Simone Bellotti - Designer, Creative Director of Jil Sander

[Kennnnn]

I don't really agree that original Jil Sander was "sterile". I only started wearing her clothes in the mid-90s, so I can't comment on her work before this. But the pieces that I had, actually many of them were very sensual, in the cut and the fabric. And she could also be "trendy" (even if she probably would not have described them in this way) - she was one of the first designers to launch a luxury sneaker, in 1996 I think, with Puma. Above all, also, there was an extreme discretion and elegance.

That's also why I think, in the mid to late 90s, actually the people that wore Jil Sander usually also bought Prada, Hermes (Margiela), and also Yohji. All had a similar feeling of sensuality and elegance (only at the time, of course; Prada and Yohji today are quite different).

Let's also not forget that Jil rtw was very expensive (closer to Yohji, Prada and Hermes), certainly much more expensive than Helmut, Ann, Margiela, Raf and Dries at the time. So her customer base (beyond the "fashion crowd") was slightly different.

 

[Kanzai]

^^^Yes, I think "sterile" is not the right word to call her aesthetic. This Yohji Yamamoto AW1996 look can fit well to the world of Jil Sander fs, it exudes a kind of austere sensuality – sculptural, but not cold; monastic, but not emotionless. I love Yohji for the melancholic mood that speaks to my emo inner child LOL (and I'm from East Asia so I feel more connected), but then when he slips into that "aura farming" mode à la Armani, that professional, composed, almost telepathically private woman, it’s just sublime. Nowadays, most people only know him for the bold, sculptural work he's done since the late 2000s, a pity.


Pinterest

 

[tourbillions]

Random stuff we will soon see on yoox

 

[PDFSD]

After just six months, Serge Brunschwig steps down as CEO and Chief Strategy Officer of Jil Sander.
The announcement, shared on LinkedIn, is concise and deliberate:

“Today is the last day of my mission for Jil Sander. I want to thank the team for what we have achieved, preparing this beautiful brand for its next chapter, and the Otb Group for their trust.”

Formerly CEO of Fendi (LVMH) since 2018, Brunschwig brought decades of experience in luxury fashion. His abrupt exit invites speculation.

Was there a divergence in vision? Organisational friction? Or a deeper strategic shift within the Otb portfolio?

In the interim, Ubaldo Minelli CEO of Otb Group will assume leadership, signalling a transition managed directly from the top.

Jil Sander stands at a crossroads. A brand defined by radical minimalism and conceptual precision must now reconcile its legacy with global ambition. In this phase, creative consistency and business strategy must move in sync.

In today’s luxury landscape, even the most seasoned leaders are subject to accelerated expectations and complex internal dynamics. Leadership, now more than ever, is both a role and a pressure point.

 

[philophile]

Sure, these kind of clothes are clearly lacking of 'interesting, architectural twists'…

Funny that you’re throwing around arguments from different people as you see fit to suit your needs, since I never used those associations you described Ms Sander's work with. The cultural context you are trying to link her work with is wildly speculative, to say the least.

You clearly have your aesthetic preferences shaped with a larger emphasize on how Zeitgeist-y it resonates and by today’s standard, that happens to be what gets being picked up by content creators, is being shared on social networks, etc. - Momentum is the currency by which the outside world validates the relevance of artistic work and by that measure, having a notoriously private, uncompromising creative like Jil Sander return for a 2nd time, replacing her much-acclaimed and beloved predecessor Raf Simons explains why the public did not welcome her back with much enthusiasm - Added to that her abrupt departure for reasons rooted in her private life, that created an air of unease for the media to engage with the work she created in her brief return.

Keeping in mind how the industry works and a momentum is created (also by the stamp of approval from Vogue and other fashion magazines), Jil Sander’s work falls way below the radar since decades, whereas of course, we have a whole other momentum behind Phoebe Philo as well as the designers following in her lineage, brought up in a largely digital-leaning PR. As an 80-year old woman, I think Jil Sander has every right to withdraw from this game, much as her peer Alaia largely disengaged from the need to personally promote his work by any means.

