Harris Reed - Designer, Creative Director of Nina Ricci

[LadyJunon]

Truth be told, Theyskens did some pretty nasty separates at Nina Ricci, things that he probably created in an attempt to provide more daywear options. Even as a fan, I am looking back on this tenure thinking that it was only saved by the otherworldly imagery and the eveningwear that still holds up until today. That being said, his all short-in-the-front-trains-in-the-back SS'09 collection is to his career what Nicolas Ghesquiere's SS'08 collection what was to his - Creating some of the most recognizable and accomplished looks of his career.

Funny enough, haphazardly finding that show on YouTube actually led me to discovering Theyskens's work (he had just left Theory at that point).

 

[gallianostan]

couldn't get past two paragraphs of that interview. this man (?) is an absolute plague to the fashion industry. everything he creates is a pitiful, embarrassing bastardisation of romance, femininity and luxury. i hanker for the day when he's inevitably thrown back into obscurity.

 

[Kennnnn]

The pieces are priced quite low for a French luxury brand.

 

[Lola701]

Olivier created clothes to dream of or clothes to photograph. Not so much clothes to wear. He had some good tailleurs at Rochas but that’s it.

The pieces are priced quite low for a French luxury brand.

The price point is clever and coherent for maisons like Mugler, Rochas, Nina Ricci, Azzaro, Courreges or even Sonia Rykiel (a brand I wish they will revive).

Those brands cannot compete with the heavy players anymore. You can’t have two or sometimes 3 decades of turbulences and expect to just comeback.

At Schiaparelli, they were clever (unlike at Poiret). They took time before going to RTW and they can that way price their products accordingly to the image they have build.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Olivier created clothes to dream of or clothes to photograph. Not so much clothes to wear. He had some good tailleurs at Rochas but that’s it.

It's always boiling down to that bottom line, doesn't it?

When we look at the length of his tenure at Rochas, it would be fair to assume the success (or therewith, supposed lack of commercial success) cannot be credited to him, really - His first show was FW'02 and the last one FW'06, even by today's standards of revolving doors, that is a relatively short period of time for any house to generate steam under a new creative director (which to be fair, Rochas did), let alone turn that it into a profitable venture. Add to that the fact that the house emerged out of complete obscurity which means there was nothing to build up from, that makes for a challenge even bigger than Nicolas' when he took over from Josephus Thimister, with a brand name holding very much the highest esteem in the history of fashion.

I'm coming to the defense of Olivier here because a lot of press by the time of his departure from Rochas painted him in a very unfavorable light (that I believe very much informed the rushed concept he developed for Nina Ricci) - Denying the fact that Rochas diversified with a growing accessories line helmed by Natalia Brilli and providing a more diversified product offering with good separates that made it very much possible to wear the brand outside the red carpet. Rochas' commercial division was helmed by the same woman who build the success of Balenciaga in the early years of Nicolas' appointment and I think for the aim to put a historic maison back on the map, they were on the right path to set the brand up for further expansion.

The fact that this did not come to happen was really due to the fact the house was owned by Procter & Gamble who in turn had purchased it as part of a bigger deal from Schwarzkopf, who had no interest to operate a fashion business in their brand portfolio.

 

[Lola701]

It's always boiling down to that bottom line, doesn't it?

When we look at the length of his tenure at Rochas, it would be fair to assume the success (or therewith, supposed lack of commercial success) cannot be credited to him, really - His first show was FW'02 and the last one FW'06, even by today's standards of revolving doors, that is a relatively short period of time for any house to generate steam under a new creative director (which to be fair, Rochas did), let alone turn that it into a profitable venture. Add to that the fact that the house emerged out of complete obscurity which means there was nothing to build up from, that makes for a challenge even bigger than Nicolas' when he took over from Josephus Thimister, with a brand name holding very much the highest esteem in the history of fashion.

I'm coming to the defense of Olivier here because a lot of press by the time of his departure from Rochas painted him in a very unfavorable light (that I believe very much informed the rushed concept he developed for Nina Ricci) - Denying the fact that Rochas diversified with a growing accessories line helmed by Natalia Brilli and providing a more diversified product offering with good separates that made it very much possible to wear the brand outside the red carpet. Rochas' commercial division was helmed by the same woman who build the success of Balenciaga in the early years of Nicolas' appointment and I think for the aim to put a historic maison back on the map, they were on the right path to set the brand up for further expansion.

The fact that this did not come to happen was really due to the fact the house was owned by Procter & Gamble who in turn had purchased it as part of a bigger deal from Schwarzkopf, who had no interest to operate a fashion business in their brand portfolio.

I agree with everything but in retrospect, as I have already said back in the day, there was that formula that was done everywhere to try to revive old houses with fresh talents. I can’t even count the number of houses at that time that did that…It was the influence of the PPR/LVMH/PRADA thing.

