Valentino S/S 2016 Paris

[dodencebt]

Oh, and apparently they're holding a 'tribe party' tonight

There is a whole scenery with curtains and walls made out of straws to "resemble" the inside of a traditional African house, raw fur carpets, wood chunks as chairs and all. As if the show wasn't offensive enough.

 

[Kaye Beeh]

A tad offensive but I enjoyed the details of every outfit. I loved the white babydoll with the empire waist fabric strands. And that one suede overcoat piece. The leather laser(?) cut pieces are sublime to see.

Other pieces and that one red bag with masks, eh....idk that bag is no bueno.

 

[orchidee]

And I honestly can't with another 'cultural appropriation' discussion. They are even more boring than this show, if possible.

Why is it boring? Because it doesn't affect you directly?

 

[VogueDisciple93]

This collection infruates me. It is not ok for designers to parade such ignorant, general, and sterotypical ideas of Africa. Then these incompetent two made it even more offensive by adding cornrows and dreads to a mostly white cast. This is offensive because the same way the Native American headdresses are sacred, the masks and jewelry of some African cultures also mean a lot to their people, not something to be added to accessories or slapped on the same sillhouettes you lazily churn out collection after collection. This collection did not celebrate cultures, it belittled them into one fertile idea. Cornrows and dreads belong to POC, and these people are looked down on and it is not up to a white person to now decide that it should no longer be a negative feature.

Maria and Pier are two of the laziest designers working today in my opinion - it is the same designs every collection slathered in some monotunous print/embroidery - and two of the most closed minded about diversity if you look at their casting history, so this collection comes as a big blow for me. Stop being lazy and find something approriate and new to create.

 

[GirlGoneChic]

If we keep treating it like a taboo or a "negative connotation" then it won't ever become positive or even normal. And it's just a hairstyle, which doesn't even have much meaning if you take it out of its context.
But wait, let me ask my black friends and boyfriend what they think about it... they probably won't even know people care about it

Like I said before, best collection of Paris, or even of the season.

That is a horribly ignorant statement. You should consider yourself lucky that cultural appropriation does not affect you or your alleged black friends.

Black people did not decide that cornrows were negative; rather, it was the prevailing race that imposed normative societal behavior and deemed cornrows to be not only unattractive but also inappropriate. However, when white people wear their hair in cornrows, it makes them trendy and "culturally aware", as another poster said.

When you consider that, it is not as easy to say "it is just hair". In this case, it was not simply a hairstyle that was appropriated, but a perspective of an entire "culture". This collection is a blatant example of offensive stereotyping of Africa, the continent. Do you have the mental acuity to recognize that Africa is a continent? If so, then you should also understand that there are 47 countries in Africa and they are not homogenous. The continent is culturally diverse and should not, therefore, be reduced to this awfully narrow depiction of a primitive world. It would be just as ridiculous to say that all of Europe is like [insert stereotype of Italy] and feign ignorance about the differences.

Anyway, this collection was trash.

 

[dodencebt]

According to Vogue, Pierpaolo and Maria wanted to send a message to the refugees looking for a better life in Italy with the collection.

“We probably feel that the greatest privilege in doing our work is that fashion can give a message,” said Chiuri. “We think every person coming here is an individual, and we can show that we can improve ourselves by understanding other cultures.”

I'm done.

 

[Sweet rus]

The accessorize are stunning, the dresses are appealing as well, but I am so over the whole tribal theme. I need something new and fresh from Valentino, it's starting to get really boring, really pretty, but reeeeeeeeally boring

 

[Spike413]

Ironically this is my favorite lineup of clothing from these two since....well....let's just say it's been a while. I love the color palette, some of the details -- that super fine leather latticework, actually most of the leather in general -- are absolutely stunning and I enjoy the fact that for whatever reason it's not nearly as frou frou fairy princess as it usually is.

That said I get why the hair in particular is bothersome to people, and the glaring lack of black models on the runway really hits hard given the sources they pulled their inspiration from. I don't think they did themselves any favors by tying this collection to the refugee situation going on, regardless of how heartfelt it may have been on their part. Bad PR move I think.

All in all though these are some of the more arresting clothes they've made in their time at the house. It's a shame it's pissing people off.

 

[thisismyname]

This is offensive because the same way the Native American headdresses are sacred, the masks and jewelry of some African cultures also mean a lot to their people, not something to be added to accessories or slapped on the same sillhouettes you lazily churn out collection after collection.

Even if they didn't know of the cultural significance of the masks and jewelry, how in their right mind did they think that it was okay for a collection "inspired" by Africa to feature necklaces that look like they are made of bones and teeth? Even if you know nothing of the actual cultures of Africa, those necklaces clearly play on a crude and disrespectful caricature of Africans as "barbaric" or "primitive."

There is no excuse. Maybe after seasons of pretty-but-not-challenging collections, they wanted to generate some controversy? It's a cheap attempt at being "edgy," and from reading the reviews as of yet, it seems like the paid fashion critics are buying their BS explanations. I'm really at a loss with this one, which is sad because I think there are some pretty outfits in there!

 

[Spike413]

^ Not to fuel an already large fire but I think your take on the "bone/teeth" jewelry featured in places might be more a case of you injecting your own meaning into something that may not actually be there.

I mean, whether the whole collection is offensive or not isn't really something that can be answered with a hard yes or no, but I for one don't think that because various tribes people re-purpose the bones of animals they've hunted to use as a form of decoration -- and these designers referenced said decoration -- that those people are being represented as "primitive" or as "barbaric". It honestly didn't have a negative connotation for me because I don't think of any native African tribes as such.

