Saint Laurent F/W 13.14 Paris

[TianCouture]

She hit the nail on the head. The reason people defend this is because it's a label and because it's Slimane. The only reason these attract any amount of interest is indeed because of the label. If this was the collection for any up and coming designer, they wouldn't get the time of day from this stuff. She called it as we all see it: lazy.

 

[happytrail]

great, honest review. cathy horyn rules

 

[FelipeV]

What Mrs. Horyn says happens with all the big brands, that's why major houses has any idiot has creative directors, the brand sales itself just because of the label

 

[MulletProof]

Without the label attached to them, Mr. Slimane’s grunge dresses wouldn’t attract interest — because they’re not special.

Short and sweet.

 

[mistress_f]

What may prove more important is the fact that for the first time since McQueen was wrapping his models in butcher's twine and plastic wrap in London, we're seeing an homage to a truly strong ...girl. Designers ad-lib ad nauseum backstage about their clothes being for a strong woman but these street urchins with daddy's black AmEx in their back pockets stomping down the runway look and feel like the real thing, girls for whom Saint Laurent minus the Yves could mean Absolutely Nothing. Why does that suddenly feel refreshing, to look irrelevant? In the right hands, what a tactic.

lol a strong girl you say? a confused teenager probably *EDIT* and feeling so desperately alternative cause she's wearing boots and fishnet tights in 2013, when there's really nothing alternative about it? wearing expesive clothes paid for by her rich daddy while she feels like she's a rebel?
that's so not my idea of a strong girl.
is it realistic? sure as hell it is! hedi knows wonderfully the world he's referencing (although he might be a tad too old to still hang out with teens, come on!) but does it represent a strong individual in my eyes? not really.
but i guess different strokes etc

i love how subtle (well i guess thats as subtle as it gets with her) cathy was about the collection. and she was totally on point

 

[Nymphaea]

Mrs Horyn is totally correct!
If this collection, mainly because of the name/label, is going to sell well, then the profits will be higher than the previous seasons. This because the clothes are like those from Topshop/H&M so the fabrications costs are very low, but the selling prices, probably over a 1000 dollars, will be very high. The net result will be extremely high, because the fabrication costs of the previous seasons were higher I assume, because of the better designs. So all in all a brilliant move concerning the profits. But not concerning the iconic name. He has to come up with something better otherwise he will devaluate the YSL brand.

 

[Darkgrey]

Secondly , I'm now scared of wearing my Zara, Topshop and secondhand finds in case someone mistakes it for Saint Laurent.

,

 

[Izreal]

Horyn should have restrained from commenting although i guess it serves as justice to some.. the fact she has to mention yet again she wasn't invited (duh) and spends 90% of the "review" berating Slimane proves the anomosity is still there (double duh)... furthermore i find her point moronic to the point of being nonsensical: so let me get this straight hedi "severs" the YSL name as a test to Saint Laurent's enduring name?!! furthermore the clientele buys into this simply because it trusts the label?? that's actually insulting to all you previous YSL lovers... to me the Hedi make-over proves the importance of a designer and the name change is purposely (and smartly) severing with the past clientele, the outrage it provoked proving it. this collection further proves this is now a Hedi show, the label and legacy references being purely symbolic and restrained.. and those that are supporting the new SLP are surely Hedi followers, that would support him no matter what house he took over.. yet re-inforcing the importance of the designer..not so much the label.. but i guess it's a lot more demeaning to imply the opposite, which is why i'm not surprised to read something like this coming from someone like her, as ridiculous as it reads!

 

[disco54]

Cathy is the numero uno fashion critic and for good reason. Her reviews are spot on and not sugar coated like other reviews. I am sure Hedi is going to come out with an idiotic tweet lol.

 

[Izreal]

Riiiight.. all the positive reviews are "sugar coating" and "liars" (as i previously heard you mention) but Cathy's is the pure unbiased truth... LOL

 

[disco54]

Take Saint Laurent. One of the first things the new designer, Hedi Slimane, did was to remove “Yves” from the label, thereby severing a symbolic connection to the founder, and everything he stood for, like good taste and feminine power.

LOOOOOOL ! Awesome

 

[almudena]

I have visited a few semi revamped Saint Laurent Paris boutiques, the clothes looked alright, more than what we saw on the runway for his debut attempt, but the leather goods takes up the majority, I am thus deducing these buzz around the world are attracting people all over to walk in, create a cool or 'it' or 'now' factor, and get them to buy (mostly the leather goods). How else do you make profits in a very short time in this economy? Lets face it, there are lots and lots of well made clothes that look sublime, and are appreciated by 'people-in-the-know', but do they necessarily sell well?
Just my two cents worth.

