Proenza Schouler F/W 2012.13 New York

[Tourni]

I don't know how Jack and Lazaro have the nerve to show something like this. This is completely Balenciaga and I don't know how some of you can justify this blatant plagiarism. Worst of all is the fact that they are showing things we have already seen before, if you're going to adopt Ghesquiere's aesthetic (which is wrong to begin with), at least do it in a new way.

This is a true embarrassment for NYFW.

 

[Spike413]

^ Would you care to point out some side by side examples of the blatant plagiarism, not including the "ripped off" looks posted on the previous page?

 

[christian zh]

Proenza Schouler fans detected.

 

[Spike413]

^ No, actually, I usually take their collections season by season, I like some and I don't like some...not that that makes your patronizing reply any less rude or immature.

I just take issue with people throwing around phrases like "blatant plagiarism" when something looks or feels similar, but not nearly similar enough to warrant such a strong accusation of actually knocking off a design.

 

[loladonna]

This thread is becoming comical. It went from "hints of Balenciaga" to "completely ripped off". I think there is some overreaching by people loathe to give credit where credit is due because of the hype that always surrounds Proenza.

When I first saw the collection it made me think a lot of Japan-- namely Kimonos, origami and karate uniforms.

 

[purplethistle]

I get a slight Balenciaga vibe, however, I wouldn't say that its a blatant plagiarism especially after having another look at some Balenciaga pieces. I also think a better thread for the plaigiarim discussion would be referencing vs plagiarism where is the line drawn.

I really like this collection, I much prefer the east asian influences here than Jason Wu's collection. While both when for a futuristic twist on the past I feel that Proenza Schouler did it much better. I also prefer PS doing a modern twist on martial art garments than Wu's modern twist on Chinese military clothing.

 

[Pradable]

 

[lmelanie]

love this collection. the tech asian influence and the quilted patterns. these guys really know what women want to wear in this decade.

 

[vivi27]

All I can say on the heating debate is that it's OKAY to take reference from other brands as long as we don't copy paste their clothes. And obviously, PS didn't do that. So what if the shape of the skirt looks alike? It's just the shape!! You can't do much to fabrics. It's not like balenciaga owns the theme, just because the brand reference is always that.
By the way, I'm not a fan of PS nor Balenciaga. I'm not saying this just because i like PS, it's because I'm tired to see people compare a collection to another brand and say that the collection was a copycat of the brand when it's not. It's obvious that PS took a reference from Balenciaga, but they definitely didn't copy paste their clothes.
I'm truly sorry if I offend anyone, but that's just my two cents.

 

[fashunviktim]

no one here said they had cut + pasted it. i think everyone is acknologiing the similarities and giving credit to Celine and Balenciaga for the inspiration. even cathy horn agreed so i don't think its fair to ignore it because its a good show for new york. its fine to reference and be influenced and i don't think anyone disagrees with that because we would not have this industry without it but i think it is silly to be shocked/angry by people calling them out for it. it is a great collection but lets be fair.

 

[Zazie]

Hmm...why do we even have copyright and patent laws? It's to protect the process of creativity and innovation, as no one will invest time and money if it is legal to rip off the success of others. Of course in fashion it is a lot more ambiguous, and such laws cannot be enforced as short of a blatant direct copy, nothing can be proven beyond doubt and enforced legally. It doesn't mean it cannot be called out as it hardly hurts the designers' profits, bottom line and even reputation - Proenza Schouler will go on to sell this hugely successful and popular line. However, it does mean that designers are rewarded for the wrong things, and the truly innovative designers are not rewarded for taking risks.

In fact, designers are often penalized for showing something new, different, and that goes against current trends and fashion, sorry, I am still upset about the widespread criticisms and pressure that forced out Paulo Melim Anderssen - to know why we have to go back and look at his FW2007 collection for Chloe that cost him his job, a collection that was bold, edgy, prescient and sensed the change in bigger, boxier cut, in bold paintbrush strokes and prints that lasted till this year (5 years in total), in the move away from vintage-y girlishness.

http://www.style.com/fashionshows/review/F2007RTW-CHLOE

So, good designers who take risks get booted while those who wait and watch from the side and then jump on get rewarded.

