Virginie Viard - Designer, Creative Director of Chanel

Your honor, how do you explain the 23% growth in the RTW sector 😭

"Blondiaux added: 'Since Virginie took over as a designer of Chanel fashion, more or less in five years, and last year alone, the Chanel ready-to-wear business grew by 23 per cent.'”

this is easily explained.
Revenue = quantity x price
Revenue grew by 23%. Let's say price grew by 50%. This means quantity declined by 18%.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the new fellow at McQueen is getting much love compared to Sarah Burton and it's not like Raf was immune to intense criticism either at Dior prior to MGC.

I don't think gay men expect women to come out looking like a Galliano couture show. Come on. I think it probably comes from their lack of understanding of how the fashion business works and is turning / how the dominant markets dictate what these fashion businesses cater to (i.e. logo merch pieces sell well in Asia and metropolitan cities and certain fits/lengths that do not complement the women body as well sell better in the Middle East). As I stated, the hate could be shifted more towards executives who are turning previously creative fashion houses into merch factories; do not let the clever marketing of "clothes for real women" fool you. I'm sure if the next creative director at Chanel or Dior churns out uninspired collections, they will get just as much criticism as VV and MGC (or in turn VV and MGC will get some post-tenure praise among the gays such as what has occurred for Sarah Burton).

Of course, there is the issue of sexism among gay men but...I think most gay men adore women because they adore beauty and value the power of femininity of women. You can't say men like Ghesquiere, Alaia, Elbaz, Karl, YSL, TF, Anthony V. do not adore women. And obviously their "gay vision" hit some cord because many "real" women did/do still love their creations (in both accesories and clothing propositions).

After my long winded responses on this thread, I still ask myself why exactly are we so concerned about protecting people, who make six to seven figures in their salaries, from criticism?
I agree, the problem is when the criticism becomes observed. Because nothing will ever be the same again and when we continue to look back which we have the power to do in a way that we've never had the power to do before and we keep comparing people to different time, well how can we ever move on exactly. It's like Balenciaga when people say he's rolling over in his grave well of course he is but also if you were to reproduce those same garments and put them in the store right now at this moment they wouldn't make any money because times have changed and times have moved on they had three great designers at that house that did not last and some where really wonderful. But in today's world you must sell something if you're not selling you're not producing you're not designing correctly for the people that are in front of you right now! In this moment. I think my biggest problem with fashion right now is all of the amateur critics out there in the world who are actually not purchasing anything who are just talking heads they can get people fired. Also not remembering that fashion is an art form and you cannot step into an artist, particularly a dead artist mind. you have to move forward, but if you keep looking back you will never be happy. This statement applies to many of the big houses out there in the world. And any which way we will never see another Karl lagerfeld again. 36 years at the creative helm full creative director for that long is it extreme task to overtake and whoever steps in next must be given time. I think it's a shame that she was let go or walked out the way she did but I do think that Chanel needs a change but the criticism was sort of extreme. I'm more angry at Sarah's criticism because I think she really took the right step after the death of McQueen until she left she focus on the tailoring and moved from there. Was it theatrical and crazy the way McQueen was no because she's not McQueen and that's okay.
 
On YouTube someone once pointed out in the comment section of a couture show by Karl: "Let's be honest, the set helps every year." and I echo this sentiment a lot. Everyone looked to the Chanel défilés as the industry standard and that helped glorify Karl's designs. Pavlovsky himself admitted that these shows used to be the bulk of the marketing budget.

The Grand Palais is still undergoing renovation so perhaps when that's done the spectacle runways will return. Perhaps the C-suites were trying to save money by watering down the shows, which in turn made us criticize her designs even more.
 
For me, it was definitely Virginie's clothes and the way things were styled. Karl's sets were absolutely grandiose indeed, but I always was fascinated by the details and the fit of everything. Virginie's designs did not invite the viewer to want to dive deeper into them. They were flat, ill-fitting, and lacking in taste. Somehow the clients still ate it up, though. So no, the sets really did nothing for me as I genuinely loved Karl's designs and seeing how he pushed the ateliers.
 
For me, it was definitely Virginie's clothes and the way things were styled. Karl's sets were absolutely grandiose indeed, but I always was fascinated by the details and the fit of everything. Virginie's designs did not invite the viewer to want to dive deeper into them. They were flat, ill-fitting, and lacking in taste. Somehow the clients still ate it up, though. So no, the sets really did nothing for me as I genuinely loved Karl's designs and seeing how he pushed the ateliers.
Her couture set could be very weird at times like I didn't know what was going on. I remember the show she did with the big animals on the stage and the models walked out of the animals that was weird but fun. She couldn't correlate the sets and the clothing together the way Karl did
 
On YouTube someone once pointed out in the comment section of a couture show by Karl: "Let's be honest, the set helps every year." and I echo this sentiment a lot. Everyone looked to the Chanel défilés as the industry standard and that helped glorify Karl's designs. Pavlovsky himself admitted that these shows used to be the bulk of the marketing budget.

The Grand Palais is still undergoing renovation so perhaps when that's done the spectacle runways will return. Perhaps the C-suites were trying to save money by watering down the shows, which in turn made us criticize her designs even more.
Maybe but some of his best shows were done in the Chanel studio house all the Ritz hotel. I.E 1997 2003 1996
 
Apologies to all the women here that if the discussion I started have caused discomfort to you and make you feel unsafe to voice your opinion. That is not my intention.
As for the last point I think needed to be said is what I remembered from a commentary made by Aha and Lolo regarding Virgine’s design around the time Karl just passed. It is something in line with ‘she lowered the waists line of those jackets which allowed women to feel better about wearing it’.
I have never really enjoyed Virgine’s design as I always find it to lack a certain fineness comparing to what Karl has offered. But I always remember that comment.
If a female designer can use her designs in the most influential womenswear brand to make women feel better about their bodies, then she is a talented designer. And what I feel as a gay men doesn’t matter .
 
Imagine if everyone stopped making ridiculous generalizations and vindictive declarations about entire genders and sexual orientations! What a crazy world that would be!

Imagine having the integrity to make this comment -- treating an individual as an individual, in the proper context -- without a single eruption of propagandistic bigotry:



And then we have the local discourse ...

I do find it odd that being called 'misogynist' is in a way so offensive to some.

Apologies to all the women here that if the discussion I started have caused discomfort to you and make you feel unsafe to voice your opinion.

Sx7jqsW.jpeg
 
@GoldenTribe Yes... we all live in a vacuum and are all INDIVIDUALS who are NEVER EVER influenced by larger cultures and societies...............
 
this is easily explained.
Revenue = quantity x price
Revenue grew by 23%. Let's say price grew by 50%. This means quantity declined by 18%.
Sincerely it was what I heard from Chanel C-suite insiders, but they were some clues in the last couple of hours : no new stores and no new production facilities.
 
@GoldenTribe Yes... we all live in a vacuum and are all INDIVIDUALS who are NEVER EVER influenced by larger cultures and societies...............

I say this without sarcasm or snark: we are all individuals; "in the proper context" (my words) is the opposite of "in a vacuum" (your words).

I would love it if everyone would stop making asinine comments that treat demographic groups as monoliths and typically denigrate them along the way, whether it's female designers or men under six feet or homosexuals. If that rubs you the wrong way, I don't know what to say.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,573
Messages
15,189,573
Members
86,468
Latest member
littlelous
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->