John Galliano - Designer, Creative Director of Maison Margiela

[blueorchid]

Or at least an artist who makes you feel something.

Oh, the current crop of designers make me feel... something...

 

[jeanclaude]

But does it work like that in others industries? The best talents, even if they comes from « unknown public schools » can through their grades, joined more reputable schools where their talent will match the reputation of the schools and then allow them to choose which companies they want to work with.

No, in other industries it works differently. For example, in the videogame industry an unknown indie developer can get spotlight through his work...and get hired by a big company...without the need of the "pedigree" of a luxury school.
And no matter how amazing your grades are, if you are front another country good luck finding a scholarship which covers all the expenses.
At the end it does not mind where did you study, as long as you know how to develop your craft and keep learning about it. But tell that to the big conglomerates HR departments...

 

[Creative]

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.

Well, I did mention Sabato and a few more. The rest are C-list houses run by chicken heads who take terrible decisions.

But that we always had… it’s normal. We had the girl at Ungaro, Frida at Gucci, Bouchra at Lanvin, Alessandra at Valentino, the husband of the Vogue editor at Paco Rabanne… Fashion always had “fillers”. And now those fillers are more “craving instagram attention”, like de guy from Ricci, Ludovic (who comes from the 10’s) or Sean. A case similar to Ludovic we had with Wang joining Balenciaga at a much higher scale.

Anyways, the flavor of the 20s is not defined by any of those names. There are no Montanas, no Muglers, no Calvin Kleins, there’s no Galliano, no Elbaz… L’air du temps these past years has been defined by Phoebe Philo ( relevant from the early 00s) and by Hedi Slimane (late 90s and 00s). Could you imagine Montana being relevant in the 00s? Or Versace in the 20s? What we are experiencing is something new.

These past 4 years have been terribly dull. The 10s, even if I despise Demna, he was very relevant. Same for JW.

The new changes are telling us that we won’t find the next big things soon because no one new is given a chance in a big house. Givenchy will be run by a terrible fashion designer (with an amazing technique, that’s for sure, but 0 fashion speech). Galliano will probably head one of the LVMH houses. Valentino is hiring a proven success like Michele.

Those houses were giving brand new designers opportunities 15 years ago, like McQueen, Galliano, Christopher Bailey, Elbaz, Pilati, Decarnin (Balmain was not established tho), Riccardo, Maria Gracia, Pier Paolo… who are the big names now. These days no one at an important house, Gucci aside, is giving anybody new or unknown opportunities.

You need to be blind to not see that tbh.

 

[CholoChic]

I think it was those great designers who made those big fashion houses shine. It was not the fashion houses that made them shine and this is demonstrated by the current panorama.

 

[Cocteau Stone]

That takes me back to Galliano's graduation collection and Christian Dior's first collection. These simply shined on their own.

Interesting you mention his grad collection, because even at the time it was so heavily influenced by Westwood to the point it bordered on knock-off. Not to discredit it at all, but the apple doesn't fall far from the tree and that the "genius" we look for in other designers takes time to learn and gestate to be something fruitful and genuine. We don't really have that right now. Hell, I've taken a huge break from doing any fashion work because I'm burnt out by it and in a way disgusted by it because of how much stuff is being churned through visually, artistically, commercially, digitally and whatnot.

And in a way, the cyclical nature of Galliano being "back" is exhausting in of itself. It's pressure on top of expectations on top of pressure meets extreme nostalgia. I don't think any new appointment will ever be satisfying or right enough, even if he goes back to his namesake. We've become kind of greedy, but also because we're so starved for something decent nowadays that the pressure for "genius" is at an all time high when creative or genuine outputs are at an all time low.

Yeah we don't help ourselves here on TFS, we're probably the most greedy of the lot despite all our differing opinions and tastes. Maybe it's the nostalgia, maybe it's wanting to nuke the industry and start afresh, or maybe it's wanting more value put into other things and leave the excess of business execs behind... who knows. Frankly, at large, I've yet to see a decent amount of collections where the clothes say fashion, when what they're doing is fashion trying to be clothes.

Dunno what half of this has to do with Galliano, but we're here. Exonerating behind our keyboards. Keeping the forums alive.

