Raf Simons - Designer, Co-Creative Director of Prada

[Nymphaea]

Raf Simons, Coming Soon to a Film Festival Near You

While he hasn’t yet been at the house for two years, Raf Simons already has his own Dior documentary. Dubbed Dior et Moi and directed by Frédéric Tcheng (who also worked on Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel and Valentino: The Last Emperor), the flick chronicles Simons’ first couture collection for the storied brand, which walked down the runway in 2012. Seeing as the doc is set to debut at the Tribeca Film Festival in April, we’re curious to know if Chanel will be inviting the cast to its annual film fest bash.

style.com

THE FRESHMAN: A documentary tracking Raf Simons as he created his first couture collection for Dior is to get its world premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival. “Dior and I,” or “Dior et moi” in French, was written and directed by Frédéric Tcheng and offers a behind-the-scenes look at the genesis of a fashion collection, billed as a “true labor of love by a dedicated, charming and often humorous group of collaborators” and a “colorful homage to the seamstresses of the atelier.”
Tcheng was also co-director of the 2011 documentary “Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel” and co-producer of “Valentino: The Last Emporer,” which came out in 2008.
“Dior and I” is to be screen on the opening night of the World Documentary competition on April 17. Twelve films are vying for best documentary, best documentary and best editing prizes. The festival runs from April 16 to 27.

wwd

 

[Thefrenchy]

I'm terribly excited as I love him, and his first couture show is, to me, the best Dior collection he has put up so far.

 

[MulletProof]

Sounds amazing. Can't wait to see where else this will be screened.

 

[Thefrenchy]

Close-up on Raf Simons

Imagine starting a job as the couturier of Christian Dior — only the sixth in the grand French house’s history — having to prepare your first high-fashion collection ever in only two months — and having a film crew greet you from the minute you walk in the door, registering every tremor of fear or doubt that may be etched on your face.

“Indeed, I was not too keen on it actually, if you want to know the truth,” Raf Simons chuckles during an interview to discuss “Dior and I,” an 89-minute documentary premiering April 17 at the Tribeca Film Festival. “You know, it’s scary and it would be a lot for people who are not actors because it has nothing to do with acting.”

Instead, filmmaker Frédéric Tcheng sought to capture the reality of the creative process at a major French house as its new designer rallied the atelier for his big debut. That includes stressful moments galore, along with touches of levity among a close-knit group of collaborators.

Simons says he ultimately came to ignore Tcheng’s camera, and was heartened by the final result, whittled down from 270 hours of raw footage.

“When I saw it, it was very comforting, but also very emotional in a way because you see yourself with all the emotions that come into play in such a moment…including the fear, which was very weird to see coming out of yourself,” he says. “There was an enormous intimacy in the movie, which I think is also present in Dior, in the company. In the building, there was a strong kind of family feel.”

Tcheng says he was eager to document the Belgian designer’s creative process, rooted in contemporary art, and more conceptual in approach.

“He’s so forward looking, and Dior is so steeped in tradition. I thought, something is bound to happen,” the filmmaker says. “He’s trying to push boundaries. He’s an innovator. He wants to change the process of couture.”

One of the chief story lines in the film ignites when Simons decides to employ a midcentury technique called imprimé chaîne, in which threads are printed before weaving. While it was usually employed for florals or other repetitive patterns, Simons wished to echo the auroralike patterns on paintings by American artist Sterling Ruby.

“Throughout the movie, you see the struggle to get that fabric done,” Simons says, describing a battle that pitted his will and determination against the doubts of Dior’s fabric suppliers, which had never taken on a print of that scale.

As he watches the film long afterward, Simons squirms as his anger flares in some scenes, though the overall impression he leaves is a different one.

“I was very surprised to see how calm and quiet I usually am. I had a different picture of myself,” he says. “I also saw how fast I am in my decisions, which I never really realized.”

Simons shares the screen with other intriguing characters, notably his endearing right-hand man Pieter Mulier, and the top seamstresses Florence Chehet and Monique Bailly.

No stranger to fashion, Tcheng codirected “Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel” and coproduced and coedited “Valentino: The Last Emperor.” He says he sees many parallels between fashion and filmmaking, although only movies end with a complete list of credits.

