Pieter Mulier - Designer, Creative Director of Alaïa

[MulletProof]

^ for me it’s the fact that their announcement was done almost a week later what makes me want to pass on it. Say no to trolling for the sake of trolling. But can’t stand the visuals in general..

I liked the interview. He sounds in a healthy headspace. I like people who at least consider other professional ventures and don’t feel chained to what they do, especially people in fashion, who see the dumpster’s been on fire for so long and still act like it is the absolute last professional field on earth and there’s no way they could ever express themselves creatively elsewhere. Wish he could’ve had a stint in furniture but it sounds like this project has been smooth so far.

I do want to say… the choices of words among fashion journalists can be so grating sometimes. ‘Despite the trauma’? what trauma..? a man dies peacefully of old age and two years later his employees are ‘traumatized’?! you’d think he was the victim of some heinous crime. It’s just death.. it happens to “some”!

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Fashion people are easily traumatized— and no less easier dramatized; just take a gander at the Phoebe Philo’s return of the king stanning thread LOL

I think that the posthumous strategy Richemont has in mind for Alaïa is really interesting and different for a corporate house.

They traded the idea of targeting aggressive growth for aiming for stability and retaining Alaïa at a healthy size that will allow the house to maintain its atelier and its flagship stores without financial losses. This seems to be very appropriate for a house like Alaïa.

Mulier's collections may not be the house's best, but he seems to be enjoying his job and getting along well with the atelier staff. He gets to be the creative director of a house with similar values to his. This means that he gets to execute his vision for the house, without the burden of having to aggressively push constant buzzy products and logoed merchandise at a breakneck pace.

There's no hard sales target or marketer/merchandiser led collections either. The only real change is to make the house more publicly visible to younger audiences, which makes sense considering that Alaïa's original customer base is now approaching retirement age.

Alaïa seems to be the ideal operational model to have in this era of fashion:
• two seasonal collections a year
• a small, but strong atelier
• a couple of flagship stores
• a healthy number of wholesale accounts
• a loyal customer base
• a equal balance between ready-to-wear and accessory sales

I hope so.

He seems to have shed that initial overly-clunky, contrived and tiresome conceptual fashion, and finally easing into a more effortless femininity-- one that was always the point of Azzedine’s sensibility. Relevance to a new generation doesn’t always and only mean gimmicky clownwear nor accessible leisurewear. Azzedine was youthful and feminine— for all women, all ages.

But Pieter needs to be careful and also aggressive in maintaining and reestablishing the Alaia signatures, because at this point— Anthony’s YSL has incorporated a good dose of Alaia’s silhouettes, and attitude, and he’s able to make it work quite convincingly alongside Yves’ signatures, despite his rather very limited talent. And with the Kering’s aggressive pull behind his YSL, it’s very easy to see a whole new generation being convinced that Pieter’s Alaia is following Anthony’s YSL, rather than the other way around. His Alaia can’t rest on its laurels and expect this era’s consumer to know who’s copying who.

 

[LadyJunon]

^ for me it’s the fact that their announcement was done almost a week later what makes me want to pass on it. Say no to trolling for the sake of trolling. But can’t stand the visuals in general.

That makes it even worse Best case scenario, Alaïa shows a bit earlier or Celine shows a bit late. Worst case scenario, magazines split their writers between the two shows with a menswear focus at Celine (which would be appropriate, considering Hedi's approach to menswear vs womenswear).

I liked the interview. He sounds in a healthy headspace. I like people who at least consider other professional ventures and don’t feel chained to what they do, especially people in fashion, who see the dumpster’s been on fire for so long and still act like it is the absolute last professional field on earth and there’s no way they could ever express themselves creatively elsewhere. Wish he could’ve had a stint in furniture but it sounds like this project has been smooth so far.

I do want to say… the choices of words among fashion journalists can be so grating sometimes. ‘Despite the trauma’? what trauma..? a man dies peacefully of old age and two years later his employees are ‘traumatized’?! you’d think he was the victim of some heinous crime. It’s just death.. it happens to “some”!

Yes, I think that his background in interior architecture (from where Raf hired him) opened his mind to possibilities beyond fashion design and his refusal to become a "jester" for a place in the industry is respectable.

