Matthieu Blazy - Designer, Creative Director of Chanel

[PPPT]

I’d put Hedi in Gucci and watch the world burn 😈

Would anyone hate me if I think Burberry should hire Hedi too, after what he did with Celine Men SS25 — that whole Eton schoolboy cosplay situation? I know it’s not exactly Burberry, but at least it’s British, right? Just give him the reins, and he’ll turn a profit. In under 7 years, he’ll be gone, and then we can start talking about the brand’s DNA and finding a CD who actually fits. 😔

 

[helmutnotdead]

I'm still in awe with this RANDOM DECISION.

 

[fenty]

Them appointing Blazy just because he'll be "easy to manage" just tells me this relationship won't last.

 

[GivenchyAddict]

Please no Alasdair McKimm near Chanel but the last VF cover with Lola in Chanel styled by him may indicate the opposite.

If Blazy wants to keep being so heavy handed with his looks then he should have Carlyne.

I try to get used to the idea of him being at Chanel but I really can’t. I don’t like his work at all.

 

[Nimsay]

Hedi Slimane and Matthieu Blazy represent two contrasting philosophies for leading a house like Chanel. Slimane’s tends to like a radical reset, completely redefining the house’s visual language.

In contrast, Blazy seems set to take a more curatorial path, building upon Karl Lagerfeld’s 36-year legacy. Instead of dismantling the past, he would study and refine Lagerfeld’s influential body of work from 1983 to 2019, identifying elements that resonate with contemporary tastes.

Karl is now Gabrielle... Chanel's intent would be to reinterpret Lagerfeld’s design language with modern materials and updates, keeping Chanel connected to its codes while also ensuring its relevance today.

Lagerfeld's legacy is a rich source for contemporary fashion, deserving of careful evolution rather than complete overhaul.

 

[avonlea002]

Slimane is a creative director with a strong but limited visual language that is easily identifiable. He has a good eye for construction and finishing but never creates anything new. It's always a literal reference from from the past but filtered and repackaged.

Blazy is a designer. He designs in the true sense of that word, plays with volumes and techniques. The issue that he doesn't have is own voice. He probably makes a great assistant or studio director but that's it. Maybe this is why Chanel chose him. He will just follow the orders and will be easy to manage.

 

[Xone]

He will just follow the orders and will be easy to manage.

well, that happened with Gucci execs and ancora guy and now we see the results...
let's wait until the official announcement bc at this point i believe they can go on different direction and Blazy was just a well crafted media distraction...

 

[MulletProof]

Is it even official?
Other than the influencers' green, I don't recall anything he's ever done lol, did he ever do anything on his own?. Someone should do one of those volft-style posts '10 receipts showing why Matthieu Blazy is a genius and why your opinion doesn't matter'.

 

[Lola701]

HEDI would have been the best choice for CHANEL, but they went for the safest one with Blazy. Nothing will change at Chanel….

For you Hedi is not a safe choice?
Beyond being a fan of his work, you could be a little bit more unbiased.
His last collection for Celine was Chanel. You can’t do safer than this.

Blazy is a surprise to me, a room of opportunities. We for the most part know what to expect from Hedi Slimane. It’s just that some people wants to see that partition under the name Chanel. I’m not, personally.

I’m welcoming this arrival of Blazy. Maybe he will actually make me want to purchase Chanel clothes again.

 

[Grets]

I fear we are in an era of designers that have no personality. I will continue to complain about the musical chairs, but there is something about this next generation of designers that lack charisma in their designs. Sabato, Maximllian, McGirr and Blazy - all very boring, safe, corporate yes-men. The suits at Kering have made it clear this is the kind of designer they want, with the exception of Demna. But we already, including the customer, see right through this. Blazy's Chanel is going to be a mix of Raf's Dior meet's Sabato's Gucci.

 

[NoInvite]

The only part I like in his profile is his work for Margiela Artisanal. I'm sure his couture will be great and he will do wonders with the ateliers that they have.

The rest I always feel it's Celine 2.1.

 

[Lola701]

I fear we are in an era of designers that have no personality. I will continue to complain about the musical chairs, but there is something about this next generation of designers that lack charisma in their designs. Sabato, Maximllian, McGirr and Blazy - all very boring, safe, corporate yes-men. The suits at Kering have made it clear this is the kind of designer they want, with the exception of Demna. But we already, including the customer, see right through this. Blazy's Chanel is going to be a mix of Raf's Dior meet's Sabato's Gucci.

But don’t you think that part of fashion is also being able to embrace the new and deal with it?
I remember that the generation of designers we all love, the Galliano, Mugler and McQueen and all were very much criticized by the previous generation because they were seen as « costumiers » (costume designers) instead of Couturier simply because their logic was expressing a creativity, a show instead of making « clothes for women »?

I always use that expression but we have the designers we deserve.

There’s a reason why that wave of designers is rising. We have this media that are fully integrated in our lives, the way people consume fashion is out of control and it’s almost funny to see that something as elitist as HF is generating that much conversations and engagement beyond platforms like TFS.