“To me, fashion is a completely collaborative process,” he says. “It takes a lot of different personalities to create a collection, and everyone pours a little of themselves into it.”

The title, “Dior and I,” thus refers not only to Simons, but to everyone who had a role in realizing the collection. It also winks to parallels between the founder Christian Dior and Simons, notably their private nature and passion for art.

To heighten the links to the past, Tcheng tapped poet Omar Berrada to voice over excerpts from the founding designer’s 1956 autobiography, as if “he’s haunting the house.”

In any case, the experience did not leave Simons pining to be on the silver screen.

The designer says he shares his war stories about the making of the documentary with Jennifer Lawrence, the Oscar-winning actress who is the face of the Miss Dior handbag range.

“She said she looks at things very technically, when she looks at a film she’s in, but it was not the case for me at all,” he says. “It’s all about emotion. It’s not about how it’s cut and all that.”

source: WWD.COM

 

[Koibito]

Designer, Reveal thyself

Augustman singapore May 2014



my scan

 

[tricotineacetat]

My disliking of Raf Simons' appointment at Dior continues to grow with every collection he is issuing for the house, he doesn't seem a very natural fit for this job.

I don't mind a more reality-driven approach and it was to be understood nobody would or could have followed in the footsteps of John Galliano's early 2000's couture extravaganza... but I find his collections lack focus, ranging from Jil Sander-esque tailoring to mid-century ballgowns and Prada-esque eclecticism. A lot of the clothes he designs seem foreign territory and not the kind sought at a house like Dior, and even worse, show that he lacks the technical depth of Parisian couture savoir faire.

An uncontrived, effortless update on typically french elegance is what Dior would have needed, in which case experienced dressmakers like Martin Grant, Olivier Theyskens or Alber Elbaz could have been natural fits for the house (I won't even mention Alaia in this case), or even more unexpected candidates like Bouchra Jarrar, L'Wren Scott (RIP) or Jason Wu, whose first collection for Boss was a surprising stretch from his own collection.

 

[dior_couture1245]

My disliking of Raf Simons' appointment at Dior continues to grow with every collection he is issuing for the house, he doesn't seem a very natural fit for this job.

I don't mind a more reality-driven approach and it was to be understood nobody would or could have followed in the footsteps of John Galliano's early 2000's couture extravaganza... but I find his collections lack focus, ranging from Jil Sander-esque tailoring to mid-century ballgowns and Prada-esque eclecticism. A lot of the clothes he designs seem foreign territory and not the kind sought at a house like Dior, and even worse, show that he lacks the technical depth of Parisian couture savoir faire.

An uncontrived, effortless update on typically french elegance is what Dior would have needed, in which case experienced dressmakers like Martin Grant, Olivier Theyskens or Alber Elbaz could have been natural fits for the house (I won't even mention Alaia in this case), or even more unexpected candidates like Bouchra Jarrar, L'Wren Scott (RIP) or Jason Wu, whose first collection for Boss was a surprising stretch from his own collection.

I absolutely agree.

Raf is clearly such an ill fit for Dior. His spirit is so misaligned with what the spirit of Dior is all about - ROMANCE. Raf's messy and contrived efforts to steer the house into this techy territory is awkward, jarring and overly complicated (not to mention, terribly constructed). There is no finesse. And what bothers me even more is all his talk about a "MODERN WOMAN." There is nothing functional for a "modern woman" to be wearing a trouser with one leg a full pleated skirt and the other a matchstick fit (like, what????) or a pair of shorts with floral pleated skirts coming out from each leg (even more of a what???). Even down to his runway styling and hair and make up is so....just wrong. I really don't know what he is thinking.

I also visited the Dior store on 57th street recently to see Raf's work in person for the first time. My opinion was not changed - in fact, it became even more clear to me that these clothes are wrong. The Spring/Summer 2014 collection is in stores now and I can't say I've ever seen more awkward and strange clothes in my life. The most bizarre color combinations and fabrics combinations. Also, the construction was too tricky and things like embroidery and appliques looked very cheap and very poor.