The wording of that article is definitely done for drama. While there was probably a small period of grief, I'm sure that the true reason for the huge gap was to allow Richemont enough time to find a decent successor. While I would've preferred Olivier Theyskens, Haider Ackermann or even Glenn Martens at the helm, Mulier, and his desire to work with the house as it is, is more than good enough in my eyes.

^^^ Fashion people are easily traumatized— and no less easier dramatized; just take a gander at the Phoebe Philo’s return of the king stanning thread LOL

Honestly, the reaction towards Hedi's debut at Celine was violent. You'd think he'd skinned Philo and sent a coat made of her skin down the runway with the pure rage it caused. The slutshaming was gross too.

But Pieter needs to be careful and also aggressive in maintaining and reestablishing the Alaia signatures, because at this point— Anthony’s YSL has incorporated a good dose of Alaia’s silhouettes, and attitude, and he’s able to make it work quite convincingly alongside Yves’ signatures, despite his rather very limited talent. And with the Kering’s aggressive pull behind his YSL, it’s very easy to see a whole new generation being convinced that Pieter’s Alaia is following Anthony’s YSL, rather than the other way around. His Alaia can’t rest on its laurels and expect this era’s consumer to know who’s copying who.

I'm not too worried, since Mulier doesn't seem to be overly dependent into that 80s cliché. His overall look reads more 90s/00s with more obscure archival references to me.

 

[MulletProof]

even Glenn Martens at the helm,

God no, this guy was promising for a split second and that split second happened lightyears ago. He’s been reporting live from gimmickland ever since. Whatever he could’ve contributed to fashion is too tainted now..

@Phuel you know what, it’s true, some people in this planet are so lucky to experience their first 20-30 years not knowing loss or hardship so it’s possible they might be traumatized by an act of nature in its most simplistic form (stroke). What bothers me is the current format of fashion journalism and its now mandatory component: commodity activism.. they really deem it necessary to cater to the reader by injecting mental health, ~trauma~, social causes, therapy.. it doesn’t matter how superficial or vapid it is, just make sure it’s there so people know it’s not *just* an article, it’s content that sees martyrs like you, so.. wanna click more?

 

[LadyJunon]

God no, this guy was promising for a split second and that split second happened lightyears ago. He’s been reporting live from gimmickland ever since. Whatever he could’ve contributed to fashion is too tainted now..

As much as I hate this fact, it's true...

What bothers me is the current format of fashion journalism and its now mandatory component: commodity activism.. they really deem it necessary to cater to the reader by injecting mental health, ~trauma~, social causes, therapy.. it doesn’t matter how superficial or vapid it is, just make sure it’s there so people know it’s not *just* an article, it’s content that sees martyrs like you, so.. wanna click more?

This reminds of another Mulier × Alaïa article for W Magazine where he said that he didn't want to use the word "glamazon" anymore, because of its link to physical and mental perfection. It's a year old, so I probably won't post it here.

 

[Kennnnn]

His Alaïa is actually growing on me. I like the casting, the sense of groundedness and maybe more "natural" quality of it. I was also quite surprised to see pictures of Gong Li in Alaïa at Cannes this year - she looked sensational.

 

[Guardian]

I'm always happy to hear when a designer is feeling fulfilled with what they are producing, and according to this article, it's certainly the case with him now. The fashion industry can be very soul-crushing and it's good for him to talk about how he really felt about it.

As someone whose endgame in the very long run is to start my own brand, God knows sometimes I feel frustrated and I say to myself: "That's it. f*ck this industry. I quit. I'm gonna start a rock band called Kate Moss and The Stairs."

There's this little part of the article that mentions that he would like to do menswear and I wonder how would Alaïa menswear even look, taking into account how feminine the identity of the brand is. As a man, I would be really interested to find out. But who knows, I remember an interview in which Daniel Rosebery said he would like to do Schiaparelli menswear and so far it hasn't materialized. Julien Dossena started doing Paco Rabanne menswear and then it got dropped. I wonder how viable is for these womenswear brands to open a menswear line. When I was a little boy I was so obsessed with Chanel that I wished Chanel would open a menswear line with Hedi Slimane as a designer.

 

[GivenchyAddict]

Ahaha! I’m new Celine MENSWEAR (the precision is important) customer. So, i have to see what he has next.

Happy to have you with us

 

[LadyJunon]

I'm always happy to hear when a designer is feeling fulfilled with what they are producing, and according to this article, it's certainly the case with him now. The fashion industry can be very soul-crushing and it's good for him to talk about how he really felt about it.