The value of an artistic body of work often only becomes clear in hindsight - for example, the most radically purist, yet architectural work by Cristobal Balenciaga in the 1960s was only much later considered the peak of his output and not received with great enthusiasm at the time of it’s presentation - Whether or not Ms Philo or her peers following in her lineage will be remembered in the history of fashion with similar significance as Ms Jil Sander remains to be seen.

View attachment 1398951 View attachment 1398952 View attachment 1398953 View attachment 1398954 View attachment 1398955

Nobody is denying Jil Sander's influence and taking anything away from her body of work. Without her work, fashion wouldn't be anything of what is today, it's very simple. It's influential, alright, but that doesn't mean fashion hasn't moved on since then. Silhouettes have improved very much and I wouldn't want to return to the beginning of something that has evolved since then. We cannot unsee/undo everything that has been created in the last 30 years just to go back to a nostalgic period that was only the start of something, when a lot has happened since then. That is so close to being historical revisionism.

I agree with the previously mentioned fact here, that Jil Sander's body of work is very comparable to the Bauhaus/Le Corbusier/modernism in general. Le Corbusier came up with the 5 points of architecture and integrated them in Maison Citröhan (actually inspired by Citroën, the car company) with the idea to create a 'house machine' that would be easy to build industrially and available to the masses. Jil Sander's minimalism is not far from that as, similarly to modernism, it built the foundations for the fashion we have today, a fashion that is practical, functional, and eventually available to the masses and that is something good and important. But also eventually, this raises problems: Uniformity and homogeneity. To see differences and individuality in any field is probably not essential on this planet we are destroying, but it is important and it reminds of us of tolerance, acceptance, and celebration of differences, it makes the world a more colorful and joyful place. I do not think that anyone who prefers 90s Jil Sander to 2010s Phoebe Philo truly likes fashion. No one who loves fashion, loves it merely for function, but for beauty, dreams, and aspiration. Besides, the biggest chunk of modernist architecture hasn't aged very well, despite the intentions of architects back then to create something timeless, a lot of it looks just now grey, uniform, cold and even outdated . The only branch of modernism that has trascended time is organic architecture or tell me you feel the same when looking at a Gaudí house than looking at Mies van der Rohe's Seagram building.

The problem I have with your opinion (and mind you, this is a visual field, no matter if you have 50 years of experience, this is about taste, a realm of the subjective, so you, like many others here, are not talking facts as much as you think you are in your self-importance), is that you deem anyone who prefers a more whimsical and architectural form of minimalism as 'trendseeking'. It's not like liking something slightly creative or out-of-the-box means you're a fashion victim, it is a highly ridiculous assumption, it just means you appreciate creativity. Beautiful things will often have a 'momentum', and it's not because they intend to be a trend or go viral.

 

[philophile]

^^^Yes, I think "sterile" is not the right word to call her aesthetic. This Yohji Yamamoto AW1996 look can fit well to the world of Jil Sander fs, it exudes a kind of austere sensuality – sculptural, but not cold; monastic, but not emotionless. I love Yohji for the melancholic mood that speaks to my emo inner child LOL (and I'm from East Asia so I feel more connected), but then when he slips into that "aura farming" mode à la Armani, that professional, composed, almost telepathically private woman, it’s just sublime. Nowadays, most people only know him for the bold, sculptural work he's done since the late 2000s, a pity.

View attachment 1399010
Pinterest

No, this is soooooooooo not 90s Jil Sander. This is not merely functional, this has plastic beauty, it's ethereal, it's whimsical. There's nothing sculptural about 90s Jil Sander nor German fashion. Yohji is an iconoclast and a defier of rules, Jil Sander, like many people in Germany, are creators and followers of rules.

 

[philophile]

I don't really agree that original Jil Sander was "sterile". I only started wearing her clothes in the mid-90s, so I can't comment on her work before this. But the pieces that I had, actually many of them were very sensual, in the cut and the fabric. And she could also be "trendy" (even if she probably would not have described them in this way) - she was one of the first designers to launch a luxury sneaker, in 1996 I think, with Puma. Above all, also, there was an extreme discretion and elegance.