I truly believe Theyskens is the only designer working today who can make Dior what it needs to be now. Dior is about romance and lush beauty - which we are getting neither of with Raf. Only Theyskens is capable of turning a mid-century couture gown into something that feels profoundly contemporary and infinitely flattering - on models, celebrities and "humans" alike. I've yet to see a single Raf Dior creation look good on anyone. Not a single person.

 

[Marc10]

2014 CFDA International Award

 

[Creative]

Raf is clearly such an ill fit for Dior. His spirit is so misaligned with what the spirit of Dior is all about - ROMANCE. Raf's messy and contrived efforts to steer the house into this techy territory is awkward, jarring and overly complicated (not to mention, terribly constructed). There is no finesse. And what bothers me even more is all his talk about a "MODERN WOMAN." There is nothing functional for a "modern woman" to be wearing a trouser with one leg a full pleated skirt and the other a matchstick fit (like, what????) or a pair of shorts with floral pleated skirts coming out from each leg (even more of a what???). Even down to his runway styling and hair and make up is so....just wrong. I really don't know what he is thinking.

THIS. This so much. I roll my eyes every time I read how he's modernizing couture and how he designs for "the modern woman".

He is just so wrong for Dior. He did nice thing at Jil Sander... and right now it looks like he can't come up with a decent coherent collection.

Plus, he has the ugliest voice ever.

 

[Marc10]

I still get surprised by the naysayers here and there. Maybe it's because of nostalgia, or maybe Raf's work just isn't for everyone's taste, and that's fine. In my humble opinion, Raf is and has been the right choice for Dior, and I think with every collection that reassurance becomes more clear. Dior was drowned in a sea of pretentious, unreachable reality. Reality is what he brought to the house, and not so much modernity as contemporaneity. He made clothes that are reachable, but never losing the excitement and novelty. Maybe because his "aesthetic" wasn't what people would immediately connect with Dior is what I think it makes it so great. He brought an outsider dialogue to it, absorbing the romantic and modern sides of his creativity and creating an unity that is intriguing, even odd at times, but most certainly beautiful. His overwhelming influence on other designers is also very telling. The Dior par Raf is the new, right look.

But also, it's always good to see what a great, intelligent and humble man he is from all the interviews and features. Love the CFDA speech, he sure deserved that award.

 

[shanhuq]

The only thing to let the zillions of people know about Raf's Dior is that Dior didn't have any relevance in fashion until he started. Like I've send in many threads my only problem with Dior is the marketing and brand image because it's not in tune but I'm not sure if that's Raf's fault.

 

[dior_couture1245]

I still get surprised by the naysayers here and there. Maybe it's because of nostalgia, or maybe Raf's work just isn't for everyone's taste, and that's fine. In my humble opinion, Raf is and has been the right choice for Dior, and I think with every collection that reassurance becomes more clear. Dior was drowned in a sea of pretentious, unreachable reality. Reality is what he brought to the house, and not so much modernity as contemporaneity. He made clothes that are reachable, but never losing the excitement and novelty. Maybe because his "aesthetic" wasn't what people would immediately connect with Dior is what I think it makes it so great. He brought an outsider dialogue to it, absorbing the romantic and modern sides of his creativity and creating an unity that is intriguing, even odd at times, but most certainly beautiful. His overwhelming influence on other designers is also very telling. The Dior par Raf is the new, right look.

The thing is for me, is I loved everything he did for Jil Sander. Truly. And while I do not worship his menswear, like many do, I do always appreciate it and find it provoking and interesting.

So his work for Dior so far confuses me endlessly. His work for Jil Sander, while minimal, was so sensual and romantic in certain ways - even his collections prior to his Couture Trilogy. There was always a story. I don't see any of that here for Dior. At all. You talk about the extreme contemporary-ness of his collections, yet I see no real "reality" to them. I look at all his collections so far (aside from his Couture debut) and see very little that is honestly flattering. In any sense of the word. Odd color combinations, odd textures, odd embroideries, odd styling, odd accessories, odd proportions and odd concepts. And it's all so cold and sexless, too! And the celebrities that wear Dior all look terribly uncomfortable in the clothes too! Jennifer Lawrence always looks like a cat in a sweater, and poor Marion Cotillard probably wishes she had never signed that Dior contract and instead had cut a deal with Gaultier.