As someone whose endgame in the very long run is to start my own brand, God knows sometimes I feel frustrated and I say to myself: "That's it. f*ck this industry. I quit. I'm gonna start a rock band called Kate Moss and The Stairs."



There's this little part of the article that mentions that he would like to do menswear and I wonder how would Alaïa menswear even look, taking into account how feminine the identity of the brand is. As a man, I would be really interested to find out. But who knows, I remember an interview in which Daniel Rosebery said he would like to do Schiaparelli menswear and so far it hasn't materialized. Julien Dossena started doing Paco Rabanne menswear and then it got dropped. I wonder how viable is for these womenswear brands to open a menswear line. When I was a little boy I was so obsessed with Chanel that I wished Chanel would open a menswear line with Hedi Slimane as a designer.

The menswear thing with Mulier and Roseberry is probably due to the history of working in menswear: Raf, Jil and Calvin for Mulier and Thom Browne for Roseberry. In truth, I don't see it happening in the near future, because Schiaparelli seems to treading slowly and carefully with expansion, and Alaïa even more so.

Not to mention that neither Schiaparelli or Alaïa have brand codes and aesthetics that could be convincingly repackaged for a male customer, unless we want costumes or worse, branded merchandise. Chanel could pull off the menswear expansion easily, due to the more androgynous codes and brand caché.

 

[Kimihiro]

Chanel could pull off the menswear expansion easily, due to the more androgynous codes and brand caché.

I’d die to have Chanel menswear. Still with Hedi on board. But idk the brand might overextend itself then. Imagine the jackets!

I hope they keep Alaïa as is without any itch for expansionism. Not the biggest fan of his showings but I hope Pieter could be a steward of sort for long and just keeps freshening up the brand once in a while to gain new customers as old ones naturally go. Not everything has to be a megabrand.

 

[MulletProof]

This reminds of another Mulier × Alaïa article for W Magazine where he said that he didn't want to use the word "glamazon" anymore, because of its link to physical and mental perfection. It's a year old, so I probably won't post it here.

Weird that, of all words, he'd fix on a rather healthy mythical image of women and think it's about perfection. The 'glam' came later and is basically cleaning up lol, but amazons were supposedly warriors, women who were as buff as men and in combat. No one's born with military training so it's relatively attainable. Hard work towards improving physical endurance isn't necessarily the worst way to deteriorate someone's mental health..

just take a gander at the Phoebe Philo’s return of the king stanning thread LOL

24 hours later this is spilling out everywhere. Not that people retain much memory but these threads were 85% 'I am SO disappointed' (e.g. Céline Spring 2012) . But I will say, these reactions (@LadyJunon) towards Hedi's arrival were more than deserved. Old threads can be a bit tricky because it's just a string of intense reactions, dead links and little mention of context so that people years later can take that as a reference and understand what the 'intensity' was about. In this case, you have to research the state of the industry in Hedi's heyday (doll-like models, the reign of size 0, lots of independent and extremely talented designers with quite a bit of creative freedom so coming into that meant you had to establish your point and presence with unapologetic force). Then there's the industry during his absence (the crisis, big loss of independent designers, emergence of the conglomerates as the be all end all of fashion, the super vanilla-looking, frail models in little cutesy, kind of infantilizing, doll-like designs you can't move in [e.g. Prada Spring 2009]). So enter Phoebe's arrival. Not the most original designer and devoted to trends but she kind of dignified womenswear, made it stronger, easier, reminded the others that women work and get those dreamlike jobs where you dress to the nines and command respect, you're not just sitting around looking cute, and she did all that with this unusual level of comfort, you didn't get any self-consciousness, overthinking or pretense from her work.

