The third dress posted from the Chanel collection in the first post is actually quite like a number of pieces of regalia I've seen worn by some of the First Nations all over Northern America..calling it ugly is even worse than screaming about appropriation
If my national costume was sent down the Chanel runway I would call it a very ugly chanel dress, even if I am very proud of my national costume when I wear it. I am proud of it not because it is a particularly beautiful dress, but because of what it stands for. The Chanel version is not particularly beautiful, and when that model wears it, it has no meaning, which makes it a bad dress as far as I see it. So there is a difference between calling that Chanel dress a flop and disrespecting someones regalia.
The fact that we have certain expectations of Chanel does not work in favour of the dress either. Karl has basically just attempted to make a more stylish version of a cultural atire, which was not very successful nor does it show any creativity on his part...
Has Karl said anything about why he made these dresses?