John Galliano - Designer, Creative Director of Maison Margiela

[CholoChic]

Or maybe there are no geniuses anymore, like a good song we would have already heard it.

 

[blueorchid]

Really, at this point… I think asking for a genius is too much.

 

[CholoChic]

^
Or at least an artist who makes you feel something.

 

[Xone]

So, John for Fendi? any updates?....

 

[Creative]

I think this is a very interesting conversation. I’ve never seen a talented fashion student, not in private not in public school in around 6 years.

Most of the people I saw had the brain of a chicken. None of them felt a passion for fashion. None of them knew anything about it. They just liked going shopping and getting dressed.

I think with social networks people are more basic and absurd than ever.

I do know a pretty talented guy that didn’t go to a famous school. He tried everything. Hyeres, non paid Interships… he was poor. He never made it.

That guy helped, for money, a student from CSM. The CSM guy had literally zero talent but quite a lot of money. That guy is kinda famous now.

That’s how it works.

 

[JohannesL]

Despite having worked in the so-called high fashion business for a brief period as a fresh grad, I would always remember that it was such a snobbish and hypocritical environment that I did not even want to finish the internship at that time. But I always know that high fashion business has never meaned to be inclusive so I eventually change my career path without a second thought. Time flies! For me, it has been good to visit the TFS even in the past the memership was not open to everyone.

 

[helmutnotdead]

I think this is a very interesting conversation. I’ve never seen a talented fashion student, not in private not in public school in around 6 years.

Most of the people I saw had the brain of a chicken. None of them felt a passion for fashion. None of them knew anything about it. They just liked going shopping and getting dressed.

I think with social networks people are more basic and absurd than ever.

I do know a pretty talented guy that didn’t go to a famous school. He tried everything. Hyeres, non paid Interships… he was poor. He never made it.

That guy helped, for money, a student from CSM. The CSM guy had literally zero talent but quite a lot of money. That guy is kinda famous now.

That’s how it works.

that’s f*cking depressing

 

[Creative]

Despite having worked in the so-called high fashion business for a brief period as a fresh grad, I would always remember that it was such a snobbish and hypocritical environment that I did not even want to finish the internship at that time. But I always know that high fashion business has never meaned to be inclusive so I eventually change my career path without a second thought. Time flies! For me, it has been good to visit the TFS even in the past the memership was not open to everyone.

Exactly, there is literally no hope. The only way is doing the master at CSM if you want to work in Paris or London or Milan. If you want to work in Paris, la Chambre, and if you are from Italy you can try Marangoni and you for sure will end up in an Italian brand.

If not, you will do a thousand internships for 0 euros and will never find a job in high fashion. You can maybe work for a fast fashion company, but that’s about it.

It doesn’t matter how many doors you knock to leave your portfolio, it will never work. They just don’t care.

And that’s when you realize why the quality of design is so bad nowadays. The bags designer of a certain brand… dear lord, a little bit more basic and he could explode. It’s all like that. They are brainless.

 

[WinstonH20]

I think this is a very interesting conversation. I’ve never seen a talented fashion student, not in private not in public school in around 6 years.

Most of the people I saw had the brain of a chicken. None of them felt a passion for fashion. None of them knew anything about it. They just liked going shopping and getting dressed.

I think with social networks people are more basic and absurd than ever.

I do know a pretty talented guy that didn’t go to a famous school. He tried everything. Hyeres, non paid Interships… he was poor. He never made it.

That guy helped, for money, a student from CSM. The CSM guy had literally zero talent but quite a lot of money. That guy is kinda famous now.

That’s how it works.

Depressing, but so true.

I've also found that the amount of appetite for risk when it comes taking chances on creatives, whether designers, editors, photographers, and models also greatly depends on their pedigree. It seems that people in the industry are more ready to be associated with the failures of (in their eyes) a 'somebody', than even the successes of a 'nobody'. I've seen this first hand, where mediocre talents are literally handed countless opportunities because of their family name or amount of money they have, whereas no one is willing to take a chance on real talents (even if they believe in them to some degree), because their last name is not well-known or they may not be 'rich' and the result may be embarrassing by association.