While this is unfolding, you have Pilati, who could be kind of a bore and often go from empowering to matronly, but his women always looked like the main character, never like the 'hot' 'side chick' to the smart and desirable main male lead. Fast forward 3 years later, Hedi's takeover and you got a combination of that (women relegated to 'groupie' 'muse'), a rehash of his better years in the industry, and this insufferable level of arrogance, defensiveness and very vocal sexism, because.. he did leave in a time where it was your way or the highway in terms of 'creative vision'. Multiply that debut by 10 or whatever was the total of collections he presented there. Then you have Phoebe's departure, which left a huge void because, yes, people were imitating what she was doing left and right but no one (except for maybe Sarah-Linh Tran) was really adopting the values that engined that and you only need to look around to see that, to this day, that's still 'way too much work' for most designers. So.. finally (after this 20-year recap ), add the suits into the equation, have them plug Hedi's 2005 broken record into Phoebe's void: the babydoll looks, the groupies, the women who are cutesy and adorably emaciated whose most exciting period of their lives are from ages 16 to 20 and revolve around following men in bands and.. you have the violent reaction and what you perceived as slutshaming. It was a huge setback.. for what Celine had been that entire decade. People can say all they want about Hedi's technical superiority but visuals matter. You can fold a Rothko and turn it into a speedo, and yes, it is still a Rothko.... and it is also a fugly speedo no one wants to see you in.

 

[LadyJunon]

Weird that, of all words, he'd fix on a rather healthy mythical image of women and think it's about perfection. The 'glam' came later and is basically cleaning up lol, but amazons were supposedly warriors, women who were as buff as men and in combat. No one's born with military training so it's relatively attainable. Hard work towards improving physical endurance isn't necessarily the worst way to deteriorate someone's mental health..


24 hours later this is spilling out everywhere. Not that people retain much memory but these threads were 85% 'I am SO disappointed' (e.g. Céline Spring 2012) . But I will say, these reactions (@LadyJunon) towards Hedi's arrival were more than deserved. Old threads can be a bit tricky because it's just a string of intense reactions, dead links and little mention of context so that people years later can take that as a reference and understand what the 'intensity' was about. In this case, you have to research the state of the industry in Hedi's heyday (doll-like models, the reign of size 0, lots of independent and extremely talented designers with quite a bit of creative freedom so coming into that meant you had to establish your point and presence with unapologetic force). Then there's the industry during his absence (the crisis, big loss of independent designers, emergence of the conglomerates as the be all end all of fashion, the super vanilla-looking, frail models in little cutesy, kind of infantilizing, doll-like designs you can't move in [e.g. Prada Spring 2009]). So enter Phoebe's arrival. Not the most original designer and devoted to trends but she kind of dignified womenswear, made it stronger, easier, reminded the others that women work and get those dreamlike jobs where you dress to the nines and command respect, you're not just sitting around looking cute, and she did all that with this unusual level of comfort, you didn't get any self-consciousness, overthinking or pretense from her work.

While this is unfolding, you have Pilati, who could be kind of a bore and often go from empowering to matronly, but his women always looked like the main character, never like the 'hot' 'side chick' to the smart and desirable main male lead. Fast forward 3 years later, Hedi's takeover and you got a combination of that (women relegated to 'groupie' 'muse'), a rehash of his better years in the industry, and this insufferable level of arrogance, defensiveness and very vocal sexism, because.. he did leave in a time where it was your way or the highway in terms of 'creative vision'. Multiply that debut by 10 or whatever was the total of collections he presented there. Then you have Phoebe's departure, which left a huge void because, yes, people were imitating what she was doing left and right but no one (except for maybe Sarah-Linh Tran) was really adopting the values that engined that and you only need to look around to see that, to this day, that's still 'way too much work' for most designers. So.. finally (after this 20-year recap ), add the suits into the equation, have them plug Hedi's 2005 broken record into Phoebe's void: the babydoll looks, the groupies, the women who are cutesy and adorably emaciated whose most exciting period of their lives are from ages 16 to 20 and revolve around following men in bands and.. you have the violent reaction and what you perceived as slutshaming. It was a huge setback.. for what Celine had been that entire decade. People can say all they want about Hedi's technical superiority but visuals matter. You can fold a Rothko and turn it into a speedo, and yes, it is still a Rothko.... and it is also a fugly speedo no one wants to see you in.

Thank you for the thorough explanation. While, Phoebe was one of my favourite designers of the 10s (never cared for Hedi and never will), I felt that the rage was unjustified. While I still think that it's a bit parasocial, but it finally makes complete sense to me.

It also explains why I gravitate more towards Pilati's and Vaccarello's YSL than Hedi's.

And yes, I do find it weird for Mulier to be so opposed to the portrayal of a fit, strong, yet glamorous woman, but I guess that it's the side effect of working with Raf Simons...

 

[MulletProof]

^ He might be overthinking his vocabulary due to the current culture. In execution, his women are fine and look quite like glamazons to me! (S/S 22).