‘I feel like the career of Olivier would have been different if he never put his brand on pause.

Procter & Gamble killed what could have been great for Rochas as Olivier managed to make his aesthetic and the idea of a name like Rochas match together fabulously. But tbh, at the time his Rochas felt weird. The Demi-Couture stuff, the kind of women who went to the shows and all, while at the same time, Lanvin and Azzaro were revived and managed to talk to a more hip customer.

‘Olivier made beautiful soft clothes for the daughters of the ladies who lunch. That’s why I will always remember the reactions to his last Nina Ricci collection! Everybody was so surprised of him finally letting his sensibility, or at least the one people missed from him, shine again! Balmain revived that idea of unapologetic party clothes and suddenly, that dark romantism of Olivier felt neeeded.

‘But he went to do jeans…Unfortunately because of this ongoing pressure to « be commercial ».

For me the problem of Olivier is that he has spend almost a decade trying to talk to people who didn’t understood his language.

The irony of it all is that when you look at his own brand, it was never not commercial. There were fabulous pants, sexy dresses and the attitude was always dark and sensual.

I think that he doubted a lot. Maybe the Industry made him lose confidence in his talent, I don’t know.

This is why maybe everytime I see someone mention his name to take over a house, I say no. The man compromised enough. Unless he does a Couture collection for Gaultier, he is better at his own house.

 

[tricotineacetat]

I agree with everything but in retrospect, as I have already said back in the day, there was that formula that was done everywhere to try to revive old houses with fresh talents. I can’t even count the number of houses at that time that did that…It was the influence of the PPR/LVMH/PRADA thing.

‘I feel like the career of Olivier would have been different if he never put his brand on pause.

Procter & Gamble killed what could have been great for Rochas as Olivier managed to make his aesthetic and the idea of a name like Rochas match together fabulously. But tbh, at the time his Rochas felt weird. The Demi-Couture stuff, the kind of women who went to the shows and all, while at the same time, Lanvin and Azzaro were revived and managed to talk to a more hip customer.

‘Olivier made beautiful soft clothes for the daughters of the ladies who lunch. That’s why I will always remember the reactions to his last Nina Ricci collection! Everybody was so surprised of him finally letting his sensibility, or at least the one people missed from him, shine again! Balmain revived that idea of unapologetic party clothes and suddenly, that dark romantism of Olivier felt neeeded.

‘But he went to do jeans…Unfortunately because of this ongoing pressure to « be commercial ».

For me the problem of Olivier is that he has spend almost a decade trying to talk to people who didn’t understood his language.

The irony of it all is that when you look at his own brand, it was never not commercial. There were fabulous pants, sexy dresses and the attitude was always dark and sensual.

I think that he doubted a lot. Maybe the Industry made him lose confidence in his talent, I don’t know.

This is why maybe everytime I see someone mention his name to take over a house, I say no. The man compromised enough. Unless he does a Couture collection for Gaultier, he is better at his own house.

For me, this reflects a wider problem also faced by designers like Haider Ackermann, Ann Demeulemeester, A.F. Vandevorst or any designer (mostly the Belgians, really) with a tendancy to operate within an aesthetic niche that's perhaps not widely supported by the mainstream press and retailers are faced with - Who exactly are you talking to?

Perhaps it's worth looking back at the mid 2000s and the landscape of media and retail that existed at the time. A part of TFS members went off to start their own community StyleZeitgeist with designers commonly discussed there that would hardly ever find mentioning here again, except for maybe Rick Owens and Carol Christian Poell. A whole other niche of retailers existed out there for whom Haider and Olivier (despite maybe fitting to a lazy 'Gothic' label of aesthetics) were already too 'polished'. Who could imagine one of Olivier's designs from Rochas hanging from a butcher's hook? But at the same time, their work was also a bit too 'grim' and serious for the average woman to resonate with. Somebody told me once that describing something as 'gothic' was not considered very adaptable to reaching out to anyone except for niche audiences and when I look at who really managed to establish an independent business and how, then I can see why that is the case.

I know Rochas had a pretty solid business with US department stores such as Bergdorf or Barneys and their buy was certainly more on the 'pretty' side with a lot of pastels and prints, but then there were stores like Maria Luisa, Japanese retailers, Joyce and Ikram who bought (like myself) more into the Edwardiana, the tiered lace, the more austere romantism that was also an important part of the Rochas look. The late L'Wren Scott would often wear that and quite a bit of this aesthetic would later inform the look of her own brand.

 

[LadyJunon]

Olivier created clothes to dream of or clothes to photograph. Not so much clothes to wear. He had some good tailleurs at Rochas but that’s it.