And I think there’s a huge difference between Blazy and Sabato. And I don’t agree with this idea of « Yes Men » and corporatism. Just because the aesthetic is not pleasing us doesnt mean that it´s motivated by corporastim. Sabato's work is boring itself and im not sure corporatism like that numbers are plunging.

We have so few examples of success in fashion driven by corporatism. Even when it´s disguised as creative, it doesn´t work when there´s a lack of vision.

 

[style_expert]

I find it rather astonishing when people claim to know what his version of Chanel will look like—and dismiss it even before the official announcement of his appointment.
Based on what, exactly?

At Bottega Veneta, he was the final creative director of a house with very few pre-existing codes in ready-to-wear. Even in leather goods, the only significant code is the Intrecciato.
Chanel, however, is a completely different game. It offers him much more to work with in terms of codes, history, tailoring, and of course budget. In that sense, it's very difficult to predict what his vision will look like—let alone whether it will be any good.

If anything, my criticism of Blazy's work is not so much that he lacks interesting ideas but that he needs to find the right way to present them in a more coherent and better-edited manner.

 

[tricotineacetat]

This is sad, but at least it's motivated me to be less obsessed with fashion and focus on more interesting topics irl, thank god !!!

No Galliano, no Tisci, no Theysken,...but this guy ???

I don’t think we will ever need to debate the artistic worth of Galliano, Theyskens, Chalayan etc. in comparison to the designers presently considered for top industry positions, such as JVA, Vaccarello or Blazy - They represent what the industry and the majority of customers are asking for in an age where the authority of the créateur is significantly smaller than in the 1990ies and early 2000s where the designers we love had their heydays.

When I was younger, I really wanted to be a designer of any one of these legendary maisons but the luster has really worn off when I see how the industry has changed. Perhaps creating something out of a comfortable niche is more attractive again than being a part of this grind of never ending collections (of which Chanel epitomizes it’s peak)… I don’t want Theyskens to design resort wear, tennis clothes and dog accessories!

 

[Alquimista]

I feel like I'm gonna be into his Chanel. He is a good choice. Hedi was the obvious choice but never my ideal name.

I'm totally in agreement with Lola. Chanel was wise to not be poised by nostalgia. Fashion is about the NEW.

Very curious for his total vision for the clothes, the sets, the campaigns.

 

[Frederic01]

I think the problem with Blazy is that he is not a good storyteller and you need to be a good storyteller in order to succeed at a Maison like Chanel.

All of his collections blend into one, with no clear distinctions between them. In that way he will have to challenge himself as he will have to do Resort and Pre-Fall collections inspired by destinations and cultures that require some kind of magic to be imbued, and a point of difference from the other collections produced during the year.

I also worry about how big his vision could be. His Bottega Veneta is a much smaller brand, 10% of the size of Chanel in terms of revenue. Is Chanel really banking on the fact that the current Chanel clientele, arguably fans of Virigine Viard and to some extent still Karl Lagerfeld, are going to magically change their taste set and aesthetic and just start buying into Matthieu's modernist vision for the brand? It is obvious they will lose a lot of clientele at the beginning due to the drastic shift in aesthetics. I can see the current Chanel clientele migrating to Dior for example. Dior by MGC is closer to what Chanel is now than what Chanel will be under Blazy. It will be interesting to see how this shift in the clientele base will occur.

Matthieu and Chanel will succeed if they can capture the whole "Old Celine", "Old Bottega", Jil Sander, and The Row clientele. But the problem with that is the price. Chanel is three or four times the price of any of those brands. If they want to bring this client base over to Chanel, they will have to sincerely reconsider their current pricing strategy. Unless they want to just sell perfumes and Karl Lagerfeld-era accessories for the rest of Matthieu's tenure...

 

[tricotineacetat]

But don’t you think that part of fashion is also being able to embrace the new and deal with it?
I remember that the generation of designers we all love, the Galliano, Mugler and McQueen and all were very much criticized by the previous generation because they were seen as « costumiers » (costume designers) instead of Couturier simply because their logic was expressing a creativity, a show instead of making « clothes for women »?

I always use that expression but we have the designers we deserve.

There’s a reason why that wave of designers is rising. We have this media that are fully integrated in our lives, the way people consume fashion is out of control and it’s almost funny to see that something as elitist as HF is generating that much conversations and engagement beyond platforms like TFS.

And I think there’s a huge difference between Blazy and Sabato. And I don’t agree with this idea of « Yes Men » and corporatism. Just because the aesthetic is not pleasing us doesnt mean that it´s motivated by corporastim. Sabato's work is boring itself and im not sure corporatism like that numbers are plunging.

We have so few examples of success in fashion driven by corporatism. Even when it´s disguised as creative, it doesn´t work when there´s a lack of vision.

I made my peace that I never wanted to be a chameleon of fashion much in the way of a Lagerfeld, but rather looked at the people deemed 'difficult' to work with for guidance, who never even wanted to create a best-selling handbag or shoe.

The era of the independent designer maisons is passed. Yohji Yamamoto, Rei Kawakubo/Junya Watanabe and Rick Owens stand as maybe the last remaining examples of designers with a singular vision that can defy corporate demands. Lemaire remains one of the few examples of real designers (and not glorified merchandisers) who have succeeded building a house in the present climate - At least without the modern means of (self) marketing that vibe with Gen Z, such as Jacquemus.