That's also why I think, in the mid to late 90s, actually the people that wore Jil Sander usually also bought Prada, Hermes (Margiela), and also Yohji. All had a similar feeling of sensuality and elegance (only at the time, of course; Prada and Yohji today are quite different).

Let's also not forget that Jil rtw was very expensive (closer to Yohji, Prada and Hermes), certainly much more expensive than Helmut, Ann, Margiela, Raf and Dries at the time. So her customer base (beyond the "fashion crowd") was slightly different.

Yeah, I agree, I think I went too hard on her, it's not entirely sterile, there was some sensuality in some of her work, but when you recall it as a whole, strict functionality was its predominant feature. Naturally, people who don't like fashion and prefer functional clothes will like her more, hence 'her costumer base beyond the fashion crowd' is not exactly a terribly hard conclusion to come to.

 

[philophile]

You think you need to lecture me on that, do you?

I’ve been working in the fashion industry for more than 20 years. And no, 'minimalism in fashion' predates the 1990's. Get back to educate yourself about 20th century fashion history, perhaps when you look at the work of other (female) designers like Anne Marie Beretta, Claire McCardell, Madeleine Vionnet or Madame Grès you will find that purist design was not exclusive to the expression of 1990s fashion.

No, I'm definitely not wanting to lecture you on anything, but experience in fashion doesn't make you an 'oracle of truth', especially when it comes to a field entirely dependent on taste, something entirely subjective. And I think a lot of your statements are logical fallacies that I have already deconstructed. Yes, I do need to educate myself more not just in fashion, but in everything, but I don't need to be a scholar in fashion history to have reasonable arguments. Also, never did I say that minimalism in fashion is exclusive to the 90s: on the contrary I did mention André Courrèges and the 1960s atomic space age movement, despite you assuming what you do for absolutely no reason. I guess when we have no arguments it's easier to resort to strawman arguments, instead of making counterrarguments. Typical of conservatives.

 

[LadyJunon]

@philophile is right.

The issue with Jil Sander (and pretty much every other fashion designer) is that her work exists within a cultural context. In the early to mid 90s, her cultural peak, the pared-back colour palettes and strong focus on practicality was seen as a break away from the extravagant, technicolour vision that dominated the late 70s and 80s. In the context of 2012, her brief return following Raf's departure, the approach didn't make the same impact all. Instead of feeling pure and energetic like her 90s work, it felt dated, stiff and anonymous. Fashion had moved on. Culture had moved on.

Philo's work also exists in a different context. Her Chloe was a solid sequel to McCartney's sexy, sweaty neo-bohemians (which in turn pulled from Ford's Gucci), while her Celine, though minimalist, was more whimsical and eccentric than the austerity of Jil Sander. It worked within the context of the 10s, which was the peak of manrepeller fashion, which was a rejection of the va-va-voom ideal that dominated the 00s. Her work under her own name exists in a different context, where the ideal she built in 2013-15 is the mainstream. In turn, she introduces an animalistic element to her lexicon with the heavy use of furs, leather and extremely high slits.

 

[Kanzai]

Regarding 90s minimalism, one of my fav fashion girls – Donna Karan is so so slept on lol, she usually doesn't get enough credits for stellar works/campaigns under her namesake label and DKNY. Even the game-changer at the time – Helmut Lang respects her.

 

[Kennnnn]

Yeah, I agree, I think I went too hard on her, it's not entirely sterile, there was some sensuality in some of her work, but when you recall it as a whole, strict functionality was its predominant feature.

Thank you. I think that functionality and sensuality are not necessarily separate. I agree that Jil Sander's clothes were functional, in the sense that they were easy to wear, fit a variety of body types and age groups, and mixed well with other types of clothing.

But they were also very very sensual. Her suiting was very precise, but never stiff or "mannish", and many of her knits - even the thickest ones - were very soft and fluid. Some of her jersey pieces, in fact, were extremely revealing - not by being sheer, but just by how they fell on the body.

I was quite delighted that there was a bit of that same quality in her Uniqlo +J capsule. I have a wonderful peacoat from that collection that feels like a beautiful warm embrace.