I don't know...I just think he's got things all wrong for Dior. And I had very high hopes. I think he's too concerned with the "codes" of the house...the specifics...the Bar Suit, the ball gown, the flowers. I think why Galliano was such a success at the house was that he wasn't bogged down (until the last several years of his career) with those codes. You'd see the bar suit, you'd see that nipped waist jacket, you'd see the florals...but it was never so shackled and slavish to those icons as I feel Raf is. And my sense is that shackled feeling I'm getting is that Raf isn't capable of grasping the spirit of the house, and therefor doesn't truly feel as free as he claims he does there. Galliano felt free. There's no doubt about that. And that freedom came from being totally aligned with the spirit of Dior...no matter how outrageous or far out his creations were, Dior was always there in spirit.

I had hoped that Raf would make Dior more youthful - youth is indeed his claim to fame. His menswear is all about youth culture and teenage rebellion. Why his Dior woman has to be some cold, sexless executive creature? And his allusions to street culture are so trite, too - like turning a high heel into an athletic sneaker. But a sneaker doesn't make the collection connected to the street if it's not there in every stitch of every garment. I'd almost bet that if he simply showed one of his eponymous men's collections on female models on the Dior catwalk, I'd enjoy it so, so much more.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I still get surprised by the naysayers here and there. Maybe it's because of nostalgia, or maybe Raf's work just isn't for everyone's taste, and that's fine. In my humble opinion, Raf is and has been the right choice for Dior, and I think with every collection that reassurance becomes more clear. Dior was drowned in a sea of pretentious, unreachable reality. Reality is what he brought to the house, and not so much modernity as contemporaneity. He made clothes that are reachable, but never losing the excitement and novelty. Maybe because his "aesthetic" wasn't what people would immediately connect with Dior is what I think it makes it so great. He brought an outsider dialogue to it, absorbing the romantic and modern sides of his creativity and creating an unity that is intriguing, even odd at times, but most certainly beautiful. His overwhelming influence on other designers is also very telling. The Dior par Raf is the new, right look.

But also, it's always good to see what a great, intelligent and humble man he is from all the interviews and features. Love the CFDA speech, he sure deserved that award.

He's not so humble in real life....

I agree with Creative, Tricot, and Dior_Couture.


Honestly, I find Raf's collections for Dior to be contrived, pretentious, tortured, and mostly just ugly. If you go and see the clothes in person they are a wonder as to how they could flatter or empower any female body. Now mind you I loved what he did at Jil Sander, but what he did at Jil Sander was with a different design team. Shocker. Not really if you look at the clothes.

Raf's ego has gotten the better of him and all the praise from editors, bought through Dior's big advertising budgets, hasn't helped. I took a friend with deep pockets and who already owns her fair share of runway pieces from his Jil Sander tenure, I took her to the Dior store and challenged her with finding one thing, just one thing on the racks that she would want to buy. She thought all the clothes were confusing, unflattering, and mostly ugly.

I really just think Raf and his assistant Peter are just farting around with their heads up their own arses and have no clue how terrible it is because the editors aren't telling them. In fact, the only people who have probably challenged them on it is Dior management who I have heard are upset because of the huge drop in sales since Raf took over.

I also agree that Olivier Theyskens would be a great choice for Dior, especially now that he's proved he can do easy and wearable clothes as well as couture showpieces.

 

[Thefrenchy]

^I guess I'm in the minority but I really like what he's doing at Dior. He made me pay attention to the house again, while I didn't really give a damn about it under Galliano. But, it's because the fashion I like is closer to Simons' offering. ALTHOUGH, I should say that: A) nothing under Raf has wowed me like his first couture collection did. It was perfect from the beginning until the end and I have yet to feel the excitement I felt when I saw this collection again and B) I won't pretend I'm blind and honestly agree that he did come up with some truly hideous things with his recent collections.

Now regarding what's in store, I guess I must not have paid enough attention but with the exception of a dress, I never really saw anything awfully made; au contraire!

