Haute Couture: Is it on its last legs?

[miss6o]

Producing unwearble collections doesn't mean you don't sell.
a mad house like dior as you know show extravagant collections and yet their sales are increasing, it's because couture shows prove that how capable a house is..others that closed down a few years ago produced absolutely wearable clothes yet they doomed.

what you see on runway does not mean you have only these choices, whenever you buy a couture, you can have a new design sketch which is totally different from runway pics

wikipedia says" In fact, much of the haute couture displayed at fashion shows today is never sold; it is created to enhance the good name of the house. "

dior's sales are rising mainly due to hedi slimane's work with the dior homme. i read an article that mens wear is the most rising segment right now so lots of fashion houses are really putting their effort and contribution to that.

 

[Missoni~Heiress]

Will luxury survive the year 2000? Yes, judging by the incredible prestige enjoyed by haute couture outside France. Haute couture, unrivalled and inaccessible, continues to fascinate. Naturally, one could deplore the fact that, today, it is an art whose style is orientated towards the past when its foremost aim is to act as a creative laboratory. All one can do is measure the changes from one age to the next: "I used my talent as one uses explosives," Chanel once stated.

www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/label_france/ENGLISH/DOSSIER/MODE/cou.html

 

[Yimi]

While dreamers exists...

Couture will never die...
While people needs dress every day

I think that Couture not only makes
fantasy and imposible dresses,

Couture, gives a direcction to dress,
making inovations in cutting techniques,
a lot of new detail making, and inovating fabrics,
colors, from make up to shoes...

So when you tell about Couture Die
you have to think what it really means
and gives to industry of Clothing all over the World...
Not to mention the
Fantasy

COUTURE WILL NEVER DIE!​

 

[Avant Garde]

this article is a little old, but still relevant

Vive la Haute Couture!
Reports of its demise have been much exaggerated.

By Anne Hollander
Posted Thursday, Dec. 11, 1997, at 3:30 AM ET

The death of haute couture is a constant refrain of fashion critics. It has been coming to an end ever since it started, much like culture in general. What a killing blow was suffered by haute couture in the first decade of this century, when The Press was first invited to fashion showings! Its presence would surely destroy the secrecy between a lady and her dressmaker, which was crucial to individual distinction. More than half a century later, the ascent of ready-to-wear dealt another allegedly fatal stroke to haute couture, as formal elegance began to look tacky, and ethnic and thrift-shop gear gained status. More recently, the street fashion called "grunge" was imitated by couture designers at five-figure prices, and again, dirges could be heard. One imagines that discriminating people in the 16th century mourned the death of high fashion in much the same way, when slashed sleeves, grotesquely imitating the rags of mercenary soldiers, came into style.

A few weeks ago, Sotheby's held an auction of haute couture clothes, accessories, and related materials. Most of the garments belonged to elegant Parisiennes whose names and photographs embellished the catalog and who were selling their dresses to benefit good causes in the manner of Princess Diana. These clothes dated back to about 1960 at the earliest and to the early 1990s at the latest. A few dresses, shown together in the catalog as a group titled "Les Createurs," were nameless as to owners, and dated as far back as 1939. Before the auction I went to Sotheby's, eager to view such elegant castoffs at close range. You could handle them if you wore the white cotton gloves provided by the vigilant Sotheby's staff, who hastened over whenever you leaned your nose too near the chiffon or made too broad a gesture toward the embroidery.

It's more interesting to see what actual couture clients ordered and wore than it is to look at runway numbers worn only by models. One noticeable fact is that rich women, unlike beautiful models, are not all tall and thin. Displays of historical costume have always revealed the way fashion-plate chic used to be adapted by clever dressmakers for the beefy or dumpy or flat-chested, but we're now used to thinking that fashionable bodies are molded to fit the mode, with the help of individualized exercise, liposuction, and implants. It's not true, at least not in Paris. Some of the garments fitted onto padded mannequins showed that their wearers were of physical as well as financial substance, and these masterpieces are striking mainly as imaginative triumphs of individual fit and suitability.

The stuff was classic in the best sense, lacking quirkiness and full of internal harmony even when it was daring, always both beautiful and personal. The ensemble that fetched the highest price--$17,250 (advance estimate $1,500-$2,000; buyer anonymous)--was a formal black taffeta, strapless dress with a matching shawl-collared jacket designed by Yves St. Laurent for Christian Dior in 1958. Since it's part of YSL's first collection as Dior's successor, this object has clear historic value and great elegance, but not much independent life. It needs a woman inside it, preferably the one for whom it was made--not named in this case. The same is true of the navy wool two-piece Dior dress that fetched the next highest figure ($16,000, estimate also $1,500-$2,000; sold to a private collector), another historical object representing the New Look in 1948 with a close fit, high collar, and richly draped skirt. Beautifully realized, very wearable, very simple, it should obviously be worn to lunch, not put on exhibit. I was glad to hear from the director of Sotheby's fashion department that most buyers do wear their purchases, prepared to sacrifice currency for unimpeachable quality.