Exactly.
Saint Laurent boutiques here are currently heavily promoting bags, shoes and accessories, much more so than they did in the past I find. Many of the Pilati era styles too of course, I can safely suppose that a number of clients and potential new ones wouldn't know the difference, or even be aware of the change of designer.

 

[jeffandtheworld]

Please fire Heidi. That's all.

 

[Izreal]

^ huh..isn't that Hedi SS13 in your avatar?!!!

anyways here's a more neutral review to balance things up:

"I feel badly for Slimane. He’s had his *** handed to him by effectively everyone–even his fans. For all the editorial reviews that have tried to gather whatever beauty and raison d’etre is evident in his collection, camps of protestors have shown up in virtual armies at the comment feeds to refute the findings. Any comment of praise has been met with a biting, “but,” and no matter how literate, intellectual, articulate and authentic the positive reviews could have been, it just doesn’t seem to matter.

It’s true that Slimane may be taking a liberal breadth of creative license in his work for Saint Laurent, but if the re-branding and subsequent dropping of the household ‘Yves’ in Saint Laurent last season was an indication of anything, it was that Slimane’s vision would likely differ phenomenally from that of the late Yves’. So, yes, Slimane is certainly not to Saint Laurent what Raf Simons has proven to Christian Dior. But his creative departure from what’s expected at YSL can just as easily be viewed as a continuation of great House tradition.

In Alicia Drake’s book, The Beautiful Fall, a wonderful portrayal mirroring the careers of Karl Lagerfeld and Yves Saint Laurent in 1970s, Saint Laurent is credited as having popularized ready-to-wear in 1966 as a means to “democratize fashion.” Lest we forget, Yves Saint Laurent invented Le Smoking–a novel nod to androgynous dressing that maintained the antiquated spirit of feminine elegance.

Isn’t this precisely what Slimane is trying to do? Appeal to a different, perhaps larger, audience? The democratization of fashion at YSL in 1966 is not so different from the shift we’re seeing at Saint Laurent now. The underlying problem here, I believe, is that it seems like we’re way past the point of democratization. (Especially, when referring to a fashion house with such an extensive aura of highbrow radiating around it).

The concept of ready-to-wear has migrated far away from the original meaning of fashion-friendly “ready-to-wear,” and if the future of ready-to-wear remains — for lack of a better term — ready to wear, should it be ready to wear now?

One of the most beautiful things in fashion is that element of personal exploration. What is more refreshing than hating a collection at first runway glance (case in point: Hedi Slimane for Saint Laurent, season one) and finding yourself having grown to love it over the interim before the clothes hit sales floors? That’s an astute testament to evolving personal style, personal point of view, personal perception. Ultimately, Slimane’s spring suiting, suede and those ineffable leather jackets are the clearest indication that you can’t fake good fabric and that you can’t fake authentic artistry.

And you know what? In spite of my having loved the Fall collection (which, I did, and would effectively besiege the previous paragraph’s sentiment), I wholly applaud the aspect of realism and Slimane’s apparent hunger to modernize the brand.

Here’s the thing of it, though, I’m not Saint Laurent’s chic, overwhelmingly wealthy, French customer; I’m a groupie on the sidelines. So, what do I make of that? Does that chic, French customer even actually exist anymore? Have people expressed violent disinterest in the collection because it doesn’t appear to cater to that customer? Are we afraid that this disheveled girl is the new prototypical woman? And is that a sad, difficult conclusion to draw? Yes, maybe we’re in denial."
Man Repeller

 

[Not Plain Jane]

Mrs Horyn is totally correct!
If this collection, mainly because of the name/label, is going to sell well, then the profits will be higher than the previous seasons. This because the clothes are like those from Topshop/H&M so the fabrications costs are very low, but the selling prices, probably over a 1000 dollars, will be very high. The net result will be extremely high, because the fabrication costs of the previous seasons were higher I assume, because of the better designs. So all in all a brilliant move concerning the profits. But not concerning the iconic name. He has to come up with something better otherwise he will devaluate the YSL brand.

Interesting thoughts. I see the point, certainly, about how some of the styling and/or design mirrors that of high street brands or contemporary labels, and yet I wonder if the "fabrication" costs will be that low? I don't know of course, but judging from the detail shots of the collection, I assume the producers are going to use top-of-the-line leathers, suedes, furs, tulle, wools, silks, detailing (buttons, grommets, zips, etc) and so on when this collection is produced? Which would be in contrast with brands like Top Shop or H&M that would use the cheapest fabrics/details possible in order to turn their clothing for a profit. I worked in a middling market for years, and even down to the button or embroidery choice, it's all about the bottom-line not the creation. I assume that at YSL they won't have to worry about such things and so fit and finish - even with these designs - will still be top level and exclusive??