And last but not least, I've had Dior people coming to my school for conferences, and each time they mentioned how happy they were with him and with the sales. I'm aware it'd have been quite shocking to tell the contrary to an audience, but they also could not have mentioned it at all... I particularly remember that woman telling us how well the furs sold

 

[dior_couture1245]

Just watched Raf's CFDA speech. Poor Marion...the dress she was wearing was so terribly unflattering with those...pillows hanging off from underneath her breasts.

(holymoly.com)

It's terrible! No one would wear these things, save for the contractual obligation these poor girls are tied up in!

 

[CholoChic]

horrible dress and that's whay he received a prize?

 

[gossiping]

does anyone know how to watch Dior and I?

I can see on the facebook page it says it has UK distribution but i have no idea where/how to watch it!!

 

[Nosaceli]

does anyone know how to watch Dior and I?

I can see on the facebook page it says it has UK distribution but i have no idea where/how to watch it!!

pretty please?

I've been searching since Tribeca like crazy with no success!

 

[Marc10]

Raf Simons is revitalising Christian Dior - and the rarefied world of French haute couture
By Alexander Fury

I first meet Raf Simons in New York City, which is unusual for a number of reasons. It's unusual because every facet of what he does feels European. His own label draws on the clothes of disenfranchised Mittel Europa youth: skinny suits like Kraftwerk dummies, Gabba-influenced prints on slimy synthetics, slouchy, oversized layers patched with artwork from bands like the Sisters of Mercy or Manic Street Preachers. And he designs womenswear under the Dior label, the most quintessentially French of all fashion houses, name alone redolent of a distinctly European luxury, and will showcase his winter haute couture collection on Monday.

Simons himself is European, of course. He was born in the town of Neerpelt (population some 16,000) in Belgium in 1968, the son of an army night-watchman and a cleaner. In an odd way, Simons's preoccupations seem born from his parents' careers: there's a militaristic precision to what he does, and a certain cleanliness.

Simons's Flemish accent stills sits heavy – slightly phlegmatic, guttural sometimes, there's a harshness to it that's entirely untainted by his success. That's because he is located for much of the year in Antwerp, where he lives and where the studios of his eponymous business are based. Nevertheless, he's been commuting for a decade, first to Germany and Italy for Jil Sander, where he designed both the men's and women's line from 2005 until February 2012, and latterly for Christian Dior. We meet in May, when Simons presented his pre-spring 2015 collection for Dior in Brooklyn's Navy Yard.

Simons may be decidedly European, but his work has a global impact. He is one of the most important designers working today. His own label, which turns 20 next year, has helped define the contemporary menswear landscape. The slender, fitted suits with narrow shoulders Simons designed in the mid-1990s were enormously influential, as was his co-opting of sportswear, and the raiment of popular youth movements. A pair of collections shown in 2001, dedicated to urban guerrillas and featuring veiled faces and slogans inciting riot and societal collapse, have a power that still arrests. They're fiercely sought after by collectors.

In recent years, his womenswear has proved just as pivotal. At Jil Sander, Simons's use of neon-coloured synthetics (better to take the dye), and silhouettes inspired by the mid-century creations of Cristóbal Balenciaga and Christian Dior, influenced high street and haute couture alike. His inheritance of Dior's label may have increased the prominence of his aesthetic, but the power was already there. Mirroring the impact of the original Monsieur Dior's 1947 New Look across the spectrum of fashion, there are few collections shown today that are not in some way a reaction to Simons's designs. His subtle but unusual mixes of colours, his abstracted, almost aggressive embroideries, the asymmetry he often employs to lend movement to his garments: all can be seen across a multitude of shows, but can be traced back to his hand.

Simons is often characterised as a minimalist. He's not: he's a realist, who wants his clothes to be worn. "I'm trying to bring a lot of reality [to Dior]," says Simons, "which relates to how women live their lives today." That reality has wrought a revolution in the salons of 30 Avenue Montaigne, hitherto a house renowned for catwalk theatrics that often distanced the clothes from the everywoman. Simons is determined to create something pragmatic, even in the most unusual of circumstances.