Among the named original owners, the most palpably present in her clothes was Catherine Deneuve, whose magnetic and statuesque beauty was easy to imagine inhabiting these sweeping YSL evening dresses. Another was the dark and impeccable Parisienne Jacqueline, Comtesse de Ribes, herself a designer, whose masterpiece here must have suited her perfectly. For this dress, she first coated the torso in high-necked, long-sleeved transparent black lace. Covering the breasts was a joined pair of black velvet, diamond-shaped patches, whose bottom points met the top points of a long black velvet skirt, of which the top edge plunged in one sharp V to the lace-covered navel in front, and swept diagonally back in a bigger V to the bottom of the lace-covered spine. At their top points, the black breast-diamonds were attached to thin black ribbons that climbed over the shoulders. Two other ribbons came around from the sides, and two more rose diagonally from the hips halfway down the rear plunge, all six converging between the shoulder blades with a bow. Two more bows appeared on the shoulders and two more correspondingly at the hips where the lower two ribbons began. Like almost everything in the whole group, this amazing dress combined complexity and simplicity, sensuality and decorum, refined wit and strong impact. French haute couture has been famous for achieving this combination for 140 years, solidly backed up by visibly inventive tailoring and visibly exquisite fabrics and craftsmanship. The result is an undeniable beauty whatever the mode, a beauty specifically meant to render the individual wearer beautiful, too.

By contrast, the current show at the Fashion Institute of Technology, called "50 years of Fashion: The New Look to Now," mainly focuses on the impact of the garments themselves. The show, an instructive panorama of shifting taste in the last half-century seen through the innovative work of designers from England, Japan, Italy, and America interspersed with French examples, demonstrates how changing perceptions of high fashion have slowly altered its character. Fifty years ago, the close-range visual value of haute couture clothes emphasized their rarity and the rarity of their wearers, faintly implying that they were all hereditary nobility in the daily habit of entering well-appointed, finely proportioned rooms. Fashion shows were designed as exclusive events. Fashion photography aided that impression with formal views of nameless, thoroughbred models. Since then, all fashion has gradually become a branch of popular entertainment that involves everybody in its creation of vast revenues, through carefully fostered connections with all kinds of celebrity and fantasy.


Designers like John Galliano have the media image of star performers. The clothes, too, have the fantasy look of things not made with hands, things always more fleetingly pungent or allusive than they are authoritatively beautiful, visions that float across the TV screen on the bodies of the fantasy figures for whom they have been designed, costumes for one performance. Just as with actual costumes, the deep thought and careful work are undiscernible and no part of the appeal; everything must look easily conjured up and as easily swept away. Vogue photos suggest the same thing, with nonthoroughbred models lolling and crumpling their clothes as they gaze straight at you, a strap slipping down, unless they're poised in fragile tinseled drapes and staring from under dream headgear. Fashion journalists covering the couture are careful to explain the precise tailoring and the deft application of the paillettes, since most of it isn't meant to register on the scanning gaze. The throwaway aspect of popular inexpensive fashion, now normal since nobody learns to sew, has lent its look to the costly couture, which more and more seems incompletely imagined and only half realized.

But real quality does show at close range. At FIT there is a 1986 hooded and trained evening dress by Azzedine Alaia, made of slinky green acetate knit that molds the body better than a glove, with similarly canny curved seaming. Set into one of these audacious seams is a zipper that begins between the breasts, snakes up over one shoulder, slithers diagonally down across the back and swoops forward over one hipbone to continue diagonally downward in front again ... darling, help me with my zipper, won't you? At any distance, it's invisible on this sleek sea creature.

Evidence accumulates that the creation of sartorial beauty will never end. It will only shift ground. Talent will arise to cut anew and drape afresh, to hang the mirror in another place, to unsettle us again and again, and to keep reclothing us and righting our minds.

http://img.slate.com/media/44000/44318/tn-1-Creature_Griffe-c*ck.jpg

slate.com

 

[miss6o]

i love those pieces on the article posted.. but some of the haute couture (which is seen on the runways) is impossible to wear..more like pieces of art. but then again people dont wear paintings on them, so maybe they are meant to stay that way,.,,

 

[Salvatore]

Some people do not purchase anything but custom-made pieces I'm sure for the ultimate fit and palpable expression of creativity. It is a part of a luxury lifestyle and as long as luxury is in place and there's money, couture will stay intact.

 

[eternitygoddess]

It's sort of sad that we don't get to see much of the couture worn in public. It's all those anonymous, rich people who buy it and then wear it to their parties. I like it better when celebs where it because then at least the public can enjoy it too.

 

[kikidior]

i agree. haute couture will still be in existence for a quite while. it's part of history and if ever couture houses will close (which i highly doubt), their creations will always be documented (through celebrities, royals, exhibitions, etc...). in regards to the comment about dior, the house has been a pioneer early in its establishment but these days it seems to rely too much on theatrics (^ circus...). we never know of its true nature by what we're provided on the runway. unless one's willing to be personally outfitted, work closely with galliano or throw out some serious cash, dior will always be just what we see on the runway. it hasn't been interesting for a while apart from some pieces but as a whole, it's just okay i guess.

 

[jefei]

my friend's once told me that, the consumers of the haute couture are mainly the nobles in the small countries which are still ruled by the *Kings and Queens*, mainly in distanted areas

 

[stilettogirl84]

my friend's once told me that, the consumers of the haute couture are mainly the nobles in the small countries which are still ruled by the *Kings and Queens*, mainly in distanted areas

and The american Royalty-

Hollywood

 

[Alexandra8715]

if couture does die then it will mean a greater separation between the world of fashion and the world of art surely? fashion will be something really superficial without the Art dimension that couture brings. I'm thinking about this in terms of designers doing whatever they want, not in terms of clothes being made to order by the client.

 

[coffeeandasmoke]

Haute Couture is art. It's unwearable for the general public, but isn't that the whole point? I mean, the pieces are so exquisite that only certain people, royalty, Hollywood, etc, could get away with it. That's what makes it so interesting to everyone else.

The pieces in the post above are seriously beautiful. Especially the YSL dress with a train.

 

[justinleaddict]

Haute couture is meant to be art only.. the designer's main creative outlet.

It will never die because there will always be creative people.

 

[BetteT]

From infoplease.com

[FONT=Verdana, sans serif]What is Haute Couture? [/FONT]
Uncovering the business of high fashion [FONT=verdana,Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-2]by David Johnson [/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]The term "haute couture" is French. Haute means "high" or "elegant." Couture literally means "sewing," but has come to indicate the business of designing, creating, and selling custom-made, high fashion women's clothes.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Strict Regulations[/FONT]​

To be called a haute couture house, a business must belong to the Syndical Chamber for Haute Couture in Paris, which is regulated by the French Department of Industry.​

Members must employ 15 or more people and present their collections twice a year. Each presentation must include at least 35 separate outfits for day and eveningwear.​

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Glittering Names[/FONT]​

The syndicate has about 18 members, including such fashion giants as Coco Chanel, Christian Dior, and Pierre Cardin. The houses generate more than
$1 billion in annual sales and employ close to 5,000 people, including 2,200 seamstresses. Workers often specialize in one area, such as feathers, fabric, buttons, shoes, etc. Before World War II, 35,000 people worked at couture houses.​

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Staggering Prices[/FONT]​

Made from scratch for each customer, haute couture clothing typically requires three fittings. It usually takes from 100 to 400 hours to make one dress, costing from $26,000 to over $100,000. A tailored suit starts at $16,000, an evening gown at $60,000.​

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]A Small Market[/FONT]​

Today only 2,000 women in the world buy couture clothes; 60% are American. Only 200 are regular customers. Often, designers will loan clothes to movie stars or other public figures for publicity.​

During fashion's "golden age," after World War II, some 15,000 women wore couture. Socialites such as the Duchess of Windsor, Babe Paley, and Gloria Guiness would order whole collections at a time.​

Despite the small market, designers maintain haute couture operations partly because the prestige helps sell other products, such as perfume, cosmetics, and their ready-to-wear lines available in stores.

I was reading the thread about what happens to Haute Couture pieces after they are made and it reminded me that most people don't even know the difference between haute couture and prêt-à-porter and I wondered why that might happen.

So I did a bit of research and it seems that the fashion industry may be partially at fault .....

From wikapedia.com

However, the term haute couture may have been misused by ready-to-wear brands since the late 1980s, so that its true meaning may have become blurred with that of prêt-à-porter (the French term for ready-to-wear fashion) in the public perception.

