Matthieu Blazy - Designer, Creative Director of Chanel

[PDFSD]

Why does it have to say anything? Why does it have to be BRAVE? What? I feel like you guys keep changing the goalposts when it comes to "intellectualism" and what it is in fashion, just to make Blazy fit this narrative in your head.

(Also... artists can be intellectuals... so what's your point with the Yves quotes? He's not an intellectual because you don't hate him. I mean, he fits the definition of intellectual in some of his interviews about fashion IMO.)

I don't give a f*ck about Blazy, but I kind of love how he sets people off...

why be a creative director?why make shoes? why do clunky clothes why talk about childhood for seats and put them in a cleaned up crack house ? why? i ask myself as well lol

In regards too brave i could choose 20 other words, i was just brave to make a choice in saying brave..... crucify me :-)

i like parts of yves sure but i don't think so before today if he was intellectual or not for me he is more and emotional instinctive person that has intellectual deep thoughts sure

the quotes was just to look at his own words on art and how he went about it i like to go back to the source if i speak on given person in a subject thats all.

it reminded me why i loved his work so much.

i dont have a narrative on him if i did i would not be discussing him because i don't need others point of view on my narrative once i have one.

i think in the end we all agree on most of the things we just happen to use different words for it

that is that his output is all over the place , and we care enough to discuss it here :-)

 

[Lola701]

this 10000000000000000% agree

...its a general view of north europe school of design versus italian designers at houses even stylist and on set and designers from UK and belgium have this snob looking down at italian designers and this is from my IRL experiences ....and why early on writing here i expressed my feeling on Pieters approach to ALAIA and why BLazy is in same school of belgian designers of approach that the somehow have a problem to resolve when designing but never give real answers.

Prada is seen as the exception of course and blue print for many as margiela etc because the clothes come closest to reality of clothes not like comme is to far and cookie.

italian designers are good for industrial acc and dealing with factories they are closer to the making of actual product but the thinking is left to the north europeans

you can see it also when Hedi was more modernist thinking approach. north europe way to now his more instinctive approach its not as celebrated .
He is after all tunisian italian brazilian mix born in france :-)

But I think despite having been in a relationship and coming from the same school of designs, Blazy and Mullier are quite different designers. Maybe the thinking is the same but the result is different.
And in a way, I was quite surprised by how bourgeois Blazy’s BV turned out to be. Beyond the very crafty nature that was very obvious, it was very bourgeois. There’s a sense of a woman and a man in his work. A sense of realism.

And maybe it has to do from the fact that he is the actual womenswear designer out of that group.

And it’s almost the same with Patrick and Raf. I loved Jil Sander by Raf but the architect behind it was Patrick. I hated Raf at Dior and we know why. And now, each part of that puzzle is ruining two brands.

I liked Matthieu’s work so I’m glad that life has distanced them professionally lol.

When Mullier said that because he saw his work being copied, he decided to do those weird things, I realized that he is probably not the type of designer he imagine to be.

But I guess we will see. Our debates are interesting but what will count is the end result.
But I agree about Italians.

I don’t really see Hedi as a designer tbh. Fashion is just an element of a context lol.

 

[proseccotabis]

And in a way, I was quite surprised by how bourgeois Blazy’s BV turned out to be. Beyond the very crafty nature that was very obvious, it was very bourgeois. There’s a sense of a woman and a man in his work. A sense of realism.

if i may: what popped in my mind are those crochet flowers and those horrid tulip like skirts -these to me are the furthest thing away from a bourgeoisie...yes the decor pieces and lamps are cute but too far fetched and far away from bourgeois... the whole craft thing feels very impersonal. it very much feels like 'we're going to do it because nobody else is doing it on this level but we will also increase the prices to a point none of you will ever afford it' lol.

 

[Thefrenchy]

God forbid I'm not MB's biggest fan, but I find it so bizarre that people have expectations towards Chanel.

KL built it into an entertainment-type of brand that will give you a show, no one (who is honest) ever looked at the clothes. If anything, accessories had become like merch from a concert. What did you see the most photos of, no matter the season? The show set. It was like going to a concert, you're wondering what the crazy singer had in mind for you this time. That's why VV failed, because she was unable to deliver on that. That's where MB will be expected: can he bring back the "entertainment" aspect of Chanel.

The brand itself is strong enough, they'll keep selling anything that is made out of a gorgeous tweed or that has a CC on it. They just need MB to make his SHOWS (not collections, shows) something to look forward to.

HIS challenge will be to understand that he can't be too bourgeois anymore. His Chanel can't be BV XXL. He needs to translate concepts that will speak to the new money woman who wants a HC tailleur, and to the girl who wants to buy a Chanel nail polish. Bonne chance.

 

[JohannesL]

Wait, which designer copied Pieter's work? I want to check his/her work what is the purpose behind the inspiration because I don't expect Pieter to be such an inspiring designer.