There have been years a Yohji show did not catch me but I know by looking at a piece of clothing there is still that specific hand there that made me fall in love with him in the first place. The same with Rick Owens whose shows for almost a decade I now find a repetitive freak show.

Those designers still have all my admiration for doing their thing where others aspire to be part of a wider 'fashion conversation'.

 

[mteb123]

I'm still in awe with this RANDOM DECISION.

Very much this sentiment… A tad bewildered, baffled and confused STILL!! I mean he’s not the worst out there.. But damn what is he really known for?! He really didn’t put a stamp on Bottega.. His Bottega needed more tuning, refining and just basic editing!! I do agree with others who mentioned they chose him basically because he would be more malleable which seems to be the story at many of these houses at the moment!!

 

[jeanclaude]

I expect Chanel to become into a bastard fashion version of "Art Attack" with Blazy at the helm.

 

[Lola701]

I think the problem with Blazy is that he is not a good storyteller and you need to be a good storyteller in order to succeed at a Maison like Chanel.

All of his collections blend into one, with no clear distinctions between them. In that way he will have to challenge himself as he will have to do Resort and Pre-Fall collections inspired by destinations and cultures that require some kind of magic to be imbued, and a point of difference from the other collections produced during the year.

I also worry about how big his vision could be. His Bottega Veneta is a much smaller brand, 10% of the size of Chanel in terms of revenue. Is Chanel really banking on the fact that the current Chanel clientele, arguably fans of Virigine Viard and to some extent still Karl Lagerfeld, are going to magically change their taste set and aesthetic and just start buying into Matthieu's modernist vision for the brand? It is obvious they will lose a lot of clientele at the beginning due to the drastic shift in aesthetics. I can see the current Chanel clientele migrating to Dior for example. Dior by MGC is closer to what Chanel is now than what Chanel will be under Blazy. It will be interesting to see how this shift in the clientele base will occur.

Matthieu and Chanel will succeed if they can capture the whole "Old Celine", "Old Bottega", Jil Sander, and The Row clientele. But the problem with that is the price. Chanel is three or four times the price of any of those brands. If they want to bring this client base over to Chanel, they will have to sincerely reconsider their current pricing strategy. Unless they want to just sell perfumes and Karl Lagerfeld-era accessories for the rest of Matthieu's tenure...

Chanel has a frame. So from that point, I don’t get your concern.
I know a lot of people who stopped buying Chanel RTW (beyond me). The fashion girls are not buying Chanel anymore.

And I think that beyond making money, you need to have influence, to drive a conversation to still be relevant.

I would say something maybe weird but I don’t think being recognized for the commercial success is a great attribute for a designer.
Commercial success should be the reward. Gucci sold more under Frida Giannini than Tom Ford. Who remember her for her work?

MGC is doing wonders for Dior numbers. In the history of fashion, her work will not leave a strong stamp.

LVMH put Kim Jones at Fendi to deliver numbers. The work was lackluster, the numbers never came and people were still reminiscing the few collections Silvia designed because of their creativity.

I don’t understand those concerns.
His work will be an interpretation of Chanel that in the major way will be filled with Chanel elements.

I’m maybe naive but I think it will be fair to wait for the first collection to see how he approach Chanel. Chanel is not Margiela Artisanal and neither Bottega Veneta.

I embrace the change. I embrace the change no matter what because it’s essential.
It doesn’t mean that we are forced to appreciate it but I’m always very surprised by how we can be lovers of fashion and be so afraid of what is to come!

I made my peace that I never wanted to be a chameleon of fashion much in the way of a Lagerfeld, but rather looked at the people deemed 'difficult' to work with for guidance, who never even wanted to create a best-selling handbag or shoe.

The era of the independent designer maisons is passed. Yohji Yamamoto, Rei Kawakubo/Junya Watanabe and Rick Owens stand as maybe the last remaining examples of designers with a singular vision that can defy corporate demands. Lemaire remains one of the few examples of real designers (and not glorified merchandisers) who have succeeded building a house in the present climate - At least without the modern means of (self) marketing that vibe with Gen Z, such as Jacquemus.

There have been years a Yohji show did not catch me but I know by looking at a piece of clothing there is still that specific hand there that made me fall in love with him in the first place. The same with Rick Owens whose shows for almost a decade I now find a repetitive freak show.

Those designers still have all my admiration for doing their thing where others aspire to be part of a wider 'fashion conversation'.

Yes I agree but at some point, those designers we are admiring were part of a fashion conversation. They were part of a wave.
Thankfully, the era they thrived allowed them to explore, to establish their langage and to develop whatever we have come to love from them.

I refuse to not be able to appreciate what is around because of the grandiose past I’ve experienced and enjoyed.

You build a career and a body of work though some tumultuous times but those who stays or who are remembered are those who left a mark.
What I see in various threads is a displeasure for what is around and an overpraise and sometimes romantization of the past and I think it’s ridiculous because fashion will always go forward.

And yes, we can criticize what’s there is to criticize but it’s unfair to see some comparisons.