Frida Giannini - Designer

[Flashbang]

You can always count on veteran fashion director James Scully to share his opinion, and last night we were intrigued with his Facebook update with his reaction to Vanessa Friedman‘s recent New York Times article, “Beware, Designers: What Frida Giannini’s Departure at Gucci Tells Us.” In the piece she writes: “What’s interesting, however, is that in all the who-ing and fro-ing, what hasn’t come up is just how pointedly Ms. Giannini’s departure reflects on current fashion industry wisdom, and the idea that what is needed right now are clothes for real life.” The article went on to document her turbulent history with the brand: “At a certain point it became very hard to identify what Gucci stood for, aesthetically, anyway, aside from bamboo-handled, made-in-Italy leather goods,” Friedman wrote. Now, Scully shares his thoughts on why things didn’t work out for Giannini…

“What does Frida’s departure tell us? What cautionary tale can designers learn from the “Arch of her Career” What arch? Are you now going to say in hindsight she was brilliant? It was better than we thought? A famous fashion designer once said to me that fashion is about desire, it is about a world, and if people can’t believe your world, they won’t buy your clothes. It’s not a famous quote but I’ll give anyone a prize (a Gucci bag?) if they can take a stab at who said it. I would classify designers into two types: The superstar, the designer who lives his or her world and brings you into it, such as Ralph, Calvin, Donna, Oscar, Tom Ford, Lagerfeld, Stella McCartney, Herrera, YSL, Valentino. Then, there is the shy, reticent creator Miuccia Prada, Nicolas Ghesquiere, Raf Simons, Rei Kawakubo, Jil Sander, Phoebe Philo. So illusive, full of thought that you’re intrigued into their world. What do they all have in common? Vision. They created desire through their clothes and image, and created a world people want to be a part of. Fashion designers, like Hollywood actors, are about the X factor. Beautiful clothes are not enough. It’s the whole world you create around the product that fuels the desire of consumers.

Look at the hottest houses that have all had remakes over the last 5 years: Celine, Valentino, YSL, Dior, Vuitton or people who have created buzz and already have definitive worldwide images like Alexander Wang, JW Anderson, or Tory Burch. In this short amount of time, all of these houses have created desire and a brand awareness. People can’t get enough of it. They have a strategy, they know who they are, and what they want their brands to project. The average consumer knows exactly what these brands represent and that is why they want to have them in their closets. Frida’s Gucci collections were palate cleansing at best. They weren’t bad clothes, they were perfectly nice, not interesting, like her, no intrigue, nothing fascinating.

Most people I know outside the business in the real world still associate Gucci with Tom Ford. She has made no impression, in their minds they are still holding on to the image he created. I know not one person that was dying to have a piece of it since she took over. You can still go into any city in the world and the above designers’ stores are full of shoppers. If I had a nickel for every editor that complained they had to shoot Gucci for advertising $$$, I’d be on my own island writing this now. She was not a designer. It was a nice effort but it was too big a job for someone without a vision to move it forward. She was missing the thing that all the other successful rebrandings paired with the right designer have. It’s not her fault she did not have it. She never created a moment. It’s like Sienna Miller: Hollywood will keep trying, but if you don’t draw people into a theater, eventually you won’t make movies. So, the lesson I take away is hire someone who can give people the dream and they will return…”

fashionweekdaily

 

[Creative]

^While I agree with almost everything he said, there's one thing that it's true: she knew her market. She sold a lot. In fact, around 2008 there were maaany articles reporting that sales at Gucci were higher than ever, and that she had doubled Tom's numbers.

The problem is not that she wasn't a designer. The problem is that fashion changes so fast (it is not a problem either, it's its nature). In a world where designers last one or two seasons, she was at the helm of Gucci for one decade, more or less like Tom was. That's a lot.

Galliano was not dismissed (I think) because he said what he said. It was because he was stuck. No one cared about Dior. Marc was stuck at Vuitton also. Both houses needed a change. And that's it. Same at Balenciaga, YSL... people want buzz.

No many designers have been relevant for more than a decade. It's just their time. One decade. Hedi or Raf won't even last that much because everything goes faster than ever.


Anyway, it never ceases to amaze me how different everything is now. Six years ago I would have never guessed the fashion world would be like this. It would have been impossible. It has never been this tumultuous.

 

[orchidee]

I appreciated Vanessa Friedman's article, but Scully just sounds harsh and unnecessarily bitchy like he has some personal bias against Frida. And I don't understand why everyone seems to be hating on her like she's the worst ever.

I get that she wasn't the most revolutionary designer, but I felt that Frida did do a decent job at Gucci. Personally, I really enjoyed the 70s obsession that seemed to run through most of her work. She certainly did know her client base and it's not as though they had any trouble getting their clothes on celebrities. She may not have been a "visionary" but hey, she lasted a decade at the helm and it's not like Gucci fell back into their dark days. That's no small feat.

Contrast that with someone like Raf, who has only been at Dior for two years. He is already repeating himself and his collections are starting to blend together. How many bar jackets and "examinations" of couture construction can you do before it gets stale? The same goes for Hedi. He is literally doing the exact same things he did at Dior Homme.

It really is just a case of fashion as a whole being so fickle that designer turnover is becoming so frequent these days.

 

[VersaceVixen009]

Clearly Scully was deaf and blind during Frida's arrival. Style.com named Spring 2006 as one of the best collections of accessories (can't remember if the collection itself was deemed as one of the best) and US Vogue editorialized the crap out of that collection. Fall 2006 was named one of the best collections and that too in US Vogue was heavily editorialized.

