Musical Chairs of Designers...

[Benn98]

Virgil should work as a cashier at H&M or something......

I think some of MJs collections are good, and with a bit of tweaking, could actually be shown in Italy. Never in London or Paris. He'll come up short. As you say, it's just a bit campy in it's current state. This weird, exaggerated state of what a woman should dress like. But he's good with prints, and sometimes add an interesting dimension to volumes.

I like Simone Rocha for her namesake brand, but I feel like she could be even better elsewhere. Roksanda and Mary I find God-awful. They really belong more in NY than London.

What about Ann Demeulemeester? Any ideas. Love her menswear!!!

 

[Scotty]

Oh I have a good suggestion.. Galliano back at Galliano.

 

[donyan]

I would love Phoebe at Jil Sander, she would have been perfect. She would also be great at Lanvin, as a jolt of energy and it would be a good way to put Lanvin into the spotlight straight away, in a positive way.
Also , obviously Galliano back at Galliano.
Marc Jacobs at Calvin Klein - I live Raf but him and CK are a complete mismatch.
Demna should be at Off White, where his brand of hyped up sportswear would make perfect sense , seeing as Virgil Abloh is a great communicator but a not so great designer..
Lutz Huelle would be a dream at Margiela but I doubt he’d do it , he would also have been great at Balenciaga , I think he would have been capable of what Demna is doing without losing the heritage of what Balenciaga stands for, his last collection made me wish he was there .
Hedi would be great at Michael Kors , injecting some attitude and relevance that is sorely missing at the moment.
Haider for Lanvin , obviously.
Felipe Oliveira at Celine , and I agree with Lemaire back at Hermes

 

[Lola701]

Odd that everyone wants to get rid of Alessandro, but nobody's mentioning the Demna 'The Hype' Gvasalia? Anyway, I'm happy with the current Gucci.

Alber at Dior, fine. Fashionista-ta will be happy and the critics will go into verbal diarrhea-mode with praise, but it's a safe mix, imo. The problem I have with Dior is that the house codes has been endlessly rehashed to the point that I really question whether we need yet another attempt. There's simply no way to top Galliano (well, there is, but that's for another thread .)
I'd like to see Alber at Chanel. It's that rare ability to master day and eveningwear, while not skimping on innovative creativity. Would be a far better choice than NG. I've not liked any of his LV collections.

I also don't know why people wants to get rid of Michele. I'm highly critical of him at Gucci because he doesn't seems to be interested in pushing himself and because everything that felt genuine in the first place seems a bit too calculated now BUT, he is the best person for Gucci now. I still remember how boring Frida's collections were. Gucci was simply not for her!
In almost a decade at Gucci, i only bought the bags & the shoes. As for the clothes, her FW14 was the only one i bought pieces from. The way she cut her pants was so weird!!

I think those who suggested Nicolas for Chanel did it because of his talent and versatility, not necessarly his work at Vuitton. That's why i mentionned him actually.
For example, i wasn't a fan at all of Alber at YSL even though i loved what he did at Guy Laroche. He redeemed himself at Lanvin. Even if i love him, Alber at Chanel could be boring after 3 years. His vocabulary is known now and we saw it with Lanvin, he doesn't really challenge himself. When you look at his work for Lanvin, SS2007 was really the collection that showed a desire to challenge himself but he went back to his comfort zone right after. Dior is so bourgeois and ladylike that he is the only one who can make it appealing for me.

He is appealing because he would do great in interpretations of the 30's (something that Karl did beautifully but it's a pity he didn't explored it more).

Nicolas has range and is obviously holding back his creativity for Vuitton. Knowing a little bit what's going on there, i almost find his work at Vuitton cynical right now

No! We need Frida!
At Ferragamo or something like that. If we have Maria Grazia at Dior, that means that we have a place for Frida somewhere!

Seriously? Pugh at McQueen? It would be a caricature....

 

[rip_ian curtis]

Personally I'm not keen on the idea of Nicolas for Chanel. Nicolas needs a different heritage to work with, more strong silhouettes and architectural minimalism. I think Dior would be more suited for him. There he would have the strong silhouettes of Mr. Dior to play with, just like he had at Balenciaga. I think the core of his success at Balenciaga was the play with the different silhouettes that we associate with old Balenciaga, and pairing them with the most interesting materials and retro-modern references. Chanel is too much about styling and accessories and bits and pieces, and the Chanel silhouette is not exactly very strong or notable. I think his work there would fell just as flat as has happened with Vuitton.

 

[Lola701]

^^
I can only imagine Nicolas being "forced" to sell that Lady Dior bag in the same way that he is today with the Capucines of Vuitton.
Even if his relation is better with the Arnault than it was with the Pinault, he should move on from LVMH after Vuitton.

KERING, LVMH...The next move is Weirthemer!
I'll send my letter to Karl in order to influence him.

 

[Benn98]

I also don't know why people wants to get rid of Michele. I'm highly critical of him at Gucci because he doesn't seems to be interested in pushing himself and because everything that felt genuine in the first place seems a bit too calculated now BUT, he is the best person for Gucci now. I still remember how boring Frida's collections were. Gucci was simply not for her!
In almost a decade at Gucci, i only bought the bags & the shoes. As for the clothes, her FW14 was the only one i bought pieces from. The way she cut her pants was so weird!!

I think those who suggested Nicolas for Chanel did it because of his talent and versatility, not necessarly his work at Vuitton. That's why i mentionned him actually.
For example, i wasn't a fan at all of Alber at YSL even though i loved what he did at Guy Laroche. He redeemed himself at Lanvin. Even if i love him, Alber at Chanel could be boring after 3 years. His vocabulary is known now and we saw it with Lanvin, he doesn't really challenge himself. When you look at his work for Lanvin, SS2007 was really the collection that showed a desire to challenge himself but he went back to his comfort zone right after. Dior is so bourgeois and ladylike that he is the only one who can make it appealing for me.

He is appealing because he would do great in interpretations of the 30's (something that Karl did beautifully but it's a pity he didn't explored it more).

Nicolas has range and is obviously holding back his creativity for Vuitton. Knowing a little bit what's going on there, i almost find his work at Vuitton cynical right now

No! We need Frida!
At Ferragamo or something like that. If we have Maria Grazia at Dior, that means that we have a place for Frida somewhere!

Seriously? Pugh at McQueen? It would be a caricature....

For about 5 or so years before Michele came onto the scene, high fashion was really a wasteland and very insular. Of course you had star designers and hyped brands, but the entire scene still functioned like a special club for most part. Michele changed that, and the reason why it's truly masterful is because his aesthetic isn't exactly commercially geared. He didnt need an H&M collab to reach the greater public. The masses were never supposed to latch onto it. I'm sure he found the response overwhelming. But not only that, he rejuvenated a brand which for years relied on a very precise direction. For that alone he should be applauded.
Now while I'm not saying he singlehandedly courted a vast audience, Gucci is up there as one of the top three to master a new attempt at democraticising contemporary fashion.
The critique against his creative output is at times justified. I get it, if the kitschy vintage-oriented debut collection wasn't your jam, then nothing he's done to date will sway you. I still feel like he try each time to incorporate something new into his work. And I don't blame him for sticking with his aesthetic. Maybe it's Frida's Gucci that makes me appreciate Michele so much. What a snoozefest it was, my God!

I agree with you re Alber. But only the fact that he fell into a comfort zone towards the end of his Lanvin tenure. He's still very capable of running a house like Chanel, with strict codes. All this time off would've served him well. Imo he's on the same level as Karl. Both are really good at creating wearable designs. Just when I think Karl is in autopilot at Chanel, them he blindsides with a stunning Fendi collection. It's very tricky to say or assume that you've seen the full extent of someone's creative vocabulary. Especially someone like Alber. Maria Grazia Chiuri? Yes! I'd agree there.

As for Pugh or Iris at McQueen, I really wouldn't mind a caricature at this stage! We are nearing two decades of Burton's mumsy floral dresses, textbook-style approach to gothic fragments, and her shoddy attempt at trying to elaborate on her seemingly greatest hit yet, the wedding dress of Duchess Catherine. Two decades and I've never seen the creative spirit of McQueen, not once. When she did try to reiterate some of his motifs with her vanilla goth foolishness it was simply laughable. What's so shocking is that Burton isn't some stranger picked off the street, she worked alongside McQueen. It's time for consumers to be reminded who the man was and what he stood for. Rant over.