I remember NG himself was the object of severe criticism when he plagiarized Kaisik Wong's collage dress - and it was only one dress, and not a "copy and paste" job either.

I don't get why PS or MJ should be the exception?

 

[loladonna]

Sorry but a similar asymmetrical skirt hem with no other obvious similarities does not constitute plagiarism or warrant a discourse on copyright laws. The reactions to this collection seem a bit over the top. There is nothing in fashion that hasn't been done before. Everyone who does an A-line skirt, drop waist, cut-outs...etc would have to be deemed plagiarists.

It seems people are upset because Proenza took silhouettes no one previously liked and made them look good and wearable and is getting rightfully praised for it. Proenza did their own take on sportswear with an Asian influence just as other designers have before them and many will do after. All this crying wolf over plagiarism makes it hard to be sympathetic when there really is blatant copying.

 

[Bretonne]

I don't know how Jack and Lazaro have the nerve to show something like this. This is completely Balenciaga and I don't know how some of you can justify this blatant plagiarism. Worst of all is the fact that they are showing things we have already seen before, if you're going to adopt Ghesquiere's aesthetic (which is wrong to begin with), at least do it in a new way.

This is a true embarrassment for NYFW.

agreed what a shame

 

[abadonna]

they can never disappoin, brilliant!

 

[Spike413]

no one here said they had cut + pasted it. i think everyone is acknologiing the similarities and giving credit to Celine and Balenciaga for the inspiration. even cathy horn agreed so i don't think its fair to ignore it because its a good show for new york. its fine to reference and be influenced and i don't think anyone disagrees with that because we would not have this industry without it but i think it is silly to be shocked/angry by people calling them out for it. it is a great collection but lets be fair.

The people who've labelled this collection a case of "blatant plagiarism" most certainly have said that they've cut and pasted another designer's work to form this collection, even if it wasn't phrased that way. Plenty of people have pointed out that they see the influence of someone or something else in this collection, which is hardly a crime since even the great Nicolas Ghesquiere has been influenced by other people. But then there are those calling the PS boys knock-off artists because of passing similarities in look, in feel and in silhouette.

There's a hell of a difference between being influenced by a mood or idea that's already floating around in the collective consciousness within fashion (that's where trends come from after all) and xeroxing the work of someone else.

And I'd just like to point out that a lot of the things here that people are so "that's Balenciaga" about, things like angular, dropped waist mini skirts, oversized boyish jackets, and intricate handiwork/textile development, are nothing new to Proenza Schouler.

 

[LadyJunon]

Reviving this thread to counteract their more recent "developments".

It would be interesting to see them go back to a modernised version of this look, since Ghesquiére has moved on to a more technical, androgynous and brutalist aesthetic for Louis Vuitton (probably by Pinault's demands). It might also give them a defined sense of individuality from the sea of counterfeit-Philo's Céline that has flooded every fashion market, high and low, since 2015.

While this may read as "Diffusion Ghesquiére's Balenciaga" to some, they really have presented a beautiful, desirable, well put together collection. The zipper placements, the fabric, those boots, it's just a really delicious collection for the eyes. It's more appealing than the Balenciaga collection it "copied" (Ghesquiére really should have put that collection of leather heeled boots).

And to defend Ghesquiére here, I still admire that he experimented with fashion and executed it with the high attention to quality and construction he did, even if it doesn't always produce the most pretty or wearable clothes. To me, that is more respectable than a mass appeal, wearable collection. I will always believe that he, along with Ackermann, Philo, Theyskens and Vandervorst, is one of the best and most important living and working designers of the 21st century. That generation of designers is very important to me.

Spoiler: Pretentious personal rambling about my experience with this sad excuse of an industry

I am a 20 year-old who fell in love with high fashion too late to live through the magical 90s to 00s, but too early to accept the 10s and 20s as an adequate alternative.

The fact that we still have at least one designer that is given the platform to produce niche, experimental runway collections at an extremely advanced level of craftsmanship in an industry that celebrates bland impersonal clothes and poorly basted "innovative" rags is very important to me.

Ghesquiére's work represents a remnant of the industry that I fell in love with and the hope that this industry is still worthy of my future.