Raf Simons: 'Galliano's work is no longer relevant'

Discussion in 'Designers and Collections' started by LagerfeldBoy, Nov 14, 2012.

  1. LagerfeldBoy

    LagerfeldBoy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    3
  2. ultramarine

    ultramarine chaos reigns

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    6,404
    Likes Received:
    1
    Its oversimplfying his statement.

    But, he caters to a certain market. And there are other houses with designers who cater to Galliano's idea of opulence (even though the one he showed prob is gone forever).

    I cant help but like Raf. But he is being a bit narrowminded. Now the market does fit his aesthetics, but he wasnt the most popular designer a couple of years ago. I really really hope this new found celebdom doesnt go up on his head.
     
  3. Littleathquakes

    Littleathquakes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    143
    Though it may be grossly oversimplified and taken out of context, the fact that he went there - I'd say it's already gone to his head.
     
  4. tangerine

    tangerine Soviet Camaro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    16,983
    Likes Received:
    1
    The writer ("Bibby Sowray", indeed, you should be) distorted Simons' statement to create a controversy. Cheap shot.

    Simons' statement is interesting because it does seem a bit equivocal; he seems to be saying that the "fantasy" element in Galliano's work is what has become irrelevant and restrictive to women (I don't think he is saying that Galliano's technical skills are irrelevant). While this is not dismissive of Galliano entirely, it does seem somewhat presumptuous that Raf is now the arbiter of what is relevant. So I would agree, it seems he is getting a bit big-headed, even if he is not torching Galliano the way the dubious Ms. Sowray is trying to suggest.
     
  5. ad041715

    ad041715 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    5
    I agree with all the commentary. I haven't completely moved on from Galliano's Dior so his implication and definition of relevance is a nuisance. He's only shown two collections for god's sake! Both designers hold a very different interpretation of what defines Dior.

    I really liked this comment below the article:
     
  6. softgrey

    softgrey flaunt the imperfection

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Messages:
    52,692
    Likes Received:
    187
    regardless of what anyone says...
    the fact remains that galliano is one of the most gifted artists this world has ever seen...
    period...
     
    rianne fans and HeatherAnne like this.
  7. tangerine

    tangerine Soviet Camaro

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    16,983
    Likes Received:
    1
    Exactly, those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. :innocent:

    Who feels that Galliano's "fantasies" are restrictive to women? I think that's really the most interesting part of this.
     
    rianne fans likes this.
  8. Flashbang

    Flashbang Mr. Magic

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    102,977
    Likes Received:
    20
  9. saann

    saann I don't know

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,110
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm not sure I quite understand what he's hinting at.. Does he mean that the theatricalness of Galliano, painting the woman as different characters, is restrictive as it molds women into a certain form?

    I can't say I agree with him then, fantasy (for me) is all about not having any limitations, where the mind can go wherever it wants to go.. So his comment is contradictory as he's stating that the fantasy element of Galliano's work restricts women

    Sure Galliano's work was theatrical and it was his fantasies, but he helped maintain the part of fashion that deals with spectacle, where fashion can be whatever it wants to be with no rules or guidelines.. Just like McQueen did.. I find that the opposite of restrictive
     
    #9 saann, Nov 15, 2012
    Last edited by moderator Elisa: Nov 15, 2012
  10. Littleathquakes

    Littleathquakes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    143
    I don't think he's that deep. I think he's merely referencing Galliano's heavy reliance on older and original pieces from the Dior archives, especially in some of Galliano's last collections for the house. And that Raf wants to move away from that - hence, his debut collection for the house didn't hint at any Dior past designs. It was all [strike]Jil Sander[/strike] Raf.
     
  11. softgrey

    softgrey flaunt the imperfection

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Messages:
    52,692
    Likes Received:
    187
    heh heh...
    and i prefer jil sander to both of these guys put together...

    so-
    guess what i'll be buying next season...?...right...not dior...
    the current definition of relevance...
    what sells...
    bottom line...
    same boring story...

    blurgh...:wacko:
     
  12. donyan

    donyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    263
    I've always loved the idea of interesting or even extreme but wearable clothes , and I was excited by Raf Simons arriving at Dior, but to be honest , now that the whole world does wearable and ( more or less) interesting I kind of miss the unbridled exuberance and joy of Galliano- I'd even go so far as to say that those are the two things that are relevant right now, more than anything else
    Posted via Mobile Device
     
  13. anlabe32

    anlabe32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Messages:
    8,344
    Likes Received:
    387
    Uhm... What? You must have confused the names.
     
  14. Littleathquakes

    Littleathquakes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    143
  15. Psylocke

    Psylocke Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    10,977
    Likes Received:
    15
    Yes, I agree, that's also the part that made me think because that's my interpretation of Simons' statement, too (especially after reading the full Vogue Aus interview - thanks for the link, Flashbang!). I think I understand why one would consider Galliano's romanticized woman and how she's costumed as being somewhat restrictive. I suppose Raf means that his minimalistic designs allow women to express themselves better than one that feels the need to dress up and become a spectacle through the way she's dressed and styled. But I don't think that this means Galliano's woman isn't relevant anymore, even an emancipated, powerful woman can feel the need to dress eccentric. It's just a different aesthetic, a different idea of a woman, but that doesn't mean one is more relevant than the other.

    I do think this is being blown out of proportion because I do not see Simons as someone that likes to stir up controversy with his interviews. It seems more like he's trying to defend his approach to doing Haute Couture in such a minimalistic way as opposed to Galliano's theatrical and opulent way of presenting Couture.
     
  16. Crying Diamonds

    Crying Diamonds Geometric Discharge

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    7,297
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree, when I first read it I thought Simons was referencing Galliano's interpretations of Christian Dior's designs - history states that Dior brought back the restrictiveness of the Victorian corset after all of the work the likes of Chanel had put into destroying it.
    On the other hand, maybe he's referring to the wearability of Galliano's designs, the concept becoming more important than the practicality of the clothing?
     
  17. Creative

    Creative Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,383
    Likes Received:
    120
    It was actually a bad copy of Dior's F/W 1954 HC collection. :flower:

    Raf Simons is unbearable... Really pretentious. I don't think I've ever disliked a designer as much as I dislike him.
     
  18. missbluejean

    missbluejean Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,117
    Likes Received:
    0
    :P:lol:

    Sure. Freedom, relevance and restricting women lessons from the guy who designed buttonless, hand-clutched coats and whose models can barely walk in his shoes on his last show.....
     
  19. Creative

    Creative Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,383
    Likes Received:
    120
    Definitely... Oh, and on top of that, his collection was just hideous. :lol: At least Galliano designed some of the most beautiful collections the world has ever seen... He was a genious, Raf is just an overhyped (and overrated) designer.

    Let's see how long his designs stay relevant... I have the feeling he will be fired quite quickly...
     
    #19 Creative, Nov 15, 2012
    Last edited by moderator : Nov 15, 2012
  20. Mutterlein

    Mutterlein Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,759
    Likes Received:
    286
    Good Point
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"