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

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

  1. Littleathquakes

    Littleathquakes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    143
    There's a difference between saying this is Simons' doing vs it's his employer's (Dior's) doing, so until your last post, I don't think you made that clear. The fact is, in a non-Galliano scenerio, designers taking over the helm simply do not declare the predecessor's work as irrelevant. I still don't agree with you even after I understand what you're saying.

    As for preference, of course every designer will prefer his own work over another's. But in terms of your theory on "pleasing" his employer - I don't believe Dior continues to want that kind of attention. They've erased Galliano from the Dior website - but is there a note declaring Galliano to be irrelevant? No, there isn't. And Simons' first collection for the house also does not reference Galliano's work (unlike Gaytten's). The house's strategy is more subtle. They simply don't talk about Galliano; Galliano didn't exist. Simons' comment was more blatant; it is direct contrast with the efforts that the house has shown. So to me, this was Simons' ego talking, not Dior.
     
  2. Littleathquakes

    Littleathquakes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    143
    I believe Simons didn't aim for controversy. His comments were seemingly taken out of context and blown out of proportion.

    That said, you kinda can't go on record saying something like what he said, no matter how innocent, without it being controversial. :rolleyes: You can't throw that out there and then play victim. If he didn't want the attention that this is garnering, he shouldn't have said anything. Let the clothes do the talking.
     
    perfect blue likes this.
  3. Doctor Caroline

    Doctor Caroline New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2006
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Galliano's aesthetic is probably no longer relevant, but his woman certainly is. She's still there excessing in cosmetic products, strutting in criminally high platforms and throwing her attitude around. To reduce Galliano to mere "fantasy" is almost insulting. The woman that he created was very real. That, to me, makes him still relevant.
     
  4. iluvjeisa

    iluvjeisa clever ain't wise

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    13,215
    Likes Received:
    27
    But is there a collection, bearing Galliano's name, where horrendous designs are paraded, season after season?

    If there was ever an attempt to make someone irrelevant, it is to hog their name and drag in through the mud. It is very far from subtle.

    But I agree with you still. It would probably have been preferable for Dior if Raf had evaded the questions about Galliano.
     
  5. fakeawake

    fakeawake Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2020
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    130
    Oh my stars Raf. Wish you hadn't said that dont ya. Now you're the definition of not relevant.

    Im just catching up on Raf at Dior I totally ignored it.
     
    christian zh, Frida, gazebo and 2 others like this.
  6. jeanclaude

    jeanclaude Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,428
    Likes Received:
    2,208
    Said the guy whose only talent is sewing stupid early 80s band patches over everything, and the kitchen sink!!
     
  7. tboy34

    tboy34 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    4
    I have to agree with you. I don't find his clothes very inspiring and what he does is ordinary and borderline Walmart silhouettes with a high price on them. Galliano is a genius and he will Raf will never be a great craftsman of Couture like Galliano. Look how long he lasted at Dior (A Hot Minute).
     
    jeanclaude likes this.
  8. bearbrick

    bearbrick Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Galliano was overly indulgent. That was his weakness. For a while he was tolerated and indulged. But until Dior he was masterful and created elegance. RAF Simon doesn’t come close with his rigid aesthetics bordering on cliches. Became boring and purple as hell.
     
    Frida likes this.
  9. billiejbob

    billiejbob Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2015
    Messages:
    332
    Likes Received:
    241
    Honestly all of Raf's (and MGC's for that matter) collections for Dior blend into one. Galliano's on the other hand all had individual themes/motifs/ideas/executions. You could easily identify a Galliano Dior as a specific collection whereas all of Raf's work for Dior just looked like they were all from the same collection...
     
    fakeawake, christian zh and Frida like this.
  10. fakeawake

    fakeawake Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2020
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    130
    people are wearing vintage John for Dior now and i STILL know which collection it’s from despite being 20 years ago.

    THATS HOW YOU RUN A FASHION HOUSE.
     
  11. GivenchyHomme

    GivenchyHomme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,424
    Likes Received:
    1,991
    I believe that after single handendly killing one of America's most iconic brands automatically voids any validity of critical opinions past, present or future.
     
