Maison Margiela F/W 2015.16 Paris

[gossiping]

sorry i don't get this at all

i can appreciate that each look is very different and has its own "feel" but thats it. the clothes themselves are hideous.

 

[simple_elegance]

The floor length coats are stunning, and that's pretty much all I like.

 

[squilliam]

The funny thing is that if you switched Galliano and raf from their respective houses you'd probably get much better results. Good designers, wrong house

 

[HeatherAnne]

Cathy Horyn, as usual, hit the nail on the head:

Toiling Under the Struggle of What It Means to Be Modern

....

Let’s take John Galliano’s very boring, maiden ready-to-wear collection for Margiela. He did due diligence with the Margiela signatures like deconstructed linings and minimalist coats, but many outfits resorted to Galliano's old styling tricks, like a purple blazer with tap pants and a black chiffon dress layered over a lace catsuit. The models wore clownish makeup, and a few walked in an angry or spastic gait, with one clutching a paper bag as she threw herself down the runway. It was almost comical, as if these models were Galliano women who had been in hiding the past few years and were now free to walk in the light again.

In any case, the mash-up wasn't successful. Galliano isn’t a modernist designer. And Margiela, if it’s anything, is a label with a modern point of view. Few designers are better than Galliano at creating moments of ineffable beauty, which draw on the past as well as the present. But apart from some collections he did for Dior around 2000, he’s never shown much ease with modern concepts. So I was seriously skeptical when, just after the show ended, several retailers praised the collection as "fresh."

....

This is just an excerpt of the full article: http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/03/dior-balenciaga-margiela-and-modern-fashion.html

nymag

 

[HeatherAnne]

And I find particularly alarming that it comes from someone like Suzy. Fan-girling really gets the best of people.

It's basically who she is, it's usually about the designer over the collection with her, I never understood why people take her seriously.

 

[lady stardust]

well...what is modern?

 

[tatouejeremie]

well...what is modern?

relating to the present or recent times as opposed to the remote past

 

[Scott]

i dunno what's happened to suzy menkes...she's softened since she's been at vogue.....when still at the helm of IHT she used to be one of the few who never pandered to anybody when it came to covering collections. truth told,i blame it on this era of disgusting advertising dictatorship....unfortunately most of these publications are bound by corporate fashion advertisers and any cross word about any one,they could pull their support away.

meanwhile cathy horyn remains so true to her oh-so brutally honest self. a dying breed really. her remark on margiela's modernism is dead-on. i think to understand her point,you simply have to look at his archives to see how much in the present and how timeless his work really was over his career. nothing he's done can be traced to any fashion period....it stood on it's own...in that moment and for the future. she's right that there are too many references to the past from galliano that just doesn't correlate with what the legacy of this house stood for.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

...very boring

ms. horyn doesn't split hairs does she?

she makes a great point though! i always thought of galliano as a romantic in every sense of the word (even think of his collections where he referenced the romantic era, the revolution, etc, explicitly), whereas margiela was not even just modern but really post-modern in his use deconstruction, fragmentation, inversion and so forth.

 

[freja]

Does anyone else feel like this collection and his Margiela debut are John throwing too many ideas up at once, almost as if he's trying to prove himself?
It wasn't a bad collection, just totally all over the place. He went from genius (the paranoid, dramatic looks) to typical Galliano (the unnecessary prints and styling).
I agree with the Vivienne Westwood comparison, and with the critiques of the set. I'm not asking for the full-out theatrics of his Dior days, but something more modern and moody would really lend itself to the clothing.
Highlights include the velvet blazers, the long and floor-length coats, and of course the bustier. Also all the shoes are really good in my opinion.

I think it's too early to pick apart the amount of Margiela codes evident in his collections. He's doing pretty well so far, and definitely being respectful to the house just as he was to Dior. But Dior's romanticism fit Galliano perfectly. I hope to see his tact as a modernist improve as he continues with MM.

 

[MON]

Finally! Yes gawd!! I missed the craziness and eccentricity on the runways that left when McQueen passed and Galliano left. I love that there's a mixture of Galliano and MMM. I am not saying that this a perfect collection, there's room for improvement.. BUT this is far far far far better than most of the collections we've seen to date. Some might say that this is not what MMM should look like and yes it kinda doesn't, BUT like Hedi, Nicholas, Raf et. al., I'd give John some time to adjust to the overall aesthetic of the house whilst at the same time adding his own touch to it. You don't get used to the aesthetics of a house just by 1 collection, it's gonna take some time.

But I'm just really happy he's back! And to be quite honest, this isn't that bad of a start.

*I still stand that those fur shoes are a big no.

 

[gazebo]

 

[Miss Galliano]

This collection is modern and very nice .. a touch of young rock girl ...
I feel the luxury and very weareable and the colours so fashion forward !
Once again.. very Martin Margiela.. . Love thahiar and Make- Up.. to see some black models on the runway..I would buy .. thanks John is back .. nice statement a good mix John and Maison Margiela

 

[Fashion_Girl22]

 

[Littleathquakes]

Does anyone else feel like this collection and his Margiela debut are John throwing too many ideas up at once, almost as if he's trying to prove himself?
It wasn't a bad collection, just totally all over the place. He went from genius (the paranoid, dramatic looks) to typical Galliano (the unnecessary prints and styling).
I agree with the Vivienne Westwood comparison, and with the critiques of the set. I'm not asking for the full-out theatrics of his Dior days, but something more modern and moody would really lend itself to the clothing.
Highlights include the velvet blazers, the long and floor-length coats, and of course the bustier. Also all the shoes are really good in my opinion.

I think it's too early to pick apart the amount of Margiela codes evident in his collections. He's doing pretty well so far, and definitely being respectful to the house just as he was to Dior. But Dior's romanticism fit Galliano perfectly. I hope to see his tact as a modernist improve as he continues with MM.

I think John had a lot of pressure riding on this, and it shows. On the one hand he could go back to the over-the-top aesthetics that he had at his own label and at Dior, but the scandal still looms overhead; so does he want to come out with guns blazing or continue being humble? As much as we'd like to separate the artist from the scandal, it's the elephant in the room. That's why I feel like this was definitely a very edited & restrained version of what could've easily been much more theatrical, much more flamboyant, much more JG. I think that is something that must be taken into consideration. So while I agree with Cathy's usual straight-to-the-chase review, I feel that Suzy took into account what I wrote above and was a bit gentler, so I don't have an issue with her review either.