What Givenchy needs is a strong POV. The reality is that except for Riccardo, nobody else had a strong POV.
McQueen was all over the place, Galliano was really unsure, MacDonald was a mess but also lacked focus, Clare had like 3 different versions of herself during her tenure and Matthew has provided confusion since the beginning.
Bernard Arnault used to go to Givenchy shows. I don’t think he bothers anymore…
HC won’t do anything for you is you don’t have something important or noticeable to say. And with Givenchy, playing with codes doesn’t mean anything as those codes aren’t known by everybody.
When I look at post-Hubert Givenchy, I just see mismanagement.
Galliano's collections were good, but looking back, it was obvious that they were an audition for Dior as his Givenchy was essentially his eponymous label with a larger budget.
McQueen's earlier collections were good, but his tenure was doomed to fail. He was too open with his lack of respect for Givenchy and it was obvious that the gig was a money and market opportunity for him, rather than a design challenge.
MacDonald was a incoherent mess with no sense identity whatsoever.
Tisci actually managed to find a strong identity for Givenchy, which eventually spread to the menswear when he took over from Boateng. He was kind of the Ghesquière of the late 00s/10s in a way.
Wright Keller and Williams suffered from what I call "Successor's Syndrome", meaning that they were automatically cast in Tisci's shadow. Wright Keller wasn't able to find an identity that pleased Tisci's customers, while Williams failed to revive Tisci's look with dignity. Having his first two seasons shown digitally didn't help either.
The next creative director will really have to say: "I am
[insert creative director], this is my vision of Givenchy and I'm not ashamed of it!"