Also, regarding the 'unknown' talents that are working hard, trying their best to get their work noticed to no avail, I'll have you know that many [powerful] people in the industry are noticing these 'unknown' talents, but almost none are willing to give them opportunities in the same way that those with access through money, pedigree or geographic location receive. If this sounds like a 'cool girl' being seen with the wrong clique in high school mentality to you, you'd be 100% correct.

Sometimes I don't know what's more depressing, that mediocre talent are ruling the industry or discovering that even so many of those with genuine talent already had some amount of pedigree or money to start with. It's the way the industry is and always has been to some degree, but now more so than ever and it's why the profiles and so much of the mediocre output of designers, models, photographers, editors and other creatives will not change any time soon. The multi-billion dollar fashion machine no longer has the capacity or will to nurture creativity in any way, the attitude from those at the top is "hopefully someone else will".

 

[Creative]

^That’s totally spot on. In 15 years we didn’t even have a relevant photographer that made it big a la M&M… Every decade has its top photographers. What did we have for the last 10 years? Recycled names or very mediocre ones.

It’s also like that in the business side. The daughter of a super wealthy family here is now working in a very high position at a very important brand. She just graduated.

As you said, it’s always been like this, but at least, there were a few exceptions (Nicolas, for instance) and they were more eager to take risks (its true that 20 years ago the industry was a baby if we compare it to now).

I really think it will get worse. Fashion houses will tend to go on autopilot (like Hermès). Chanel is in autopilot now. Dior too. They will be like car companies or watch companies. If you see the campaigns they are launching now, you get it. 0 creativity and super basic, just repeating their brand principles and 0 risk.

I don’t know. For somebody who grew in the 00s it’s sad because the past years have marked the end of an era.

 

[Creative]

I was thinking about it this morning and I thought that the fashion downfall must have something to do with the downfall of magazines.

Before, Carine, through repetition, would create the next big things... Decarnin, M&M, I&V, Lara Stone... She knew how to create a very respected platform. Now, nobody cares about magazines. There are no fashion leaders, and if there are, they are the minus 60 IQ influencers who take their own pics.

These days, there are no platforms to create the next big things or to showcase talents... The only "vitrines" are the images the brands themselves put out: the campaigns, and every brand would go for same old, same old, because they don't have the need to discover anything, and much less in such a corporate world.

 

[tricotineacetat]

About 10 years ago, I would work as a guest lecturer in a fashion design course at an applied arts university - I noticed at the time that this new crop of students was fully accustomed to sourcing any fashion-related information exclusively online. My suggestion to go into a high fashion boutique in order to took at garments up close, felt like a very daring act to them - Which is what I did when I first got interested in fashion. It was there that I would see designers like Yohji Yamamoto, Alaia, Helmut Lang or Miuccia Prada for the first time, in the mid to late 90ies.

I feel this 'in person' experience was fundamental in shaping my approach to fashion design well beyond clicking through frontal runway shots on a screen. There's a whole lot you don't get to see or feel when you only have a picture or live stream as reference. I also felt this more analogue-driven research, despite being more laborous, gave me a much more thorough knowledge than relying on the convenience of the internet.

That, along with a curiosity of the past, the desire to trace the origins of things I was interested in, naturally lead my interest towards all the historically important eras and couturiers of the past - Grès, Vionnet, Balenciaga etc. - I feel these things matter little to the youngsters of today whose knowledge lets them think of Demna as the intellectual owner of what was generously taken from Margiela. When your heroes can get away with copying or flooding the market with merchandise with little design ambition, how can you expect these kids to develop a broader horizon? They are very much lead to believe that high fashion is an entirely corporate place whereas in the early 2000s it was a lively place for many exciting up-and-coming designers, a promising new discovery to be had almost by the season.