I just paid a visit to that Celine thread and it's actually pretty standard and civil considering most disliked the collection. I've certainly seen way worse with others designers (the Tomo guy, the one Phuel found hot who was bald and always in black leather, he showed in Milan, I forgot his name, help me @Phuel ). But guess who deemed the criticism on the clothes and on an openly sexist man taking over a woman as 'homophobic' and 'violent'? king of gaslighting Hedi lol.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Yes. Don’t get the impression he’s so much opposed to the ideal of the glamazon (which is/was the next logical evolution of the Supe; this was a time that fashion continued to progress with higher and higher standards of beauty, alongside creative talent), so much as pandering to the current fashion times of frowning upon this untouchable image of impossible beauty and mythological strength as inspiration and aspiration for everyone to be the best that they can be. Because as if the term “glamazon” isn’t as much of an illusion as Rupaul— but let’s all worship him... Thank god there’s the mediocrity of Paloma and Precious for the children with low standards to identify with.

(God, hoping he continues on a steady/confident/solid trajectory of the current collection's sensibility [the one he showed in in penthouse] before even thinking about menswear. If he somehow returns to the nonsense of the intellectual-stripper mess of the first collection, imagine what a hot mess the menswear could be. One thing at a time.)

 

[LadyJunon]

^ I just paid a visit to that Celine thread and it's actually pretty standard and civil considering most disliked the collection.

I was talking about the criticism on Twitter and Instagram. TFS (using the search query because only I discovered this forum back in 2021) actually had a discussion that was more intelligent than the "Philo good, Hedi bad" discussion, explaining the actual issues with Hedi as a man and a designer

^^^ Yes. Don’t get the impression he’s so much opposed to the ideal of the glamazon (which is/was the next logical evolution of the Supe; this was a time that fashion continued to progress with higher and higher standards of beauty, alongside creative talent), so much as pandering to the current fashion times of frowning upon this untouchable image of impossible beauty and mythological strength as inspiration and aspiration for everyone to be the best that they can be. Because as if the term “glamazon” isn’t as much of an illusion as Rupaul— but let’s all worship him... Thank god there’s the mediocrity of Paloma and Precious for the children with low standards to identify with.

Don't do Precious like that. Body type aside, she still exudes "glamazon" energy.

Personally, I see any deep issues with the "glamazon" archetype, because it was more centered around fitness, which was a product of 70s/80s fitness culture, which itself was most likely the product of 2nd wave feminism which included the permanent shift away from heavy undergarments.

The late 90s/00s "waif" is arguably more problematic, since it's just thinness and nothing else. It's ironic, since the designers who popularised that look were considered progressive for the rebellious, androgynous and "relatable" aesthetics they produced.

(God, hoping he continues on a steady/confident/solid trajectory of the current collection's sensibility [the one he showed in in penthouse] before even thinking about menswear. If he somehow returns to the nonsense of the intellectual-stripper mess of the first collection, imagine what a hot mess the menswear could be. One thing at a time.)

The first collection was really disjointed, but overall promising. The second collection was... something. I liked the Picasso dresses though. The third collection is my personal favourite, but was still a mess. The fourth collection was a massive improvement and his overall best for the house so far.

I hope he doesn't do menswear though, a house like Alaïa doesn't need it and if it can't hold up the womenswear it will be quite a shame.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ That was the 4th collection?!?!? Took a while to get there... (No, Precious exudes drag queen energy's caricature of a glamazon. She would have been great fodder for Tyra's circus tho.)

(Who is this bald leatherman you speak of , Mullet. I'm scared.)

 

[Lola701]

But the Alaia woman is a glamazon. Alaia’s clothes demands a lot from the body. You needed to be athletic, skinny or curvy but really there’s a seduction factor in his clothes even if it was never an aggressive sexuality. His women were sensual and approachable. That’s why personally I have always prefered him over Montana or Mugler.

‘His woman wasn’t an heroine or a creature. That’s why he was able to dress France’s oldest haute bourgeoisie families, Rock stars, people from the Art world and working women.

Glamazon is actually a good word if it’s well incarnated.

 

[MulletProof]

@Phuel my 'nOt tHaT pEoPle aRe gOoD wItH mEmOrY' has come back to get me right away: what is his freaking name! I'll circle back.. it shall come lol.