The price point is clever and coherent for maisons like Mugler, Rochas, Nina Ricci, Azzaro, Courreges or even Sonia Rykiel (a brand I wish they will revive).

Those brands cannot compete with the heavy players anymore. You can’t have two or sometimes 3 decades of turbulences and expect to just comeback.

At Schiaparelli, they were clever (unlike at Poiret). They took time before going to RTW and they can that way price their products accordingly to the image they have build.

It's always boiling down to that bottom line, doesn't it?

When we look at the length of his tenure at Rochas, it would be fair to assume the success (or therewith, supposed lack of commercial success) cannot be credited to him, really - His first show was FW'02 and the last one FW'06, even by today's standards of revolving doors, that is a relatively short period of time for any house to generate steam under a new creative director (which to be fair, Rochas did), let alone turn that it into a profitable venture. Add to that the fact that the house emerged out of complete obscurity which means there was nothing to build up from, that makes for a challenge even bigger than Nicolas' when he took over from Josephus Thimister, with a brand name holding very much the highest esteem in the history of fashion.

I'm coming to the defense of Olivier here because a lot of press by the time of his departure from Rochas painted him in a very unfavorable light (that I believe very much informed the rushed concept he developed for Nina Ricci) - Denying the fact that Rochas diversified with a growing accessories line helmed by Natalia Brilli and providing a more diversified product offering with good separates that made it very much possible to wear the brand outside the red carpet. Rochas' commercial division was helmed by the same woman who build the success of Balenciaga in the early years of Nicolas' appointment and I think for the aim to put a historic maison back on the map, they were on the right path to set the brand up for further expansion.

The fact that this did not come to happen was really due to the fact the house was owned by Procter & Gamble who in turn had purchased it as part of a bigger deal from Schwarzkopf, who had no interest to operate a fashion business in their brand portfolio.

For me, this reflects a wider problem also faced by designers like Haider Ackermann, Ann Demeulemeester, A.F. Vandevorst or any designer (mostly the Belgians, really) with a tendancy to operate within an aesthetic niche that's perhaps not widely supported by the mainstream press and retailers are faced with - Who exactly are you talking to?

Perhaps it's worth looking back at the mid 2000s and the landscape of media and retail that existed at the time. A part of TFS members went off to start their own community StyleZeitgeist with designers commonly discussed there that would hardly ever find mentioning here again, except for maybe Rick Owens and Carol Christian Poell. A whole other niche of retailers existed out there for whom Haider and Olivier (despite maybe fitting to a lazy 'Gothic' label of aesthetics) were already too 'polished'. Who could imagine one of Olivier's designs from Rochas hanging from a butcher's hook? But at the same time, their work was also a bit too 'grim' and serious for the average woman to resonate with. Somebody told me once that describing something as 'gothic' was not considered very adaptable to reaching out to anyone except for niche audiences and when I look at who really managed to establish an independent business and how, then I can see why that is the case.

I know Rochas had a pretty solid business with US department stores such as Bergdorf or Barneys and their buy was certainly more on the 'pretty' side with a lot of pastels and prints, but then there were stores like Maria Luisa, Japanese retailers, Joyce and Ikram who bought (like myself) more into the Edwardiana, the tiered lace, the more austere romantism that was also an important part of the Rochas look. The late L'Wren Scott would often wear that and quite a bit of this aesthetic would later inform the look of her own brand.

According to Theyskens himself, his tenure at Rochas was dead from the start:

When Theyskens was appointed at Rochas, the house was owned by Wella. There was no fashion department at the house, so Theyskens had to build it from the ground himself. Soon after his first show, Wella is bought out by Procter and Gamble, who specialise in skin care, hygiene products and other cleaning agents. The executives told him that they wouldn't be able to keep up with the fashion demands of the house so they had to close the house, but they allowed him to do anything he wanted until the end of his contract. It was a licensing deal that made the relaunch with Zanini and Dell'Acqua possible.

Source: Episode 13: ‘Fashion Independence’ with Olivier Theyskens EN (from 12 minutes)

Funny enough in the same podcast, he talks about his tenure at Theory. Apparently, the "Theyskens' Theory" line was commercially successful and did a lot for Theory, but Andrew Rosen told him that he was "wasting away" doing contemporary-priced clothes.

I feel that Theyskens' biggest misstep with the revival of his eponymous label is that debut collection. His comeback collection should've been the full "Theyskenian" dream (or nightmare) to fully cement the label's image and grab the attention of the media, with the following two or three collections being more stable and approachable for buyers.

 

[LadyJunon]

This ad is a few months old, but it's been colonising my region's ad intermissions lately:

Compared to their mid/late 00s/early 10s ads, this one is completely bland and void of charm.

 

[gallianostan]

saw the thread bumped and was hoping for news of his departure.