 

[Alquimista]

I agree, the world is bigger but the problem is that it has added confusions.
Because fashion is more glamorous than ever before (to people), there are a lot of talents. And with the corporatization of fashion, it was about to happen.

I hate sometimes to talk about things with the theory logic because there’s pragmatism and economic realities. And at some point, when you choose all the talents who comes from business schools to handle the business side, there’s maybe a need for some equivalence and balance of ego from the creative side.

The reality was that fashion for a longtime was an industry that people joined through passion or connection. I was a « Nemo baby ». If my grandmother wasn’t a petite main at a fashion house, I would have probably never worked in fashion. I had a passion but I discovered the industry while I was in it…

For me it make sense that the industry is structuring itself. It also make sense that people have career paths that exclude being a Creative Director. Yes, Pharrell is the CD of Louis Vuitton menswear but without the permanent designers, who probably enjoy their job better than if they were CD, it would be impossible.

So, yes, in theory, it would be fabulous if a talented human being would be discovered in the suburbs of Calcutta to become the next CD of Chanel. But it won’t happen. It’s a beautiful fairytale but it won’t happen.

And Schools are doing a good lobby job to attract brands to their schools.

I have 1 nephew and 1 niece who wants to work in fashion. I would never advise them to go to CSM.

There is a real need for structure in the creative side. Well there is a structure already but it's a bit ugly, nepotistic and not very meritocratic.

It could happen if fashion allowed. And I'm not talking about being a CD necessarily. This hypothetical person could start at a lower level, but fashion need to provide the structure.

But going back to Galliano, getting his own brand back would be the best scenario for him, not sure if the best for LVMH. Lol

 

[Creative]

^^I agree with most of what you said, but I don’t think seeing things in person is that relevant. In fact, I prefer to imagine how things are done. It’s like traveling, its always worse in reality than in your imagination. And some children don’t live in a fashion capital. Before it was through books and now it’s online. I grew up with both, but I understand that it’s much cheaper online and you get tons of info as well.

Its like when you go to a fashion show. The magic of seeing them online had nothing to do with seeing them irl, where you see all the brainless people, it’s super fast… idk.

I think the problem now are social networks. I never had them and I preferred to waste my time in other things (not that its better). When you are so connected, creativity dies.

I remember my first shock when Nicolas created his IG and Pelayo would uppload pictures with him… He was my fashion hero and all of a sudden you kind o realize that he is a normal person with a very banal life.

 

[Kimihiro]

When young creatives are more concerned with brand, references and personalities than doing things in service of, and to further the craft this is what you get. I rarely encounter people who are concerned with details, with technicalities, with pushing things forward.

They don’t care about how a piece of clothing is constructed, or how a photograph can tell a thousand stories. Those are fundamental things that are lost in favor of pushing branding and personalities. Many of these new people want to be the product. It’s always the glamorous stuff. The dinners, the connections. They want to make it big without honoring the (honestly) vocation they’re getting into. That’s how you end up with these outputs that are vapid, overly referencing codes and the past but without the nuances. All c*nty slay, slay forgotten the next minute.

Unfortunately I am of this generation. I’m not saying that I know better. I’m not in the fashion industry and the few times that I’ve been near it I knew I wouldn’t make it. I do not speak like them, look like them or dress like them. Frankly I felt like I was surrounded by stupidity. I knew of a well-connected girl who studied fashion, and she didn’t know who ‘Cristobal’ was. She went on to further study at CSM and is now all over Europe.

I guess that says enough.

 

[tourbillions]

soulless art and fashion is a gen z thing i think. And if we dont appreciate it, its probably cause it wasnt made for our generation and that is ok. Now its all about the image and vibe... Sooner or later it will return to something more about skills and soul. its just a phase...

 

[Creative]

But gen z is not even working at the moment, and if they are, they are definitely not taking the decisions. The thing is that it’s (almost) the same people working now than 10 years ago. In terms of designers, what’s new? We still have NG, MGC, Galliano… very mature designers in general. And luxury customers are around 40 years old in almost every brand.