It's ironic, since the designers who popularised that look were considered progressive for the rebellious, androgynous and "relatable" aesthetics they produced.

The practice of 'toning down' the attention on models so that it remains strictly on the clothes is a double-edge sword and a flawed belief imo. It's been done differently over the years and it's still the default setting for many designers (from Hedi to Raf to Olivier and probably even Pieter if he wasn't in this house), but it's interesting that in retrospective, if done excessively, it's a good way to expedite your work into forgetfulness. When you revisit old collections, it's the beauty of those women representative of the time they lived in, the standards that reigned (which you can totally correlate to movies, music, your own relatives' pictures in those years), the way they walked, how confidence was manifested then, and the energy of a time that is long gone.. what makes you appreciate the designs even more, it makes them dimensional and they communicate with precision the designer's [often extraordinary] ability to observe and absorb her/his surroundings.. in a way, these models are the vehicle between past and present, so reducing face and body to nothing is not a good idea. You look at Prada Fall 1988 and every woman looks completely different and they exude the time they were in.. which ignites some kind of connection 30-something years later and makes you appreciate the clothes and consequently, their legacy, even more.

You still had that 'unique' beauty in the 90s even with the heroin chic look. It was probably more problematic because hard dr*gs were still glorified, and last time I checked the newer the generation, the less they're prone to consume that. Personally though, maybe because I did not experience the 90s as an adult, I find the direction fashion was heading around the time of the Dutch boom far more problematic because it erased face too!. You'd just see trails of Anna Jagodzinska, mid blonde look-alikes, walking nervously. The more interchangeable, the better, and in this case, there was no progressive design to compensate. That changed with Tisci, I think..

 

[LadyJunon]

The practice of 'toning down' the attention on models so that it remains strictly on the clothes is a double-edge sword and a flawed belief imo. It's been done differently over the years and it's still the default setting for many designers (from Hedi to Raf to Olivier and probably even Pieter if he wasn't in this house), but it's interesting that in retrospective, if done excessively, it's a good way to expedite your work into forgetfulness. When you revisit old collections, it's the beauty of those women representative of the time they lived in, the standards that reigned (which you can totally correlate to movies, music, your own relatives' pictures in those years), the way they walked, how confidence was manifested then, and the energy of a time that is long gone.. what makes you appreciate the designs even more, it makes them dimensional and they communicate with precision the designer's [often extraordinary] ability to observe and absorb her/his surroundings.. in a way, these models are the vehicle between past and present, so reducing face and body to nothing is not a good idea. You look at Prada Fall 1988 and every woman looks completely different and they exude the time they were in.. which ignites some kind of connection 30-something years later and makes you appreciate the clothes and consequently, their legacy, even more.

You still had that 'unique' beauty in the 90s even with the heroin chic look. It was probably more problematic because hard dr*gs were still glorified, and last time I checked the newer the generation, the less they're prone to consume that. Personally though, maybe because I did not experience the 90s as an adult, I find the direction fashion was heading around the time of the Dutch boom far more problematic because it erased face too!. You'd just see trails of Anna Jagodzinska, mid blonde look-alikes, walking nervously. The more interchangeable, the better, and in this case, there was no progressive design to compensate. That changed with Tisci, I think..

I've always liked to see models as the "supporting cast" of a runway show. While they're not necessarily the "stars" of the show, they're very important as they serve to complete the "universe" the designer and his team have created.

In storytelling, a supporting cast's role is to push the story forward and humanise the protagonists, just like how it's a model's role to embody the designer's vision and become an extension of the clothes they're wearing. A good casting and model direction will be conscious of the "story" the designer wants to tell and will work seamlessly with it, while a poor casting and direction will be ignorant of the "story" or even work against it.

In simpler terms: the default stone-faced expressions, simple, quick-paced walk and stadium sized staging isn't the answer for every designer or even the answer for every collection one designer might create. This doesn't mean that that need to have a full return to ever-twirling Cheshire-cat models of the 80s/early 90s (God forbid), but a slightly more personalized approach to casting, cheorography and staging can go very far. Dries and Lemaire's shows are a very good example of what a slight deviation can do. Alaïa's show in Antwerp is too, now as I'm thinking about it.

 

[LadyJunon]

Rihanna wearing custom Alaïa for the Superbowl performance back in February:




Other women in Mulier's Alaïa:
Tina Kunakey:


Ella Goulding: