Iris Van Herpen Haute Couture F/W 2016.17 Paris

[Fashion_Girl22]

nowfashion.com

 

[Fashion_Girl22]

 

[Creative]

A high tech D&G. Always the same.

The presentation looks so pretentious. It makes me cringe.

 

[ToniOrtega]

It has Mcqueen's "Plato's Atlantis" written all over it...
Still, I can't deny its beauty!!

 

[DutchHomme]

Great couture stuff
She actually never dissapoints
Wish she had more money to use better models

 

[Wintergreen]

Some of them do look like ripoffs of McQueen's Atlantis. Pretty nice anyway, the dress on the black model (don't know her name, my current-model knowledge is pretty limited lol) is amazing.

 

[ominao]

So, her ready-to-wear challenge has ended? I was kind of excited and really hoping to see such a young designer passionately trying to incorporate these wonderful techniques into prêt-à-porter...
I think it’s a beautiful collection, and that it’s probably alright for her to be this way if that’s how she wants to be, though I don’t really understand why she’s chosen fashion as her medium when she makes objects for museums to exhibit, not clothes for people to wear. I really think a piece of clothing loses its meaning when it’s not made to wear. What’s the point, really?

I’ve heard the Netherlands government give financial support to designers like Van Herpen and Viktor＆Rolf, which kind of indicates their principle.
But what about “fashion designers” in the country? Do they get the same level of support from the country or domestic companies?
I’m not at all familiar with Dutch fashion, but considering all the amazing talents the Netherlands has produced, from painters to footballers, I’d assume they have some good young fashion designers who could become marvellous designers like Lucas Ossendrijver and Josephs Thimister.
They might support such designers too, or they might not, I don’t know. But I sometimes wonder why we only have a few good Dutch fashion designers, and whether their government support is working properly.

Back to Van Herpen, I haven’t read any articles on this collection, so I don’t know what kinds of techniques she has applied to her stuff this time, but I don’t think she has many ideas in the first place? Her stuff basically looks samey, silhouettes are always almost exactly the same, the last look in particular is very much like the water dress she made for SHOWstudio a few years ago. Good to look at, but not covetable at all.
I want to see clothes that are new, beautiful and wearable, clothes that balance creativity and commerciality.

 

[YohjiAddict]

Her stuff basically looks samey, silhouettes are always almost exactly the same, the last look in particular is very much like the water dress she made for SHOWstudio a few years ago. Good to look at, but not covetable at all.
I want to see clothes that are new, beautiful and wearable, clothes that balance creativity and commerciality.

Ditto her "clothes" do absolutely nothing for me. I pass.

 

[gazebo]

The four long dresses are gorgeous.
The rest not so much.

 

[AnaD]

The first look is horrendous, tentacles curling out from the centre of your skirt is never a good thing. It's very McQueen, but I'm not completey mad at it.

 

[dior_couture1245]

She is so obnoxious. Girl, it's not 2009 anymore. Those platform heels are so delusional. And ultimately I could care less how technically masterful the clothes are when they're this ugly, useless, and dated.

 

[neonsprinkles]

I love her imagination and how far Iris can take her vision into actuality. The dress in the latter part of the collection felt new, love the mix of fluidity and pattern. My only issue with Iris is the symmetrical, fractal approach gets a bit too repetitive.

 

[Nomar]

Such a unique designer, there really is no one else like her out there at the moment. Pictures simply don't do her pieces justice because you have to see them in motion, they really take a life of their own. I hopes she continues to show her couture because I have missed it so much, completely unrestrained and full of ideas, not watered down like her ready to wear (so it is wearable and sellable). I don't care if these are impractical, they are still absolutely amazing works of art. Keep doing what you're doing Iris!

 

[anlabe32]

Beautiful clothes and technique. Of course most of it isn't wearable but that's not her point. It's art.

Gorgeous setting and presentation.

Finally a designer is being creative and not commercial, like all the other designers everyone complains about, and you guys are throwing sh!t at her. Jesus.

 

[gazebo]

 

[FashionFollower]

she's still doing the same thing she was years ago..like..liven up iris.

 

[Lola701]

It's great for what it is but this type of fashion doesn't do it for anymore. It may come from Rei Kawakubo, Iris or who ever, it bores me.
This idea of "This is what Art look like in a fashion context" is actually a bit dated.
It's spectacular, about a controlled/expecte emotion, something slightly pretentious.

I totally respect those designers and those who like this but it bores me the same way Valentino does.

 

[gazebo]

^Seriously? Rei and Iris in the same sentence?

 

[Lola701]

^Seriously? Rei and Iris in the same sentence?

Yes! Sacrilege!
I mentionned Rei because sometimes people believe that people will say that they hate this kind of fashion but at the same time, they will love it when it's done by CDG, just because it's CDG.

I just don't care for "performance Couture" anymore.

 

[ominao]

Beautiful clothes and technique. Of course most of it isn't wearable but that's not her point. It's art.

Gorgeous setting and presentation.

Finally a designer is being creative and not commercial, like all the other designers everyone complains about, and you guys are throwing sh!t at her. Jesus.

It’s alright for Van Herpen to be this way, as I already said, if she doesn’t want to make clothes that will sell, though her ready-to-wear attempts indicate she, like any other fashion designer, wants to dress people.
Van Beirendonck says fashion school should focus on creativity, rather than business. But that sounds really irresponsible to me, and that's actually how you produce bollocks like Meadham Kirchoff, who couldn't stay in business because of their non-commercial **** despite their huge reputation among the fashion press. They made no money to keep doing what they wanted to do and are now begging for donation to keep their "legacy" alive. That’s simply ludicrous.

Do you not think you should incorporate your forte (technology, in her case) into your “clothes” people actually want to wear when you call yourself a fashion designer? Why do you present your “art” thing on the catwalk during a fashion week when you are a fashion designer?

And I definitely don’t think fashion should be art (what’s the point of fashion being art when it’s already fashion. I don’t understand why so many fashion people envy art so much in the first place.) I really hate it when people separate business from fashion. It's actually inseparable, how do you keep doing what you want to do without making money by it. It's business, let's face it.
The only fashion designer who did art I think is Elsa Schiaparelli.
Artists would give her their stuff, and she would incorporate it into her clothes in a very surprising, intellectual way while keeping them wearable. That’s how you should approach art when you’re a fashion designer.
And Van Herpen doesn’t do that, she always ends up showing off some technology, putting it onto the same dresses she has already shown.
If she made beautiful dresses people would like to wear in the street with these wonderful technologies, it could be a real revolution, and that’s why I find her current stuff disappointing
Not wearable enough to be clothes, not beautiful enough to be art, just some stuff made with some technology. Is she the appropriate recipient of governmental support? I don't think so.