 

[JohannesL]

I think the fashion industry is a different case even when it comes to the non-designer positions. I remember that even in their NYC offices and showrooms they always filled those office worker positions with ivy league/prestigious private college grads or those related to somebody. In the U.S., there is always existing the legacy admission process that will guarantee an average student from a well to do family for those esteemed colleges so those people (at least from upper-middle class) are not necessary the best for their jobs. Of course it seldom happens that a poor kid graduating from ivy league would like to work in the high fashion business.

 

[Creative]

This is going to sound bad, but I was also thinking you kinda need to be “poor” to be talented.

I feel when you are too comfortable you don’t have issues, everything is very easy… Galliano, McQueen, Ghesquière, Margiela… they all come from poor environments.

 

[Lola701]

This is going to sound bad, but I was also thinking you kinda need to be “poor” to be talented.

I feel when you are too comfortable you don’t have issues, everything is very easy… Galliano, McQueen, Ghesquière, Margiela… they all come from poor environments.

But for every Galliano, McQueen or even Alaia, there are Mugler, Karl, Yves, Tom, Miuccia…etc.

I think the spotlight around the huge financial success of the fashion industry as a whole has changed the perspective on how to approach fashion for younger generations.

The standards were higher back then anyway. So, at the end, only the work mattered. Maybe the less fortunate had a different set of challenge but because the fashion community was so small and because there was a sense of communion into rooting for the talent, a community pushed those talents. Alaia would have never been Alaia without the community of Rich private clients, editors, models, artists who believed in him. The same, Galliano would have never been Galliano without the people who pushed for him.
If Yves didn’t had contacts at Vogue, he would have never had that career.

But it was all about the talent.
Fashion was before becoming that huge industry, in the High Fashion world, a passion thing. And because those people were passionate, they had an insane culture on the subject.

I wonder if current designers that are hyped knows about Madame Gres or Adrian. Are those people capable to see beyond Helmut Lang and Martin Margiela?

 

[CholoChic]

Look what Bill Gaytten made in Dior and Galliano, he had a good chance, was sourrunded by the best people of the industry. Why he didnt go with his master Galliano?

 

[avonlea002]

I don't understand what you mean. That Dior tenure after Galliano's firing was his chance and he failed miserably. He would have never got that position in any other situation. I also wouldn't call John his master. Galliano was a master for Robinson, that's for sure. I am not surprised he wanted to have his moment instead of leaving after friend whose future was uncertain.

 

[CholoChic]

I mean it's ironic: when Galliano fell from grace, sick, his bosses fired him, they didn't try to cure him or help him, they just fired him. They said the circus he does is replaceable by Bill, who worked very closely with him and must know the secrets of Galliano genius. But we already saw what happened: Suzy Menkes wrote something worthy about it.

Even Galliano's former bosses brought out the workshop workers to close the fashion show. Finally time taught them that those workshops without a great director are nothing. So I hope Galliano has set strong conditions now that he returns where they were a little rude to his situation.

They understood that they had and lost a brilliant artist that no one could surpass, nor move the workshops and artisans with the grace, energy and passion with which he did it and continued doing it in another smaller house.

Is Bill Gaytten designing with Maria Grazia? He will return to Galliano, how interesting those brilliant tailors and seamstresses whose names are unknown but who make their master's intricate and fantastic dreams come true.

 

[avonlea002]

I mean it's ironic: when Galliano fell from grace, sick, his bosses fired him, they didn't try to cure him or help him, they just fired him. They said the circus he does is replaceable by Bill, who worked very closely with him and must know the secrets of Galliano genius. But we already saw what happened: Suzy Menkes wrote something worthy about it.

You can't help someone who doesn't want it. There have been many interventions done by people from both LVMH and Dior long before John's drunken outburst. Maybe they should have fired him earlier. I don't get why Galliano is still being painted as the victim of LVMH when he has done it to himself.
Let's not forget that towards the end of his tenure, John hardly designed anything (it's debatable how much he really did at Dior, as Robinson reportedly did everything for him when still alive). It was mostly done by the studio team, of which Gaytten was part. It was logical to give Bill the CD position. It's a billion dollar making company, not a foundation helping millionaire alcoholics and drug abusers.