 

[Lola701]

^^
Burton is like Gaytten. She is a dressmaker. She is a good menswear designer but she doesn't have the vision to carry a brand like McQueen. McQueen was so deep and personal that it needs someone, maybe with a different aesthetic, but with a real deep and personal point of view. And i know it's a word i used a lot but Lee was a very versatile designer. I feel like people only see McQueen for his last few collections but he was really good good good. I only started to like him after Givenchy because, like Tom Ford, working with a Couture heritage really helped him a lot. FW2002 is my favorite colletion from him. It's like he didn't tried and it worked perfectly!

To be honest, Burton is no different from Maria Grazia. The only difference is that she hides it in the OTT big designs she does. Her best work is generally the pre-collections.

It's funny that nobody mentioned Fendi. Fendi is so weird because i feel like it's Karl's playground. His love for Architecture and Art really comes forward there. I think Marco De Vicenzo is like the obvious choice for the house.

Fendi has a big potential. I feel like people are a bit afraid of Fendi because of the fur thing and also because it's not that commercial compared to Prada. I feel like Fendi is much more difficult to understand than Prada actually...

 

[helmutnotdead]

It's funny that nobody mentioned Fendi. Fendi is so weird because i feel like it's Karl's playground. His love for Architecture and Art really comes forward there. I think Marco De Vicenzo is like the obvious choice for the house.

Fendi has a big potential. I feel like people are a bit afraid of Fendi because of the fur thing and also because it's not that commercial compared to Prada. I feel like Fendi is much more difficult to understand than Prada actually...

I put Chitose Abe on the table. She could kill all Milan there.

 

[dior_couture1245]

Fun thread to read through! Some fabulous suggestions!

I think, at this point, Alber really would be the best fit for Chanel. I think he has a great understanding and feel for an easy and light sense of luxury. Plus, his playfulness would work to his advantage at the house. Karl certainly has a sense of humor with Chanel, but it oftentimes veers into gimmicks. Elbaz has a real skill with the flou and I can also see him making some truly fabulous iterations of the tweed suit.

Initially, I had thought that Hedi would have been glam for Chanel...because my favorite Chanel period was when Karl was imitating the Hedi look, circa 2005-2007...that really leggy, mod, Irina Lazareanu period. But, Hedi is now at Céline, obviously, and the thought of him hopping to another house just from here seems obnoxious now and I wouldn’t want him to leave Céline any time soon.

Dior needs an absolutely new vision. We’ve been getting Lady Dior now for far too long. Ever since Galliano started rehashing the New Look around 2007, it’s all we’ve gotten from Dior, through Raf and now with Maria Grazia. And despite Dior’s best efforts...I just don’t feel as though the New Look holds up as a desirable, modern way of dressing. That’s what worked about Galliano’s best period...1999-2007...he didn’t recreate the archives, instead he recreated the spirit of Dior. We all know the New Look was shocking when it debuted, and I think Galliano’s extravagant, street-inspired, multi-culti collections captured the same romance, decadence and excess of original Dior, without dressing women in explicit 1950’s Couture replicas. It was so smart.

If Dior really wanted to push for the New Look after Galliano, they really missed out on hiring Olivier Theyskens...I think he was the only one who would have been able to give Dior something worthwhile. His sensitive, poetic and moody sensibilities would have been a very distinct, sobering shift after Galliano that I think would have worked wondrously. Raf couldn’t make a gown to save his life. Theyskens makes gowns you would give your life for. Unfortunately, at this point, I don’t think Theyskens would make sense for Dior anymore. The archive Dior look is too played out.

I actually think Demna would be better at Dior than at Balenciaga. He could kind of pick up where Galliano left off around 2003. I don’t dislike Demna’s work for Balenciaga, but something still just doesn’t seem to quite fit there for me. I don’t think irony makes sense at Balenciaga. I think it could work at Dior because Dior was able to still feel authentic even when Galliano sent out his intentionally trashy collections of the early 00’s.

 

[GERGIN]

Lindsay Lohan for Bill Blass or Halston so chic.

 

[Steddycam91]

Deep down, Alber would also be my first pick to take the reins at Chanel...behind him, maybe Phoebe Philo.

