Dolce & Gabbana S/S 09 Milan
- Thread starter liberty33r1b
- Start date
ElectricAlyce
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 726
- Reaction score
- 0
This is so much better than the D&G collection. For me though, D&G (and therefore Dolce & Gabbana) has been utterly ruined by beeing a logo-brand. I do like some of their pieces (both D&G and Dolce for that matter), but I can't get past the fact that they splash their logo on everything (this refers, of course to D&G). This is somewhat irrelevant to this collection, but also applies because the way they use their logo-overdose on their lower line makes me negatively biased towards their main line.
Northern Star
French Chic
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2006
- Messages
- 15,990
- Reaction score
- 219
Approx. 75% of this collection is just horrible
First of all it's meant to be Spr/Sum and virtually everything is so dour IMO.
I'm sure even old hags would turn half of this down was it offered to them.
For the last few seasons these guys have totally lost it.
First of all it's meant to be Spr/Sum and virtually everything is so dour IMO.I'm sure even old hags would turn half of this down was it offered to them.
For the last few seasons these guys have totally lost it.
papa_levante
oh! darling
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2005
- Messages
- 17,751
- Reaction score
- 10
I like what sethii said about it being classic Dolce & Gabbana.
try googling their collection from the 90's.
they did have a more subdued collection at last spring season with the organza dresses. i think that's what they were original doing when they first came out.
but to tell you the truth.... people, in general, would wear anything dolce&gabbana because of the name. i mean, you see people like fergie and other celebrities vomiting out the name of the brand to make them seem "fashionable".
I'd say looks for their collections from about 1996 - 2002. Style.com has shows dating back to 2002 and firstview.com has shows dating back to 1996 (unfortunately they're not free to look at)
MulletProof
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2004
- Messages
- 28,699
- Reaction score
- 7,236
There are several videos from Dolce and Gabbana's late 90s collections in this channel.
It still looks about the same to me, maybe worse, but that's just because models did tend to walk like strippers and not penguins like these days.
It still looks about the same to me, maybe worse, but that's just because models did tend to walk like strippers and not penguins like these days.
NellOfDruryLane i feel like evaluating Dolce&Gabbana in terms of what they've done for fashion, craft, art and all of that would be overlooking the fact that fashion is a big industry (a hard-to-get-in easy-to-get-out one btw) and not all creators should try to be "evaluated" by the same standards.
the social context in which the so called dolce and gabbana woman appears is crucial for understanding why this brand neednt be so important in terms of creative innovation. when you picture this woman wanting to lets say show herself off or whatever her will is and how that could be considered in terms of moral in a country like italy, the fact that these two designers (that by then were probably not much more than good at fresh/modern/daring styling) made it so big in the market it very remarkable.
more and more, i try to think of everyone's collections as if i was to chose some key looks that i'd select for a biographic book of them. and the more i do that, the more i get the feeling that collections like this one just wouldnt make it to the pages of a book that should illustrate what dolce&gabbana is about. maybe in 30 years, if i tried to explain my children what DG is, whould i show them this? is this la grande epoque de dolce and gabbana?
i understand designers get many different influences during their careers, and they have ups and downs and that some of them just can't constantly show stuff that everyone will like. what "scares" me most about this sort of radical changes is that if they ever decide to go back to their classics, it might be too late... as nobody will eventually know what they really are.
i think every designer should be very careful when taking a step forward making sure that by doing that he is not erasing the ones he already took.
the social context in which the so called dolce and gabbana woman appears is crucial for understanding why this brand neednt be so important in terms of creative innovation. when you picture this woman wanting to lets say show herself off or whatever her will is and how that could be considered in terms of moral in a country like italy, the fact that these two designers (that by then were probably not much more than good at fresh/modern/daring styling) made it so big in the market it very remarkable.
more and more, i try to think of everyone's collections as if i was to chose some key looks that i'd select for a biographic book of them. and the more i do that, the more i get the feeling that collections like this one just wouldnt make it to the pages of a book that should illustrate what dolce&gabbana is about. maybe in 30 years, if i tried to explain my children what DG is, whould i show them this? is this la grande epoque de dolce and gabbana?
i understand designers get many different influences during their careers, and they have ups and downs and that some of them just can't constantly show stuff that everyone will like. what "scares" me most about this sort of radical changes is that if they ever decide to go back to their classics, it might be too late... as nobody will eventually know what they really are.
i think every designer should be very careful when taking a step forward making sure that by doing that he is not erasing the ones he already took.
Whitelinen
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2005
- Messages
- 5,760
- Reaction score
- 1
Thank you Mulletproof and Spike for tips! I did take a look, and it was what I had already seen of Dolce&Gabbana and had made me form that opinion of mine... so no, I still don't really see their value as designers.
Borjacapella, I have to say I do not get your point... could you elaborate a bit more? Because personally, I don't see that someone should be praised for being able to sell loads of clothing. If your point is that that D&G are great because they have brilliantly managed to market themselves, then why not raise H&M to the group? They have managed to brilliantly sell clothing, but are they that relevant in discussing fashion from the point of designing? So should they be praised as designers or as excellent business men?
Of course fashion is an industry these days. But I don't follow it because I would like to see how much money someone makes. I don't think that is the purpose of fashion, and I dare say if we were into fashion because of how much it sells, we would not be spending our time in this forum but reading the moment's stock exchange (not saying none of us do that!).
I do find your approach to collections interesting, though. I don't know whether I agree with it, but I find it very very interesting... definetily something I would love to hear more about!