 

[kikifoz]

They had Francesca Burns style the Pre-Fall lookbook.. Perhaps that's an indication of who they selected? Leaning in the young, British direction..

 

[Deleted member 7575]

They had Francesca Burns style the Pre-Fall lookbook.. Perhaps that's an indication of who they selected? Leaning in the young, British direction..

Not sure that's an indicator as Frida oversaw that shoot.

 

[Chanelcouture09]

Clearly Scully was deaf and blind during Frida's arrival. Style.com named Spring 2006 as one of the best collections of accessories (can't remember if the collection itself was deemed as one of the best) and US Vogue editorialized the crap out of that collection. Fall 2006 was named one of the best collections and that too in US Vogue was heavily editorialized.

But they paid for that product placement as a top advertiser, her collections (along with every other designer) were never featured for being best sellers or cutting edge, they were paid to be there which is what more often than not is wrong with publishing, designers have to pay to get their product in the prime spots, it shouldn't be based on that but sadly it is - which is something similar with department stores, they pay to have the prime locations.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I think Frida had her moments but she was never consistent with them and she never took anything to that critical point were you freak out. She was mostly pallid, predictable, and often quite tedious. When it was good it was solid, when it was anything less than it was nothing at all.

Her time at Gucci is nothing to scoff at though, she should be pretty proud. But like Creative said, her Gucci is no longer viable in the market. Few designers can stay relevant longer for extended periods of time, especially for a house that is that heavily marketed and distributed. But in many ways she did the brand a favor. She kept it going, toning it down, reestablished it's heritage and now it's primed and ready for a reinvention!

 

[kikifoz]

Not sure that's an indicator as Frida oversaw that shoot.

True, but she could have been pushed by higher ups to use more younger British talent. Just a thought.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

True, but she could have been pushed by higher ups to use more younger British talent. Just a thought.

Unfortunately I don't think decisions like that are made in such a manner. If anything it was Frida trying to give the collection more spunk to save her job.

 

[Myriah S]

Thank goodness that woman is leaving, she was literally stuck in the past. I'm praying that Gucci will become big again with the rise of its new CEO & Creative Director. Perhaps the fact that they were a couple played a part in the decline of the brand. Better not to confuse business with emotions.

 

[Chanelcouture09]

I would much rather see Alexander Wang at Gucci, because he is ruining Balenciaga - I think if Gucci are going for the youthful approach then his injection would work wonders on a house whose appeal in both RTW and Accessories has dried up and lost its direction.

Slimane at Gucci wouldn't really work - I think although his shows aren't that great, his sales have proven his aesthetic is working for the house, even I've been suckered into purchasing a few pieces this season.

 

[tatouejeremie]

i've been told who's going to replace her and the person they chose has definitely not been chosen to create a more exciting gucci also it's a name that hasn't been mentioned yet here.
get ready for an even more boring, but probably more consistent, version of gucci

 

[squilliam]

Wang, slimane, tisci...it seems like most of us here are choosing designers to replace frida based on "they're ruining that fashion house so I want them at Gucci so that they won't be ruining that fashion house anymore". I guess that goes to show how little we care about this house now. Gucci really has become dull and irrelevant

 

[squilliam]

For the Hedi rumors, Gucci was exactly what YSL is today. The critics and the collections were kinda mediocre but it sold well.
Frida's first good reviews were for her SS2010 collection.

Bridget Foley made a point. At Gucci they tried to ignore the Tom Ford years but it was a wrong move. Before Tom Ford, Gucci made clothes...Tom Ford gave the vision, the identity & the fashion. She compared Gucci to Prada and she is right, it's totally the same equation.
At YSL, even if they tried to ignore the Tom Ford, Alber & Stefano years, it was all about Yves!

Seriously, seeing the way Stefano left YSL, i don't think he is going to work for Kering again. Don't forget that Stefano, like Frida or Christopher Bailey and others used to work with Tom Ford at Gucci & YSL. They were used to a standard regarding the creative control of the brand.
When Stefano tried to make more personal collections at YSL, even with a huge success, he was outed.

Even if i want an Italian designer doing Gucci, i think they will go for Altuzarra. I'm afraid because i still remember that he is the only designer ever who copied a whole collection. That collection was the Gucci FW 2003.

Actually Alexander wang also copied a whole collection once (and was even more blatant, even copying the shoes and hairstyle), and now he's at balenciaga...

 

[Creative]

i've been told who's going to replace her and the person they chose has definitely not been chosen to create a more exciting gucci also it's a name that hasn't been mentioned yet here.
get ready for an even more boring, but probably more consistent, version of gucci

Is that even possible? WOW. The only name that comes to my mind is Altuzarra's, but he has been mentioned.

Christopher Kane is not possible, right? He's not as boring as Frida. Prabal Gurung? Jason Wu from Boss? It might be someone from NY if it's thaaat unexciting.

 

[gazebo]

i've been told who's going to replace her and the person they chose has definitely not been chosen to create a more exciting gucci also it's a name that hasn't been mentioned yet here.
get ready for an even more boring, but probably more consistent, version of gucci

Do telllllllll

 

[StoneSkipper]

i've been told who's going to replace her and the person they chose has definitely not been chosen to create a more exciting gucci also it's a name that hasn't been mentioned yet here.
get ready for an even more boring, but probably more consistent, version of gucci

I wonder if it's Andrea Incontri? I don't know why his name came to mind, but it did...

 

[Chanelcouture09]

I have a feeling it might be Tomas Maier..

 

[anlabe32]

I have a feeling it might be Tomas Maier..

I'd actually love that. But, isn't he doing a fine job at Bottega and didn't he just say that he wanted to give more attention to his namesake label?