 

[CholoChic]

If they didn't understand the delicate fragility of an artist, they do now.
Dior's growing success led Galliano to hell.
Finally it could have been any illness caused by work, not the stigma of being drunk.
It is not victimization but those millionaire luxury corporations and high standards were able to deal better with his genius that was collapsing. If not for humanity, at least for business.
I imagine that after Galliano those responsible for Dior did not feel the euphoria of a good show. Surely last January they wanted to be sitting in Rosso's seat, who finally behaved like an excellent businessman.
Now, they throw themselves at the feet of the genius who will dictate their conditions and knowing Galliano all of them will be great.
Finally it all led to the myth of genius. Who still has fashion shows to paint.

 

[Creative]

I don’t think any company makes people alcholic of drug addict. That was his fault. But the way LVMH managed the situation was beyond nasty imo.

Had it been any other designer (Karl), nothing would’ve happened, I’m sure. I think they wanted to get rid of Galliano (which is normal, because what he was doing at the end of his tenure was a super sh!t and everybody was tired), and they took advantage of the whole situation.

 

[tourbillions]

I don’t think any company makes people alcholic of drug addict. That was his fault.

easy to say but creatives are vulnerable to it, add in the pressure of needing to perform in numbers and its a recipe for codependence. Theres a reason a large number of the "Greats" have had problems.

 

[GRCF]

I don’t think any company makes people alcholic of drug addict.

Not on it's own but it is could be a contributing factor especially for creatives like said above ^.

But the way LVMH managed the situation was beyond nasty imo.

100% after watching the doc, I never wanted to slap someone like I wanted to at Toledano for the comments he made (and Arnault in footage of old interviews after the fact). Like you know someone is trashing hotel rooms and drinking themselves unconscious and you didn't think they have a problem? Be serious. Not to take any responsibility away from Galliano, though.

 

[Lola701]

Im puzzled by the infantilization of that grown man. Every creative is hyper sensitive. A lot of them cope with trauma and pressure differently.
What happened to John is John’s only fault. A lot of designers indulged to substance abuse like Donatella, Marc Jacobs and others. Karl ate his pain out for example…
But none of them went on the terrasse of a Cafe insulting customers.
As a company and as individuals, people at Dior did what they could do. But you can’t protect a grown man from himself.

Designers acting like Divas is not new. Galliano pushed the button very far because at some point, he was very powerful, aware of his power and…Let’s be honest, aware of the dependence of his presence for Dior.

Back then, because the financial success was so great, the idea that someone like Galliano would leave Dior scared a lot of people. The same way it did when people imagined the departure of Karl. Gucci did lost in influence under Frida and such a charismatic personality can have an overwhelming presence over the company.
John Galliano was the CD of Everything Dior womenswear, something that changed when he left.

It was Galliano duty to give a Mea Culpa to Arnault and Toledano. He jeopardized the reputation of their company and let down the people who he had under his responsibility. I’m not sure that all the Petites Mains who worked at Dior knew about that part of the life of John for example…

I don’t think any company makes people alcholic of drug addict. That was his fault. But the way LVMH managed the situation was beyond nasty imo.

Had it been any other designer (Karl), nothing would’ve happened, I’m sure. I think they wanted to get rid of Galliano (which is normal, because what he was doing at the end of his tenure was a super sh!t and everybody was tired), and they took advantage of the whole situation.

He renewed his contract in 2008 so his contract was going to end in 2013 anyway. The year he left, sales were already growing. It was at the time that they had that Resort show in Asia and Dior was doing good.

So maybe they took advantage of the situation regarding the fact that he wasn’t paid of the extra money he would have had at the end of his contract but that’s it.

 

[lowfive1715]

Has anyone else wondered or pondered what his Givenchy what have looked like or the trajectory it would have taken had he stayed there? He was only there so briefly and what we saw was stunning. I have to wonder if he would have been able to grow it into a billion dollar brand like he did with Dior.

 

[blueorchid]

Im puzzled by the infantilization of that grown man. Every creative is hyper sensitive. A lot of them cope with trauma and pressure differently.
What happened to John is John’s only fault. A lot of designers indulged to substance abuse like Donatella, Marc Jacobs and others. Karl ate his pain out for example…
But none of them went on the terrasse of a Cafe insulting customers.
As a company and as individuals, people at Dior did what they could do. But you can’t protect a grown man from himself.

The coddling of Galliano reminds me of a friend I have who defends the behaviour of "artists" in her field by saying, lol, "oh, they're just EXTREMELY right brained!" so what... they can't be a decent human being?

 

[tourbillions]

so what... they can't be a decent human being?

some can.. some cant 😁 we need a list of unproblematic fashion geniuses.