Matthieu Blazy - Designer, Creative Director of Chanel

[LadyJunon]

I can’t find it 💀

It's members only...

 

[Lola701]

what a sunday to wake up to see this youtube video on your feed by understitchyt :
View attachment 1436351
Had to censor the flags but you can see the full video on understitchyt video intro text below:

Nov 22, 2025
I just couldn't not make this video! After seeing Blazy's Chanel debut I was so invested in how many various references I saw to Gabrielle Chanel's life and of course to her involvement with Nazi Germany. To me it came across like he was communicating a dislike for her as a person to be honest, though I am aware that's just my own interpretation of the themes in the collection.

Do we care if he hates Gabrielle Chanel?
The Weirthemers probably hates her too lol.

I don’t think Coco was likeable in the first place.

Maybe the thinks pieces around this collection are getting too deep…

 

[PDFSD]

Do we care if he hates Gabrielle Chanel?
The Weirthemers probably hates her too lol.

I don’t think Coco was likeable in the first place.

Maybe the thinks pieces around this collection are getting too deep…

If he hates her he should not work under her name loL makes no sense .... Gabrielle Chanel was not liked in her time for her rudeness etc sure but Blazy was not even born then so he cant have deep feelings towards her while he barely knows her archive and justed started digging in her story.

I think the piece is more about how Blazy is avoiding the things that Gabrielle Chanel actually loved to use in her original work versus his choices to highlight in his first collection as being chanel like but not her most loved ideas on dressing etc

The owners own dad forgive her and took care of her till her death and they got rich beyond their dreams , i very much believe they see Chanel as a business not emotionally attached to its history they are both very straight men with other passions like horses etc than what Chanel did or does has in their store windows or runways

 

[Lola701]

If he hates her he should not work under her name loL makes no sense .... Gabrielle Chanel was not liked in her time for her rudeness etc sure but Blazy was not even born then so he cant have deep feelings towards her while he barely knows her archive and justed started digging in her story.

I think the piece is more about how Blazy is avoiding the things that Gabrielle Chanel actually loved to use in her original work versus his choices to highlight in his first collection as being chanel like but not her most loved ideas on dressing etc

The owners own dad forgive her and took care of her till her death and they got rich beyond their dreams , i very much believe they see Chanel as a business not emotionally attached to its history they are both very straight men with other passions like horses etc than what Chanel did or does has in their store windows or runways

For me it’s irrelevant. It’s like a « let’s find another thing to hate on Blazy ». We don’t know those things. We don’t need to go deep around those questions.
Karl didn’t necessarily said beautiful things about Gabrielle either. Her personality has always been a very difficult subject of conversation. I remember Françoise Sagan saying that she was a terrible person but it didn’t stopped her from wearing Chanel.

What is relevant is the work. How his work relates to what she has done and what Karl left.

It’s turning into an unecessary witch hunt. Understich could have hated the collection, even if Matthieu wanted to be adopted by Gabrielle, the collection wouldn’t have changed.

Gabrielle would have probably hated the black woman that i am and here I am buying products attached to her name since 2004. Yes mostly due to Karl but still we are.

And the same way that I don’t have a record of her expressing her distain for black people, we don’t have a record of Matthieu expressing his dislike for her. If we go down the « think pieces » route, it’s a never ending game…

 

[PDFSD]

For me it’s irrelevant. It’s like a « let’s find another thing to hate on Blazy ». We don’t know those things. We don’t need to go deep around those questions.
Karl didn’t necessarily said beautiful things about Gabrielle either. Her personality has always been a very difficult subject of conversation. I remember Françoise Sagan saying that she was a terrible person but it didn’t stopped her from wearing Chanel.

What is relevant is the work. How his work relates to what she has done and what Karl left.

It’s turning into an unecessary witch hunt. Understich could have hated the collection, even if Matthieu wanted to be adopted by Gabrielle, the collection wouldn’t have changed.

Gabrielle would have probably hated the black woman that i am and here I am buying products attached to her name since 2004. Yes mostly due to Karl but still we are.

And the same way that I don’t have a record of her expressing her distain for black people, we don’t have a record of Matthieu expressing his dislike for her. If we go down the « think pieces » route, it’s a never ending game…

It's in a context of a person that has interest in Chanel and its history and makes multiple content on it ..we don't know what he said because i think so far nobody here has paid to see the video so we don't know his verdict or opinion or findings.

Its irrelevant if one hates Blazy more or love him more, as the conversation is everything around him and his Chanel appointment i don't understand the constant divide in counting less favorable opinions versus pro or indifferent.

I don't know what's deep or not deep supposed to mean, as we discuss here as the conversation goes, ideas or concepts hopes wishes dislikes love and hate etc facts or speculation.

Witch hunt is code word for look the other way...it does not mean any more what it used to be since the orange guy uses it at every discomfort of critics or investigation.lol
Again we don't know what Understich said in the video so we cant have a fully formed opinion to call it a witch hunt.
The analysis is in the video of his finding or opinions as he usually does, we don't know what he is basing it on.

I think the cover is a bit to much i don't see the link, but i don't know what point he was making as i don't subscribe or pay for more subscription i have to many and forget to cancel lol

BRAND PRODUCT versus Founder / Owners believes:
The idea of Chanel as a bad person versus the Chanel the brand that's up to everyones to decide for themselves, many companies have helped the n*zies even LV BMW HUGO BOSS VW etc ect some willingly others by force or ways to survive.

Many current companies have token poc in ads but have racist owners or management or affiliations.
Cartier owner is a big clear example of this and the management, yet they have constant poc models for ads on their websites because they know its sells and looks good for optics up to you as client to self educate and decide to shop cartier.

Everyone that want to know where to spend their money can know and decide to spend or not at x company be it for health reasons or political or environmental, quality/safety or founders or owners stance on race or any society related moral questions or believes this for me is personal morals and believes.

Gucci makes products in pig skin as well means as muslim one would not buy any gucci regardless if they have calf products also because it comes from same factory and same shop i doubt many don't buy any Gucci for that reason at all.

Humans thent to override their beliefs or morals in order to have shiny objects or wealth etc so i don't know how much value people place in where they shop if its not a clear boycott in the press.