their fashion and style division...
that's where i find many interesting articles that represent real journalism...
rather than just obvious commentary...

 

[voguetoffee]

Sarah has got it clearer than water. I mean shes absolutely right, journalists nowadays only try to find good things of shows to put in their 'reviews' so they can get an invite. Even if they dont like the 90% of a collection but its Chanel (just an example) they said they loved it so the industry thinks positively about them.
Not to mention that most reviews are garbage, like.. are you serious? for God's sake.

 

[iluvjeisa]

Of course, as softgrey mentions, it's always tricky to be hard on your friends. I think the most rational solution is to not review your friends at all...that way you're not biased or hurtful.

Some of the most interesting points I've read are in Swedish media. Among others Daniel Björk at Svenska Dagbladet (and Bon). And that's probably because the Swedish journalists are more out of the loop, so as to not being biased, yet very informed. Of course, that's nothing particular to Swedish media but probably a characteristic of most non English/French/Italian cultural circles.

 

[Bruidefond]

the 2 reviews that really touched me (in a bad way) was Gucci FW09 and Dior HC FW11 reviews by - of course - Tim Blanks. First, he says Gucci is very commercial... too commercial for a house of that name and that "her commercial style makes a crowd of critics mentally drum its fingers with impatience" (source: style.com)... and then he goes on and on about Dior HC FW11... of course, that collection was not Galliano, everybody saw that, but Dior has been becoming very commercial since 2007.... it basically built its own HC clientele (as well as RTW) that would get their desired outfits designed and made in the atelier and decided to reduce the quality of the show (imo by decreasing the costs of the show), especially after the 2007 crisis. So my way to explain the HC FW11 controversy is that it didnt matter to Dior what collection they will present... they have their own stable clientele that will get their garments designed by their individual wishes and basically decided to produce D-rated couture show, with the cheap runway, soundtrack, make-up and hair.. and simple clothes... i even remember reading how they were bragging that everybody went home early day before the show cuz everything was done (as if it was something to be proud of)... Yes, economically it works... but HC is not supposed to be economical thing... they forgot the main essence of haute couture - art... the glory of old heydays of couture.. the pinnacle of fashion... not to produce something uninspiring cheaply and fast, the customers will come anyway.... it will not ruin Dior... but it will ruin Haute Couture... the only treasure left of old days.... and then comes Tim criticizing Gucci for being uber-commercial and then posting that 'review' on Dior... it only shows he gives certain positive/negative reviews based on the brands name, not the collection itself...



good eye



i really preferred when style.com used Ftv first looks on their site... it briefly covered everything.. backstage, hair styles described by hair artist, make-up explained and done by make-up artist (u were told what and why), then you had the most reminiscent outfits of the show described by the DESIGNER (not sum empty words of Tim Blanks), models opinions, celebrities attending and their opinions as well as some fashion critics... i felt like it in 4-8 minutes captured the entire event from many angles and you had a good idea what it FELT to be there.... Tim was not contributing to the society at all... then in 2007 came those Tim Blanks reviews -.- 2-3 minutes about Tim Blanks liking the collection and talking to important people... so humble yet not-saying-anything-important... now Tim Blanks contributes to the society even less....

now, the only thing i dont like about those First Look videos is that from time to time they feature completely unnecessary gibberish model talk.... you just see they approach some model who does not even know what show she is at today and as soon as she is asked about the collection she takes a loooong pause and runs with her eyes around the room thinking intensively what to say... and then she goes: "eeeeeehhhmm.... <pause> the collection is really prettyyyyyyyy..... its just so beautifuuuuul.... so feminineeee..... the clothes are amaziiiing...... i.... i really like it....." you hear that in every video...

totally agree.... it only says the inspiration of the collection (that they prolly read on the introduction card guests receive at the show - the ones with the introduction of the collection, complete list of outfits and credits) and then especially lately they pick certain outfits from collection and simply describe them.... hmm, so deep :-/[/QUOTE]

The saddest day was when Tim Blanks quit Fashion File. I hated the new guy.
I think fashion critics automatically write positive reviews because brands pay a lot for advertising. Magazines depend on ad revenue especially since print is losing money.

IMO Cathy Horyn and Sarah Mower write decent reviews. I remember there was a French editor who point blank said she did not like Tom Ford's collection. Bill Cunningham has also said he does not attend Milan fashion week because they are too commercial

 

[mdankwah]

I agree with one of the posters comment about Cathy Horyn being one of the very few critics who can actually look at a show objectively and offer her professional opinion. I remember reading an article she wrote on being banned from Armani shows because Mr. Armani did not agree with her review on one of his shows.

 

[BerlinRocks]

well i know nothing about Fashion Critics, but the ones one generally reads in newspaper, internet and see on TV. I've read Roland Barthes (Système de la Mode). that's it.
style.com etc. are here to mass-inform, not to analyze fashion or its system. at the beginning, firstview just posted photos, style.com, too. it's just to tell the mood, the fabrics and tough points of collection. it's mainly literature, narrative not necessarily criticism.

as underlined in the resume of Systeme de la Mode (posted above
"Unlike other products of the mass media (films, newspapers, popular novels), the literature of fashion tells of a world of constant euphoria, a world in which nothing dramatic ever happens."

I would like to know what you consider a critic of Fashion (and I'm not talking about PR).

I guess there are some Fashion critics (Suzy Menkes, Loïc Prigent?) who have good eye and manage to contextualize Fashion with cultural, or political events, draw a link with Fashion History and sociology, economy.
But I barely find them.

Since, Fashion is a mix of business and desire, the grid for Fashion critics should probably be found in these systems (economy, literature, psychology/sociology).
not sure making sense.

 

[softgrey]

A review nowadays is nothing but an overview of a show .

i think this is true...
which is why i don't bother to read them and just look and decide for myself...
then, afterwards i'll read the review, just in case there is some special detail or concept from the designer in the program notes which they have shared in the review...

it's a good way to keep your eye and trendspotting muscle in shape...
see if you can figure it out without any info...just by your own knowledge and instincts...
that's what this forum and the threads in the D&C section are for...
fur us to post our opinions...!

BR-
maybe some real fashion critics are the people who work at some trendspotting or forecasting agencies?
we don't necessarily see what they are writing or thinking because you have to pay privately for that service...
but i imagine that they have to take into account social and economic forces as well as fashion trends in order to put everything into perspective and determine what is coming next in terms of fashion and trends...
what do you think?