 

[Lola701]

^^^Yes, I think "sterile" is not the right word to call her aesthetic. This Yohji Yamamoto AW1996 look can fit well to the world of Jil Sander fs, it exudes a kind of austere sensuality – sculptural, but not cold; monastic, but not emotionless. I love Yohji for the melancholic mood that speaks to my emo inner child LOL (and I'm from East Asia so I feel more connected), but then when he slips into that "aura farming" mode à la Armani, that professional, composed, almost telepathically private woman, it’s just sublime. Nowadays, most people only know him for the bold, sculptural work he's done since the late 2000s, a pity.

View attachment 1399010
Pinterest

For me this look can’t fit into the JS universe. If that was the case, considering that all the designers from Versace to Jean Colonna, did minimalism, they would have fit in her universe.
Yohji at some point was in the crossroads between classic Haute Couture and there’s something about the poetry of his work and the high drama that is very distinctive for him. Yohji in the late 90’s was more like a modern, Japanese’s interpretation of Cristobal Balenciaga. Yohji has the sensibiiity of a grand couturier!

What characterizes JS’s work was her pragmatism. There’s almost a service-led aspect to her work. Modern, feminine, for the most part timeless and clothes that the wearer forget. Some of her best collections for me doesn’t shine because of the brilliance of her clothes but because of the « justesse » or her proposition. I’ve never said « wow » for a JS by Jim piece but I often myself being that woman, in her deceptively simple, extremely well made, high quality clothes. And Jil informed a lifestyle too.

 

[LadyJunon]

Thank you. I think that functionality and sensuality are not necessarily separate. I agree that Jil Sander's clothes were functional, in the sense that they were easy to wear, fit a variety of body types and age groups, and mixed well with other types of clothing.

But they were also very very sensual. Her suiting was very precise, but never stiff or "mannish", and many of her knits - even the thickest ones - were very soft and fluid. Some of her jersey pieces, in fact, were extremely revealing - not by being sheer, but just by how they fell on the body.

I was quite delighted that there was a bit of that same quality in her Uniqlo +J capsule. I have a wonderful peacoat from that collection that feels like a beautiful warm embrace.

For me this look can’t fit into the JS universe. If that was the case, considering that all the designers from Versace to Jean Colonna, did minimalism, they would have fit in her universe.
Yohji at some point was in the crossroads between classic Haute Couture and there’s something about the poetry of his work and the high drama that is very distinctive for him. Yohji in the late 90’s was more like a modern, Japanese’s interpretation of Cristobal Balenciaga. Yohji has the sensibiiity of a grand couturier!

What characterizes JS’s work was her pragmatism. There’s almost a service-led aspect to her work. Modern, feminine, for the most part timeless and clothes that the wearer forget. Some of her best collections for me doesn’t shine because of the brilliance of her clothes but because of the « justesse » or her proposition. I’ve never said « wow » for a JS by Jim piece but I often myself being that woman, in her deceptively simple, extremely well made, high quality clothes. And Jil informed a lifestyle too.

There's a lot of influences in JS's work. While there's a strong menswear influence in her work (the sobriety and practicality), the overall result leans towards the feminine and sensual. Her silhouettes skim the wearer's figure rather than masking it and the fabrics used are often soft rather than stiff like a men's suit, nothing feels overly agressive or hard-edged. In that vein, her view of femininity isn't coquette, girly or flirty.

As @Lola701 said, Yohji Yamamoto designs with a more couture sensibility. His work may not be stereotypically feminine, but there's a level of drama and scuplture that typically associated with the like of Vionnet, Gres and Balenciaga. Funny enough, there's quite a bit of Yohji in Ghesquiere's earliest collection for Balenciaga. Helmut Lang was more gritty and industrial with his strong references of workwear garments and Americana. Calvin Klein is closer to Jil Sander, but is more openly sexy and glamourous, something that was amplified during Costa's tenure.

 

[Kennnnn]

@LadyJunon thank you, "skim" (the body) is exactly the word I should have used. A friend of mine who was a fashion editor at Vogue Japan and who understood my style, told me years ago when Cos first launched in Tokyo - you have to try the clothes, you'll love them. But I've never been able to find anything i liked there, because the clothes are so flat. It's the same problem I have with the Meiers' JS.