 

[Izreal]

Interesting thoughts. I see the point, certainly, about how some of the styling and/or design mirrors that of high street brands or contemporary labels, and yet I wonder if the "fabrication" costs will be that low? I don't know of course, but judging from the detail shots of the collection, I assume the producers are going to use top-of-the-line leathers, suedes, furs, tulle, wools, silks, detailing (buttons, grommets, zips, etc) and so on when this collection is produced? Which would be in contrast with brands like Top Shop or H&M that would use the cheapest fabrics/details possible in order to turn their clothing for a profit. I worked in a middling market for years, and even down to the button or embroidery choice, it's all about the bottom-line not the creation. I assume that at YSL they won't have to worry about such things and so fit and finish - even with these designs - will still be top level and exclusive??

of course the cost of fabrication will not be low... anyone with a clue of good sense can observe the sheer quality in the detail shots.. furthermore a shirt isn't just a shirt because of it's (plaid) pattern, or a dress/jacket/boot the same because it holds inspiration from a basic (iconic) model... these are excuses or perhaps ignorant statements by people with an agenda. like or hate the style/aestethic, that is perfectly you're right but make no mistake, the quality is top notch, I would even say a big step above the previous YSL with a more artisan approach in the detail and construction.. Hedi is obsessive with these kind of things, all the way down to garment linings.. even the stores feel more elegant with noble marble and iron/gold accents in place of the cheap and gaudy looking pourpre mirror acetate of the previous.. subtle details that have their importance..

Exactly.
Saint Laurent boutiques here are currently heavily promoting bags, shoes and accessories, much more so than they did in the past I find. Many of the Pilati era styles too of course, I can safely suppose that a number of clients and potential new ones wouldn't know the difference, or even be aware of the change of designer.

I honestly don't know what they could have done to further dissociate themselves from the previous iteration.. they've literally changed everything, from the name all the way down to the lights, walls, floors, hangers... really you'd have to be blind to not notice the difference

 

[Uemarasan]

In Alicia Drake’s book, The Beautiful Fall, a wonderful portrayal mirroring the careers of Karl Lagerfeld and Yves Saint Laurent in 1970s, Saint Laurent is credited as having popularized ready-to-wear in 1966 as a means to “democratize fashion.” Lest we forget, Yves Saint Laurent invented Le Smoking–a novel nod to androgynous dressing that maintained the antiquated spirit of feminine elegance.

Isn’t this precisely what Slimane is trying to do? Appeal to a different, perhaps larger, audience? The democratization of fashion at YSL in 1966 is not so different from the shift we’re seeing at Saint Laurent now. The underlying problem here, I believe, is that it seems like we’re way past the point of democratization. (Especially, when referring to a fashion house with such an extensive aura of highbrow radiating around it).

So how does this new image of YSL parallel the democratization of 1966 exactly? Lots of pretty words here that don't mean anything or lead to anything. Questions that remain unanswered and pretend to be self-sufficient and rhetorical. This isn't even a fashion review. It's a diary entry.

Seems like what Cathy is saying is being misintepreted to suit some other agenda. I don't care much about Slimane nor YSL, but she is right, and her criticism is not only for this house but for fashion in general. Let's not fool ourselves. Slimane is a label. Maybe the good thing about this show is that it is forcing the fashion industry to look at itself and see how ridiculous, sycophantic, and self-serving it has become. Get out of that bubble.

 

[disco54]

There is no parallel with the garbage Slimane has produced for YSL, and what Yves Saint Laurent did in the 60s and 70s. The shock in the clothes is not about how radical or different they are, which was the case in Yves' era but simply how cheap looking and pedestrian they are lol. I mean these kind of clothes are readily found in Forever 21, good will and even kink stores. The dynamic YSL woman has been replaced by a vapid teen angst junior line aimed at 15 or 16 year old girls.

 

[arkasha]

I really don't get why every other reviewer feel the need to include the soundtrack of the show. It's by a virtually unknown band, did Hedi specifically requested they should be mentioned or what?

 

[HeatherAnne]

^ He's always been known for his soundtracks, and introducing new bands, I don't find anything unusual about that at all.

Cathy is the numero uno fashion critic and for good reason. Her reviews are spot on and not sugar coated like other reviews. I am sure Hedi is going to come out with an idiotic tweet lol.

Really?!?! On this matter, I agree with Slimane [not that I thought his Twitter letter was appropriate]. I find Horyn utterly transparent, biased, and feel she kisses most designers a$$es.