Borjacapella, I have to say I do not get your point... could you elaborate a bit more? Because personally, I don't see that someone should be praised for being able to sell loads of clothing. If your point is that that D&G are great because they have brilliantly managed to market themselves, then why not raise H&M to the group? They have managed to brilliantly sell clothing, but are they that relevant in discussing fashion from the point of designing? So should they be praised as designers or as excellent business men?
Of course fashion is an industry these days. But I don't follow it because I would like to see how much money someone makes. I don't think that is the purpose of fashion, and I dare say if we were into fashion because of how much it sells, we would not be spending our time in this forum but reading the moment's stock exchange (not saying none of us do that!).
I do find your approach to collections interesting, though. I don't know whether I agree with it, but I find it very very interesting... definetily something I would love to hear more about!
^^oh maybe my use of the word "market" made it sound like i was talking in terms of sales but that was not at all my intention (although one cant deny that their finantial success is also something to praise too 
).
what i wanted to express by saying that their work was remarkable is that they pushed the trends in a new unexplored direction no one had yet dared to experiment with. (call it tacky or rich b*tch or whatever it was called then)
in a very different level, OF COURSE, it would be like saying that Saint Laurents transparent blouse was remarkable. that was a new boundary he pushed and not by his well known skills as a designer/crafter/artist. he just had the idea to put together two things that had never been... a blouse (relatively basic cut with no need of gallianesque skills of construction), and transparent fabric... and the result was a huge shock! boom!
so in a way Dolce & Gabbana did also succeed because of their daring attitude: they convinced people that their clothes was the right thing to wear at the moment.
When you ask if H&M (and i guess you'll agree others like Zara or Topshop could be included) should be "raised to the group", i say the only reason why they shouldnt is probably because one can not really say they work with their own ideas (other than the "revolutionary" idea of taking big-names pieces and copying them for the mass market). However, they also need to be greatly considered in the way they may have influenced the high end brands... for some years, specially when every look that went down a runway seemed to be replicated (in Zara, but also in Canal street), i had the impression that the designers where embellishing everything more and more so that they got this unique look and finishing that no zara or chinese workshop could ever replicate. maybe that was just me, but i dont think any major designer can just ignore what's going on in the streets, and the streets nowadays are full of H&M.
I am a business major and i think the economic side of the fashion industry is fascinating. However, as you very well said, if it was because of how much money it makes, i'd be looking at the stock exchange (which I do, but not as frequently as i visit tFS
)
what i like about the business side of fashion is that the markets ultimately represent what people like, and what they dont...
and maybe the critics may not praise Pilati's work one season, but if the sales go up, that'll mean he has proved them all wrong because he has the support of people in the streets.
in other times a collection like this winter's Prada lace stravaganza would have seemed absolutely inadequate... but if people have bought it now, maybe it means that she got something right, no? maybe she was feeling something no one noticed before her... and that sure showed up in her bottom line.
i dont think "the numbers" is the most important side of fashion, but one cant underestimate them, never!
JUST A COUPLE OF PS:
1, i wanted to make sure it doesnt look like i am comparing Saint Laurent's talent with D&G's let's say... "skills"! i am soooo not!!
2, that made quite a long post... i need to learn how to simplify...
).what i wanted to express by saying that their work was remarkable is that they pushed the trends in a new unexplored direction no one had yet dared to experiment with. (call it tacky or rich b*tch or whatever it was called then)
in a very different level, OF COURSE, it would be like saying that Saint Laurents transparent blouse was remarkable. that was a new boundary he pushed and not by his well known skills as a designer/crafter/artist. he just had the idea to put together two things that had never been... a blouse (relatively basic cut with no need of gallianesque skills of construction), and transparent fabric... and the result was a huge shock! boom!
so in a way Dolce & Gabbana did also succeed because of their daring attitude: they convinced people that their clothes was the right thing to wear at the moment.
When you ask if H&M (and i guess you'll agree others like Zara or Topshop could be included) should be "raised to the group", i say the only reason why they shouldnt is probably because one can not really say they work with their own ideas (other than the "revolutionary" idea of taking big-names pieces and copying them for the mass market). However, they also need to be greatly considered in the way they may have influenced the high end brands... for some years, specially when every look that went down a runway seemed to be replicated (in Zara, but also in Canal street), i had the impression that the designers where embellishing everything more and more so that they got this unique look and finishing that no zara or chinese workshop could ever replicate. maybe that was just me, but i dont think any major designer can just ignore what's going on in the streets, and the streets nowadays are full of H&M.
I am a business major and i think the economic side of the fashion industry is fascinating. However, as you very well said, if it was because of how much money it makes, i'd be looking at the stock exchange (which I do, but not as frequently as i visit tFS
)what i like about the business side of fashion is that the markets ultimately represent what people like, and what they dont...
and maybe the critics may not praise Pilati's work one season, but if the sales go up, that'll mean he has proved them all wrong because he has the support of people in the streets.
in other times a collection like this winter's Prada lace stravaganza would have seemed absolutely inadequate... but if people have bought it now, maybe it means that she got something right, no? maybe she was feeling something no one noticed before her... and that sure showed up in her bottom line.
i dont think "the numbers" is the most important side of fashion, but one cant underestimate them, never!
JUST A COUPLE OF PS:
1, i wanted to make sure it doesnt look like i am comparing Saint Laurent's talent with D&G's let's say... "skills"! i am soooo not!!
2, that made quite a long post... i need to learn how to simplify...
Last edited by a moderator:
simple_elegance
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,328
- Reaction score
- 6
out of the entire show, i want the puppy the most. GIMME THAT PUPPY!
Similar Threads
Users who are viewing this thread
New Posts
-
-
-
A Retrospective : US Harper's Bazaar under Glenda Bailey (2001 - 2020) (2 Viewers)
- Latest: blueorchid
-
-