@LadyJunon thanks for crushing my dreams

 

[LadyJunon]

saw the thread bumped and was hoping for news of his departure.

@LadyJunon thanks for crushing my dreams

I'm so sorry! 😂

 

[Nimsay]

Style Zeitgeist? What. SZ is like corny and what the hyper intellectuals wear. Its detached and quite decadent.

Superfuture was the most influential forum of all time. It basically shaped modern fashion.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Style Zeitgeist? What. SZ is like corny and what the hyper intellectuals wear. Its detached and quite decadent.

Superfuture was the most influential forum of all time. It basically shaped modern fashion.

It has it's cache on a specific continuum of brands and their followers - originating from the deconstruction favoured by the Belgians and Japanese designers. I feel the descend of independent multibrand boutiques in favor of the fashion industry becoming increasingly more 'conglomerate' is one factor which made this niche become less visible, too - Brands will quickly start their own retail instead of relying on influential boutiques to provide them with a market representation.

That being said, I still remember very vividly that stores of with this mix of brands existed as long as the designers who spearheaded these aesthetics, in every major city. That client is still out there but also aging - still, I admire the brand loyalty and consistently with which they wear the designers they love - I would have this any day over the Gen-Z customer who displays their Jacquemus or Balenciaga on platforms like Instagram or TikTok.

 

[blueorchid]

When I saw this thread bumped up, I thought it was surely going to be about their new book... wait for it... Fluid: A Fashion Revolution. I've already seen it for sale on a website for cheap, highly discounted, and overstock books (I like a good deal, what can I say?). Despite it being released later this month, oddly enough. The description sounds as you'd expect: delusional.

Fluid A Fashion Revolution

Influential designer Harris Reed explores the world of gender-defying fashion in this richly illustrated monograph. In Fluid, revolutionary fashion designer Harris Reed introduces the world to a new era in fluid fashion. At the center of Reed's sartoria

www.abramsbooks.com

 

[gallianostan]

When I saw this thread bumped up, I thought it was surely going to be about their new book... wait for it... Fluid: A Fashion Revolution. I've already seen it for sale on a website for cheap, highly discounted, and overstock books (I like a good deal, what can I say?). Despite it being released later this month, oddly enough. The description sounds as you'd expect: delusional.

Fluid A Fashion Revolution

Influential designer Harris Reed explores the world of gender-defying fashion in this richly illustrated monograph. In Fluid, revolutionary fashion designer Harris Reed introduces the world to a new era in fluid fashion. At the center of Reed's sartoria

www.abramsbooks.com

this is living proof that meritocracy cannot exist. there are so many skilled tailors and dressmakers toiling away, struggling to make ends meet, while this waste of space gets showered in not only press, but somehow receives backing from a historic parisian house almost immediately after graduating. it's honestly laughable. the best advertisement for anyone not wanting to go into the industry.

also that cover is f*cking heinous. an actual jumpscare. it really underscores how his entire 'career' (if you can even call it that) is just one fat, ugly, self-indulgent exercise in narcissism.

 

[Kite]

The Irony of him having a book but yet I went to Selfridges the other day and the ENORMOUS Nina Ricci concession has every single piece in every single size at 60% discount or more....All hanging there.....lifeless.

 

[eugenius]

Style Zeitgeist? What. SZ is like corny and what the hyper intellectuals wear. Its detached and quite decadent.

Hey, now. People with brains need stuff to wear, too.

I liked SZ when it was around, but only for introducing me to brands that'd normally pique my interest. But their brand of conversation was a smidge too lofty for my taste, and not particularly fun. "Oh, 36 pages dedicated to the stitching of a CCP jacket...Thrilling!"

 

[youthinasia]

When I saw this thread bumped up, I thought it was surely going to be about their new book... wait for it... Fluid: A Fashion Revolution. I've already seen it for sale on a website for cheap, highly discounted, and overstock books (I like a good deal, what can I say?). Despite it being released later this month, oddly enough. The description sounds as you'd expect: delusional.

Fluid A Fashion Revolution

Influential designer Harris Reed explores the world of gender-defying fashion in this richly illustrated monograph. In Fluid, revolutionary fashion designer Harris Reed introduces the world to a new era in fluid fashion. At the center of Reed's sartoria

www.abramsbooks.com

Influential? To whom?

 

[LadyJunon]

Influential? To whom?

To the young ghæys who are fully convinced that Central Saint Martins will turn them into John Galliano.

 

[blueorchid]

Forget about "influential," the claims of being REVOLUTIONARY are what really get me.

I'm half tempted to suggest this as a purchase to my local public library, but do we really want to waste taxpayer's money? I just want to see inside of it SO badly, it looks so awful.



abramsbooks