Witness his spring/summer haute couture show, where the ease of an Air Max trainer was translated to perforated layers of silks smothered with those modernist embroideries Simons so loves. There was something dynamic about those clothes, air flowing through the minute holes and embroideries as the models moved swiftly through an all-white space. It didn't feel staid, or stuffy, or old in any sense. After a > deferential series of collections that quietly began his Dior tenure, it felt like it was saying something new.

Taking the reins of Dior was – and is – a challenge. It's one of the biggest houses in the world, with a prodigious array of products. Simons oversees two ready-to-wear and haute couture collections a year, alongside the increasingly important pre-collections and commercial ranges to keep some 235 worldwide boutiques stocked. That size, however, was part of the pull. "Jil is a niche brand... it wouldn't have been a challenge to take on a lot of niche brands," says Simons of his post-Sander move. "It's not only the style or the aesthetic, it's where it sits in the fashion world... communicating with so many women. With a lot of people, you say Dior and they know what it's about. Even if they don't really know what the clothes are about, or who's doing the clothes."

But, for the fashion world, it does matter that Simons is designing these clothes. Some people find it difficult to ally his Dior work with his own label. Dior, after all, built dresses (note the verb) for mature women with fecund hourglass shapes, while Simons is renowned for stitching whippet-thin, sombre and rebellious suiting for teenagers. Yet, there are connections – not just the superficial, like his use of bold, vertical bands of colour, sleeveless tailoring or fusing formal with sports. Simons's menswear is obsessed with the other, with youth cults and closed, obsessive music scenes – his 2001 ode to Richey Edwards of the Manics, for instance, or his 2003 collaboration with Peter Saville titled 'Closer' – and he talks of the world of Dior, and the world of women as a whole, as if they had a cultish appeal for him, too. "I like very much when women group together. It's something I find fascinating," he allows. "Even at Jil, with the beauty salon collection [spring/summer 2011], where it was women taking care of each other. But there's this thing: men cannot enter."

The same is true of haute couture. It is a female-dominated world, a world of women lovingly hand-crafting garments for other women. Simons may play the lead, but it's otherwise an all-girl cast of atelier workers and moneyed clients.

There are more than a few parallels between Simons and Dior. Both are shy, private men who seem uncomfortable in the spotlight. The title of Dior's autobiography – Christian Dior et Moi – indicated how the private man felt he was separated from his public myth. In it, Dior described press conferences as a "ghastly ordeal... like being a prisoner in the dock before a terrible tribunal." Simons describes facing the barrage of backstage interviews following his first Dior show as "like Marie Antoinette". At the start of his career, Simons would not even bow after his shows. "It's not in my interest to be a star," he says. "I prefer not to see people. I just want to do something that will change something."

Both Simons and Dior also came to fashion late. I ask Simons when he became interested in fashion – but it soon becomes evident that it was clothing first. "I come from a village – they have no cinema or galleries," states Simons. "When I was very young, 12 or 13, I didn't know what a gallery was. The only thing we had that could relate in some way to culture was a record store. When I got older – OK, there was a cinema... but boutiques didn't exist."

The connection with clothing, though, began "when I was 13, 14 I think. It had nothing to do with fashion, only with music. Dark, black, Depeche Mode, Kraftwerk." It feels like Simons is reeling off the references that formed the basis of his first shows in the late Nineties – the shows that defined his aesthetic. "I didn't see Depeche Mode as fashion, it was the music. Then you connect to the way they look – which was über fashion, actually. So that's how it started. But until I was quite far into my industrial design education, I could never think of fashion as something that could eventually interest me to practise. Never. Actually, the opposite."

Nevertheless, when Simons was an 18-year-old student in Genk, he began buying high fashion by Helmut Lang and Dirk Bikkembergs: his circle of friends included fashion students from Antwerp's Royal Academy of Art, most notably his ex-girlfriend, the designer Veronique Branquinho, as well as Olivier Rizzo (now a stylist) and Willy Vanderperre (a photographer). Simons collaborates with them both at his own label, and at Dior.

