D
Deleted member 7575
Guest
Phoebe Philo for Gaultier would be soo interesting.
Would it? It's not really her wheelhouse.
Phoebe Philo for Gaultier would be soo interesting.
i am already bored of the can of worms i opened.
Why should a designer like Dossena have a better understanding of haute couture than for example Simone Rocha, Rei Kawakubo, Bouchra Jarra or Iris van Herpen? Donatella Versace? Consuelo Castiglioni? (that would be major!) or even the duo of Khaite (one of them is female).
what i wanted to say that's nowadays it's not only a question about it's gonna be a male or female designer who get's the job, it's the networking (call it fashion family) that works best.
it's just about the narrow creative field Gaultier chooses from. it makes sense, is safe and i understand that he loves to work with people he likes. But it's not a challenge.
For me Glenn, Haider & Julien are not so much different of the way they create, how they became fashion leaders, for what they are standing for and where they get their ideas from. Olivier was and is different. He has a much wider, experimental (sadly not always tasteful) approach than all four of them - and it showed in his collection for Gaultier a lot. And i loved it because it was so fearless and fresh.
Would it? It's not really her wheelhouse.
Hm, sort.. of. It's not strictly a preference. Growing up a women's clothes, especially in foundation years (before puberty), wires you very differently than someone who's only ever looked at it from the outside and exclusively sees it as fun and not as a reality with multiple angles.. you become familiar with a certain, incessant type of judgement even from adults. It does not make you more practical or a stranger to eccentric/bombastic costumes, femininity-as-conceived-through-parody getups or scandalously sexual attire, especially in teenage years when you're testing, learning to manage/manipulate the judgement that is always there and having fun with it.I think it's also that the larger share of female designers prefer to design wardrobes for real people than couture showpieces. The antithesis of Gaultier.
I didn't mean to portray that wearable approach to fashion as less than (I think quite the opposite actually), I just think that it's a bit of shame that the industry has built this box around female designers, just like how I despise how black designers always seem to be synonymous with streetwear. I do see younger designers pushing against this though, but whether they're doing it well is up for debate.Hm, sort.. of. It's not strictly a preference. Growing up a women's clothes, especially in foundation years (before puberty), wires you very differently than someone who's only ever looked at it from the outside and exclusively sees it as fun and not as a reality with multiple angles.. you become familiar with a certain, incessant type of judgement even from adults. It does not make you more practical or a stranger to eccentric/bombastic costumes, femininity-as-conceived-through-parody getups or scandalously sexual attire, especially in teenage years when you're testing, learning to manage/manipulate the judgement that is always there and having fun with it.
Reality sinks in once you enter adulthood, have to make a living and realise that opportunities are proportional to that judgement and that even womenswear design is a male-dominated field full of men that in most cases don't know s*it about women but will be the first ones to rush and tell you what we want (in a way you've never seen women do when they design menswear, ever saw Ann insisting on trousers with crotch cutouts so men can show a tiny bit of ball?) and just like in any other male-dominated field, you have to extra prove your capacity to generate profit in order to be trusted and gain opportunities and that will not come from the financial risks of eccentricity, gaudiness, or relying on a pop star to bring stability to your label. So in short, it's mostly survival. And the real people are in fact just other women in similar positions who need high quality clothes with a heavily calculated dose of experimentation and conservatism in order to be taken seriously in most fields, way way harder to do than designing for a stage.. which, believe it or not, anyone who can afford it can do.
Speaking of designers who had to tone it way down in order to survive and that still didn't work: Anne Valerie Hash would be great. Veronique Branquinho. Moon Young Hee. Sharon Wauchob. Zowie Broach. An Vandevorst. I agree Nensi would be cool, just to see if there's more potential with larger resources and under a specific 'theme'. I never really cared for JPG's work but the fact that this is short-lived makes it fun and some people deserve the attention.
@jeanclaude I forgot she was dead! crazy. In my mind she's like Adrover, somewhere but still out there. That reminds me of Sophia Kokosalaki..
I think this is the opportunity for him to show his personal aesthetic without having to use the codes of Paco Rabanne. Obviously he gives a lot of himself there but it couldn’t be more different in terms of aesthetic even if Gaultier’s mentor, Cardin, had a thing for space-age himself.I guess I can kiss that Tisci/JPG dream goodbye.
This one is the least interesting to me. I’m not a fan of Paco Rabanne’s work, so I can’t take the new Paco Rabanne designer seriously, so I can’t take the new Paco Rabanne designer’s take on JPG especially serious.
Regardless, I’ll still click on the corresponding thread in July.
I guess I can kiss that Tisci/JPG dream goodbye.
This one is the least interesting to me. I’m not a fan of Paco Rabanne’s work, so I can’t take the new Paco Rabanne designer seriously, so I can’t take the new Paco Rabanne designer’s take on JPG especially serious.
Regardless, I’ll still click on the corresponding thread in July.