To each their own but just because you associate bone jewelry with a stereotype of barbarism doesn't necessarily mean everyone does.

 

[thisismyname]

To each their own but just because you associate bone jewelry with a stereotype of barbarism doesn't necessarily mean everyone does.

This is in theory a fair point, but I still think that it was quite widely known that necklaces made of teeth or bones are a classic part of a stereotype of barbarism or primitivism (not necesarily unique to Africa). Besides for stereotypical imagry, when I see tooth and bone jewelry, I am reminded of the Flintstones. If the style of the Flintstones is not a primitive one, as they used the bone jewelry to accessorize their loincloths, I don't know what is. One need not be educated in history, culture, or the arts to know the Flintstones, cartoons that are set in a prehistoric (i.e. "primitive") era.

Further, I distinctly remember seeing African necklaces that featured what appeared to be animal teeth in a museum.

I do not want this digression to overtake this thread. With your critique in mind, I will simply restate my prior comment to say that I personally find how Valentino used these types of accessories disrespectful and distasteful, and that I do not understand how the idea that the accessories could be perceived as such never crossed the minds of the folks at Valentino.

 

[khyrk]

According to Vogue, Pierpaolo and Maria wanted to send a message to the refugees looking for a better life in Italy with the collection.



I'm done.

Wow. What do the refugees from Middle East have to do with an African-themed collection? Are they even geographically literate?

 

[ChimyeeRong]

I like it. That's Valentino.

 

[orchidee]

Wow. What do the refugees from Middle East have to do with an African-themed collection? Are they even geographically literate?

That's the default excuse. When people are caught appropriating, they spout some bs about paying homage or showing support to some group of peoples. We all know they don't give a damn about people suffering in other countries--regardless of whether they are Syrian refugees or the people of the homogenized African continent from which they stole design motifs. It doesn't surprise me that these idiots don't know the different between the Middle East and Africa. They just have this exoticized vision of anything outside of Europe and North America. If they really wanted to show support for the refugees, they would donate the money they're making off of their cultural appropriation to actually help these people.

Also, what kind of hypocrisy is it for Chiuri to say that they should try "understanding other cultures" and then have a cast comprised mainly of pasty white girls?

 

[HeatherAnne]

Ironically this is my favorite lineup of clothing from these two since....well....let's just say it's been a while. I love the color palette, some of the details -- that super fine leather latticework, actually most of the leather in general -- are absolutely stunning and I enjoy the fact that for whatever reason it's not nearly as frou frou fairy princess as it usually is.

That said I get why the hair in particular is bothersome to people, and the glaring lack of black models on the runway really hits hard given the sources they pulled their inspiration from. I don't think they did themselves any favors by tying this collection to the refugee situation going on, regardless of how heartfelt it may have been on their part. Bad PR move I think.

All in all though these are some of the more arresting clothes they've made in their time at the house. It's a shame it's pissing people off.

Well said, Spike, I'm of the same mind as you on both fronts.

It really is a stunning collection. I feel like I've been looking at the same Valentino collection for years now, but this one broke the mold. There are still identifying Valentino signatures, but it's all so much more intricate, elegant, and inspiring. Absolutely lovely

 

[Spike413]

That's the default excuse. When people are caught appropriating, they spout some bs about paying homage or showing support to some group of peoples. We all know they don't give a damn about people suffering in other countries--regardless of whether they are Syrian refugees or the people of the homogenized African continent from which they stole design motifs. It doesn't surprise me that these idiots don't know the different between the Middle East and Africa. They just have this exoticized vision of anything outside of Europe and North America. If they really wanted to show support for the refugees, they would donate the money they're making off of their cultural appropriation to actually help these people.

Also, what kind of hypocrisy is it for Chiuri to say that they should try "understanding other cultures" and then have a cast comprised mainly of pasty white girls?

Taken from Style.com's write up of the collection...

For more than a year, tens of thousands of refugees from Senegal, Nigeria, Eritrea, Mali, Gambia, and elsewhere have been making the harrowing journey across the Mediterranean to southern Italy. Packed into unseaworthy vessels, many are dying in appalling circumstances before they reach shore, a humanitarian crisis Italy has been dealing with by patrolling the seas, saving survivors, and giving them sanctuary.

So maybe the idiots weren't the designers, in this case, but the people who decided to jump to conclusions and nail them to a cross before even bothering to get the facts of which refugee situation they were speaking about straight. It may be entirely misguided but it they're clearly not as ignorant and downright stupid as you'd clearly like to believe they are. Furthermore, you make it sound as if the profits which will potentially be earned from this collection go directly into the designer's pockets, which is a ludicrous notion. For all you know they do donate some of the money that they make as salaried employees to various causes. But by all means, make them out to be monstrous people just because they made the politically incorrect choice to reference a culture that doesn't belong to them.

Lastly, that remark about the cast being comprised of "pasty" white girls comes off as unnecessarily harsh and biting when in fact the models have nothing to do with any irresponsible or potentially offensive decisions that were made here. "White girls" would have sufficed I think.

 

[Perickles]

No. Really...

 

[Crying Diamonds]

Ironically this is my favorite lineup of clothing from these two since....well....

EVER.

To look at this collection entirely face value, it is definitely the strongest collection they have ever pulled together. I was surprised when I started to watch the show that I actually continued to watch.. until the very end.
As a die-hard enemy of the accessory designers "at the helm" of Valentino, I was surprised to find myself finding a lot of the looks incredibly beautiful.. most notably a silk jacquard coat with lurex patches; the paneled dresses based on georgette and the tie-dye effect jacket and hoodie.