  12. MulletProof

    MulletProof Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    26,499
    Likes Received:
    1,318
    lol at this thread being resurrected like 'how dare you say that after all you've done!'. Context is important. It's 2012. Let's recap: Céline is all the rage, fashion's become much simpler and ordinary due to its democratization (bloggers/streetstyle celebrities, collaborations and affordable lines left and right), Raf has *just* started at Dior after showing growth in the right direction at Jil Sander and obviously Dior is still Galliano (so Raf was determined to reconnect with the actual Dior before Galliano). And.. let's not forget, Galliano, as talented as he still is, resorted to making gaudy 90s wedding cakes in the shape of dresses and horrid logos as his one vocabulary (which was cool in the uptight and minimal late 90s) until everyone was so over it by the mid 00s he had to do a 180 and create that 'regular clothes' collection. Galliano's work for Dior in 2012 is no longer relevant and guess what, it's 2021 and it's still not relevant. Is it a mandatory chapter for those wanting to understand fashion and its history the way Paco Rabanne's legacy is? sure, but it's not communicating or embodying the zeitgeist whatsoever.. and that's irrelevance for better or for worse.

    Sadly, age comes to get us all and Raf gave himself faster to its negative effects than Galliano himself. Within 10 years, minimal celebrity and fast-tracked by its insistence in being taken seriously by the art world, he's up in the clouds and lost the ability to communicate effectively in fashion (or anywhere else really). He can't find the humility to leave for good like Helmut did and make it in the one world he respects and wants so desperately to be a part of, but he's too arrogant to be a student in the field he remains... and others suffering the same 'wish I was a part of the art world but alas, here I am in fashion' syndrome buy into his bs.. it's really the blind leading the blind type of spectacle.
     
    #52 MulletProof, Jan 11, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2021
  13. fakeawake

    fakeawake Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2020
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    130
    I think John did catch the zeitgeist but I think marketing pressures to keep everything trash but with high prices led to his demise. LVMH wanted John gone because they didn’t want to spend millions on fashion anymore. This whole athleisure style is just from tons of marketing - it’s not zeitgeist. Dior hired raf because they know he does pricey t shirts and other banal things with huge margins.

    I mean dior embarasses themsleves when they say their profits are up. All you sell are cotton shirts and jeans I HOPE your profits are up. It’s sewn in a shop in spain in 15 minutes I HOPE your profits are up. I would imagine Dior overall isn’t doing well - I’ve seen the faces of the couture customers in the audience seeming puzzled by what they’re being presented. Facts are the couture customer still wants to be draped like a cake. facts are Dior is reissuing Johns work. Facts are Dior knows they won’t get another John in this lifetime so they settled for another Marc Bohan.

    I do think John desperately needs to learn how to edit.
     
    #53 fakeawake, Jan 11, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2021
    San Marco likes this.
  14. fakeawake

    fakeawake Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2020
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    130
    Also I would never bash logos because without them we would have all died from poisoned milk or bad ibuprofen. Logos exist to help people make quick decisions on a quality product. Dior has done enough to have their logo be valued as a sign of quality.

    I’ve always thought fashion people are hilarious since they never buy anything full price at retail but think they should be catered to

    this kind of contempt for “regular people” is why brands are desperate as ever. People want beautiful clothes to escape their lives and make them feel good. Not clothes with crap printed across it. Because it’s ‘intellectual’ and not a logo.

    fashion is fashion. Not philosophy.
     
    #54 fakeawake, Jan 11, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2021
    rianne fans, San Marco and dsamg like this.
  15. TianCouture

    TianCouture Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    234
    Funny, I think John's work at Dior from 2000-2005 is actually really relevant today.
     
    rianne fans likes this.
  16. Lola701

    Lola701 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    6,651
    Likes Received:
    6,216
    The Galliano/Dior dynamic is quite bizarre because in retrospective, he was quite very forward thinking in his approach to fashion 20 years ago. Let’s not forget that Galliano dipped into the logo trend more than anybody when his contract was renewed for the first time at Dior.

    The J’adore Dior, saddle bags, logo-a-Gogo was all his. He had total creative control over the whole house (I remember the insane amount of perfumes he created). But the FW2004 was the beginning of the end. It became out of control and Arnault wanted his Dior to be more elevated...That’s how we saw the change of direction one year later.

    I remember at that time, Arnault was concerned by the amount of t-shirts they were selling.

    Tbh, Arnault I believe was really happy when John started his back to basic era. It felt luxurious, Carla Bruni was the unofficial ambassador and sales were good. But he still cared about the press and that’s why prior to the scandal, there were so many rumors of them letting him go...

    From the moment John stopped doing T-shirts to when MGC arrived, I don’t think the house has ever been into so much commercialism. Maybe this time, it’s softer, more digestible than it was when John was there...


    But the Raf comment is interesting because despite whatever he believes, he is not a disruptor. I think that MGC is more disruptive at Dior (the company) than Raf was...
     
    MulletProof likes this.
  17. fakeawake

    fakeawake Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2020
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    130
    Raf is just a pc rebel. The worst kind.
     
    Lola701 likes this.

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"