But at this point, is it just me or does Chanel seem like something of a poisoned chalice? It's such a behemoth, with so many product categories and the expectation of huge blockbuster shows and pre-collections, that I feel like a major designer in a position to actually get the job would decline and go to another house where they could have much more control of the overall image of the brand, or just start their own line.

Nicolas at LV and Maria Grazia at Dior are the ones that are currently running brands on a level and size comparable to Chanel, so I do wonder if that would give them an advantage when the Chanel position inevitably becomes available...

 

[chanelh]

correct me if I am wrong, but i read somewhere long time ago, didn't Alber get anxious when he was in charge of Lanvin? I mean the workload, pressure and expectation in Chanel would likely to crush him if Lanvin can make him anxious, he is talent but too soft IMO.

And i agree with Lora, Alber's vocabulary is limited, Lanvin was pretty and elegant under him but nothing exciting at all. For Chanel, the collection can also be similar from time to time, but it's mostly because the heritage of the House is too strong and iconic, Karl or any other designer need to respect that, and know how to create some new from all these old elements, even maybe just the setting sometimes. Chanel is truly a hard job, and Karl is doing as well as it could be, we need someone tough and aggressive to take the job, no sensitive or emotional or whining

 

[GivenchyHomme]

I think some of MJs collections are good, and with a bit of tweaking, could actually be shown in Italy. Never in London or Paris. He'll come up short. As you say, it's just a bit campy in it's current state. This weird, exaggerated state of what a woman should dress like. But he's good with prints, and sometimes add an interesting dimension to volumes.

So what your basically saying is that mediocre amateurs such as Clare Wright Keller, Demma Gvasalia and Anthony Vaccarello are worthy of showing in Paris? And not a man who has experience with a major house and has been in the industry for over 30 years? Your forgetting that his label dosen't have the budget or prestige that it used to. At his heyday he was on top of this industry. For you to say that he could never show in one of those cities is absolutley hilarious, especially when you see who actually is in Paris at the moment. Marc Jacobs is a slave to fashion, the others are slaves to commerce. I'm glad he hasn't sold out like everyone else. His brand may have taken a hit, but at least he'll go out with pride knowing that he never compromised his art for the sake of money or fame. He would bring a breath of fresh air to Paris. A creative freedom. He won't cater to millennials just to make a quick buck. You should really take a look around those cities before you make such a ridiculous statment. If he comes up short it won't be for lack of creativity, it will be his defiance of current trends.

 

[Growl]

So what your basically saying is that mediocre amateurs such as Clare Wright Keller, Demma Gvasalia and Anthony Vaccarello are worthy of showing in Paris? And not a man who has experience with a major house and has been in the industry for over 30 years? Your forgetting that his label dosen't have the budget or prestige that it used to. At his heyday he was on top of this industry. For you to say that he could never show in one of those cities is absolutley hilarious, especially when you see who actually is in Paris at the moment. Marc Jacobs is a slave to fashion, the others are slaves to commerce. I'm glad he hasn't sold out like everyone else. His brand may have taken a hit, but at least he'll go out with pride knowing that he never compromised his art for the sake of money or fame. He would bring a breath of fresh air to Paris. A creative freedom. He won't cater to millennials just to make a quick buck. You should really take a look around those cities before you make such a ridiculous statment. If he comes up short it won't be for lack of creativity, it will be his defiance of current trends.

I loved reading this.

 

[dodencebt]

Really?
For me Philo could alter the spirit of Armani. Armani is undeniably Italian and above all from the north. Beyond the minimalist aesthetic, there’s a certain idea of elegance behind it.

I could see Armani by Alessandra Facchinetti or Stefano Pilati. One proved her talent at doing Couture, RTW and working with a leather goods company and the other worked for an illustrious French house and above all, his work for Agnona and Zegna Couture was pretty much in the spirit of a house like Armani. Plus, Stefano had an history with Armani..

I definitely agree that they would be a more suitable choice in terms of style, but I truly believe that hiring someone like Pilati wouldn't be enough for the turnaround I'd like to see at Armani. With him, I think the house would continue to do a beautiful, but safe job. With Philo, Armani could have the potential to be on top of the game as Phoebe is someone who could take the house codes and twist them in an extremely modern and influential way. But that's just my opinion and wishful thinking.