Every haute couture house also markets prêt-à-porter collections, which typically deliver a higher return on investment than their custom clothing. Falling revenues have forced a few couture houses to abandon their less profitable couture division and concentrate solely on the less prestigious prêt-à-porter. These houses, such as Italian designer Roberto Capucci, all of whom have their workshops in Italy, are no longer considered haute couture.​

Many top designer fashion houses, such as Chanel, use the word for some of their special collections. These collections are often not for sale or they are very difficult to purchase. ​

Sometimes, "haute couture" is inappropriately used to label non-dressmaking activities, such as fine art, music and more.​

​

I find it interesting that some ready-to-wear brands have deliberately misused the term "haute couture" so often. It's almost as if it has lost it's true meaning and they don't even care. ​

So, if the designers are not making much money on their haute couture creations because fewer and fewer customers can or will pay the price for a one of a kind fashion statement ... why are some still doing it? Is it profitable or not?

The bolded part of the infoplease.com article says that sometimes they use the pieces on a celeb for for publicity ... but wouldn't any beautiful gown serve the same purpose? Press coverage is press coverage ... as long as they say the name of the designer. Why would it have to be haute couture? (Actually, it's usually RTW, nowadays, it seems.)​

It seems to me that all of this indicates that real haute couture is no longer realevent to anyone, other than a few very, very wealthy matrons. Is this a sign of it's demise? Are we seeing the last of a dying breed?​

What are your thoughts about this?​

​

 

[tigerrouge]

It has reportedly been on its last legs since I was first aware that fashion existed, and in that time, business empires have risen and fallen, the economic climate has swung to and fro, technology has continued to change, yet couture keeps going - mainly so that journalists can keep writing that it is dying, it seems, given how many times I have seemingly read the above quoted piece. Then again, fashion itself recycles old ideas for a new day, but usually with some twist that makes you see new meaning in the materials and sources being used, so drawing from that article, I would be more concerned about the future of fashion reporting than haute couture.

 

[ColorScreams]

I don't quite know since I honestly do not know enough to voice an opinion on this, but thank you for the information, this was quite eye opening. I really hope this tradition does not die, looking at the wonderful pieces is good enough for me. (It's my fix, honestly lol)

 

[Salvatore]

I believe for the remaining houses like Chanel, Dior, and others, haute couture is somewhat of a tradition that the house is identified by. It gives them some type of prestige I guess you could say. To me, haute couture fuels all of the buying of Chanel and Dior handbags, fragrances, and other accessories because people attempt to buy into this image.

I think houses like Balenciaga and Balmain are continuing with the haute couture feeling without actually doing it if that makes sense. The feeling of special pieces and exclusivity is the same idea so that could be considered demi-couture, no ?

I think that haute couture is not going to die, it will just take someone to come along and excite it and make it more relevant widely again. I think Tisci is changing things, but someone will come and take it even further.

 

[CrisGalaxy]

I think that the power houses like Chanel and Dior will continure to do Haute Couture for as long as money can let them. But I think that in order for a house to maintain its Hature Couture it should have a very talented designer and the ready-to-wear collections should sell in seconds, just like Lagerfeld at Chanel and Galliano at Dior. Both houses make a great amount of money and thats because both designers are very talented and they've made the houses what they are today, so therefor Hature Couture cannot survive without ready-to-wear now adays. But I do believe that if the economy falls Haute Couture will stop or there will be less creations of couture. I think that only ways for Haute Couture to go extinct is if there is no money and no one is interested in buying it or if people do not want to continue the tradition.

 

[Rompecorazones]

I side with Salvatore on this... Chanel and Dior will continue to produce haute couture as long as the money is there and I doubt it will ever end in my lifetime. The new money in places such as Russia and the Middle East will keep this art alive for several decades. The question should be: With all these businesses/investors buying up designer brands, what will happen to fashion world? Will it become a Microsoft vs Apple vs Google?

 

[Salvatore]

I side with Salvatore on this... Chanel and Dior will continue to produce haute couture as long as the money is there and I doubt it will ever end in my lifetime. The new money in places such as Russia and the Middle East will keep this art alive for several decades. The question should be: With all these businesses/investors buying up designer brands, what will happen to fashion world? Will it become a Microsoft vs Apple vs Google?

Very amazing point ! It's kind of like in the music industry where there are the four major record labels that have so many small labels under them and control a large portion of the music heard on the radio. Undeniably, the sound has the creativity and speciality that the smaller independent labels and artists are making. It could be the same thing in the fashion industry where the price for being bought out by a major group/investory/whatever, a lot of personality and creativity is being held back. And since they are most likely for the money (which is not bad since they have invested millions into the brands), things and people ... even designers ... get cut if they are not producing. Look at Lacroix.