The switch from consumer to creator came, Simons says, suddenly. He was interning with Belgian designer Walter van Beirendonck, who took him to a show by the then-young Martin Margiela, in Paris. It was only the designer's third show. "Three girls came out," recalls Simons. "It was a split second – I knew I wanted to do fashion."

Margiela's anti-fashion aesthetic – including dresses made from plastic bags, shredded army-surplus socks and discarded fabric – is an odd link to the rarefied world of Dior. At least, on the surface. But Simons is never preoccupied with the surface of things. I suggest that that emotional connection – the tenderness of people hand-crafting clothes for other people – mirrors that emotional reaction. Simons nods. "That's mainly what inspires me," he states. "Unfortunately not for a lot of the audience, except the women who are still wearing couture. Especially a younger crowd, they really see it as spectacle. They don't see it as a thing which is about that relationship between people."

In Simons's universe, that isn't limited to couture, to women, or to the rich. "I wanted to make clothes for kids, in the beginning," he says. "We were young, we were going out..." Initially, after his industrial design degree, he wanted to follow in Margiela's footsteps and study at the Antwerp Royal Academy of Fine Arts. However, Simons's early designs were sufficiently strong for him to leapfrog the education system, with buyers immediately wishing to order the pieces.

"I went to show them to [his professor] Linda Loppa... and she sent me to Milan to the sales agent for Helmut Lang... There was a weird moment where, a week ago, I was trying to make clothes to make Linda believe I could be her fashion student, and the week after I had to borrow money from my mum and dad to buy a fax machine, because this guy was calling me to say that he wanted to send orders. I got, like, nine orders." Simons figured out how to produce the clothes, the buyers bought, and his business was born.

Is the Dior woman the Raf Simons woman? "No." Short, and emphatic. "The Jil Sander woman is not the Raf Simons woman; the Dior woman is not the Raf Simons woman. My persona comes in the game all the way, of course... I also see my role very differently. When you're your own brand, and when you're a creative director, it's two different worlds and two different mind sets. It doesn't mean one is more or less important."

Simons continues: "My opinion is that a creative director in a huge institution is... how do you say? You enter, and you're going to go out. I could never take the attitude that this thing stands or falls with me. No. My brand, yes, but Dior or Jil, no... What attracts me is the curatorial aspect of it. When you step into a mind-blowing, huge institution, and you're given the opportunity to try and do something great and meaningful there. That's how I experience it. I don't experience it as something that I have to make mine. It's not mine. It's just something that I think could mean something for women."

Ultimately, that's the impact of Simons, and his Dior. It seems modest, but it's all-important. In a fashion landscape over-populated with insignificant, irrelevant designers, Simons is a rarity: a designer who really matters. A designer whose clothes actually mean something.

independent.co.uk

 

[malaychic]

For those of you who claimed Dior sales has dropped since Raf took over can you please provide some evidence on that?

I work in the industry and never have I read such claim being made (in fact it was the other way around with supporting documents - financial statements)

While it is entirely possible that sale in your area (or where u usually shop) is experiencing bad season, Dior is doing exceptionally well in mostly new territories (middle east & china) which contributed largely to their worldwide sales (even huge surge of revenue in America and Europe is largely attributed to people of these regions who traveled to shop). Yes Dior is experiencing some challenges with the established market but the crowd that it drew from the new territories are overwhelming and growing even bigger in recent years. Raf is playing a huge part in this where a lot of the clothes he offered are very wearable and practical for women in this region.

If you look at the HC show yesterday yes it may be dull and sterile but the real HC clients see all the many amazing jackets and separates that they will want to add up to their wardrobe (those tunic-length jackets will do so well especially with middle-eastern clients)

Raf makes Dior HC and RTW become wearable for normal woman again. People in Asia & Middle East are new to this couture world, unlike most brands Dior under Raf is not as intimidating and look beautiful on any figure. The clothes appear very modest. I dare say Raf is researching a lot on how women from these regions react to his clothes as it is very apparent on the runway season after season.

While it is truly acceptable for anyone to disagree on positive opinions of Raf at Dior it is entirely not okay to say that the sales has dropped which evidently it is not (you can Google the news that or you can also study their financial statement which is publicly available)