I don’t think it’s a generation problem in this case, to me more it’s more that the business evolved and it’s too big and too corporate now.

 

[Creative]

In this decade (2020s) for the first time, the big names are the big names of the past.

In the 80s you have the 80s designers, in the 90s the 90s designers, in the 00s the 00s designers, in the 10s the 10s designers…. But now? What’s new? Chemena, Sabato, let’s say Matthieu, and who else? And they are not even relevant.

We don’t have a new Peter Dundas, a Decarnin, a Tisci, a Phoebe Philo, a Pilati… idk

 

[lookatme]

About 10 years ago, I would work as a guest lecturer in a fashion design course at an applied arts university - I noticed at the time that this new crop of students was fully accustomed to sourcing any fashion-related information exclusively online. My suggestion to go into a high fashion boutique in order to took at garments up close, felt like a very daring act to them - Which is what I did when I first got interested in fashion. It was there that I would see designers like Yohji Yamamoto, Alaia, Helmut Lang or Miuccia Prada for the first time, in the mid to late 90ies.

I feel this 'in person' experience was fundamental in shaping my approach to fashion design well beyond clicking through frontal runway shots on a screen. There's a whole lot you don't get to see or feel when you only have a picture or live stream as reference. I also felt this more analogue-driven research, despite being more laborous, gave me a much more thorough knowledge than relying on the convenience of the internet.

That, along with a curiosity of the past, the desire to trace the origins of things I was interested in, naturally lead my interest towards all the historically important eras and couturiers of the past - Grès, Vionnet, Balenciaga etc. - I feel these things matter little to the youngsters of today whose knowledge lets them think of Demna as the intellectual owner of what was generously taken from Margiela. When your heroes can get away with copying or flooding the market with merchandise with little design ambition, how can you expect these kids to develop a broader horizon? They are very much lead to believe that high fashion is an entirely corporate place whereas in the early 2000s it was a lively place for many exciting up-and-coming designers, a promising new discovery to be had almost by the season.

This is truly a huge problem.

And it's not just seeing and feeling designer clothes in person...there's a huge lack of understanding of actual antique clothing. When you touch and feel designer clothing from 15-20+ years ago, there is a stark difference in the quality and richness of the construction. At the end of the day, you cannot come up with these ideas on your own. Even the best designers in the world need a foundation of historical and contemporary references to be able to direct an atelier to say - "I want to set the sleeve like this," or "let's use this boning application in the interior of the garment," or "I want to replicate this hem finish," or "can we use this same darting technique but exaggerate it?" etc. etc. etc.

John is actually a perfect example of a designer who will totally geek out on the construction of vintage garments as a way of researching ways to make his own designs. And that is why his designs are so rich and fully realized.

Designers of his generation built a collection with not just inspiration images, but a full rack of reference garments to pick apart and use as launching boards for whole new items. And they'd be items as wide ranging as handmade folk costumes, vintage uniforms, home-sewn craft project clothes, early designer duds, etc. etc. etc.

Now - the new generation of designers seem to create strictly from mood boards made up of runway images of other designer's work and magazine tears from the 90's and 00's! That's it! So flat and so one-dimensional. It's a way of working that leaves no room for surprises or idiosyncrasies.

 

[tourbillions]

But gen z is not even working at the moment, and if they are, they are definitely not taking the decisions. The thing is that it’s (almost) the same people working now than 10 years ago. In terms of designers, what’s new? We still have NG, MGC, Galliano… very mature designers in general. And luxury customers are around 40 years old in almost every brand.

I don’t think it’s a generation problem in this case, to me more it’s more that the business evolved and it’s too big and too corporate now.

why do you keep ignoring the fact that plenty of new generation designers were given a chance at big houses. But none of them delivered so far only those who are in smaller houses are delivering fresh fashion. That is why even in this forum people would rather recommend seasoned designers for important positions than picking from the crop of new gen designers. ancora guy, mcqueen guy, ludovic, feragamo guy all failed to do anything fresh.