Virginie Viard - Designer, Creative Director of Chanel

But on the flipside... it's perfectly fine for gay men to make braindead criticisms of women (she has a job because she has ovaries!!!!), or generalizations that gay men love to design for women because ~women are strong~ AND ~"adore women because they adore beauty"~ (oh, we're dolls, our only value is in our beauty?), etc. It's a two way street.
Well strength was mentioned so maybe beauty isn't the only value?

My issue is the critiques against the criticism and the "women design for women" generalization is it is all so selective (and often not based in context). Where was that energy for CWK, Bouchra Jarrar, Gabriela Hearst, Frida etc. during their tenures at brands and when they got sacked? Why is the "gay men are misogynist" point (which, as I've stated earlier, is a real issue for a certain portion of gay men) thrown when it's cases where the women creative directors decided to leave their roles at these houses on their own time, such as the case of VV and even Phoebe? It's like JK Rowling whose name just randomly started getting thrown around, these arguments kind of just appear in a space. And I'm not sure if certain customers really care like that or care to know...I don't think certain customers want to know or care that their goods are being designed by a gay man (or if the labels they flaunt was of a gay man). As long as the goods hold a specific type of social currency. A currency that is in part propelled and goes back to the vision and perception-building of a creative director.

And this is just my opinion, I will say one of the faults of the role of a creative director at big brands is that it is geared towards someone who are able to/will choose to focus on their job more than anything else and give 100% of themselves to their job (and yes, I am aware this is not the only career that requires that but we are talking about fashion). Some gay men [who are out because I know an earlier comment stated that gay men can have it easier in society because they can be in the closet...which is just..sad to read if you think that's a great situation to be in...but anyways] historically often have lower chances (or in some cases, desires) of a successful romantic and/or family life, hence, it factors into why the industry operates the way it does. Of course times have changed in some places a bit. Blazy and Mullier breaking up to focus on their careers signifies that choice to focus on their careers first. And when you want to focus on even one of those things, you kind of sometimes have to leave. I don't think these big brands are going to change that level of commitment any time soon. Classic case of don't hate the players, hate the game.
 
I was the person who brought up JK Rowling and it was a joke ........ except that she is also the poster child for clueless myopic self-righteous rich cis-het white women who parade around declaring without a shred of self-awareness or irony that rich, cis-het white *men* are the ultimate evil and the cause of all problems; a billionaire who spends her time attacking the trans community; not a classy figure or a paragon of tolerance.
 
No creative director is above criticism and I don't know why the Virginie Army Defense is NOW coming to her defense.. But it's really simple if, you design something that's of poor taste you'll receive a whole different reaction from what the people around you are saying and this is what sucks about designers or fashion as a whole, Yes Men are killing creativity.
 
Virginie’s Chanel was dismal. Giving Anne Taylor Loft and Talbots, an embarrassment.
 
I know fashion’s your passion and anything out of ‘Chanel-Virginie-Chanel-Virginie’ will go over your head but the most simplified, watered-down explanation is that it was the type of commentary when a female designer unequivocally or debatably fails. Not that she’s a woman, or that she’s talented or that men suffer, or that men do not receive criticism.

I'm sorry but the "type of commentary" that emerged in the announcement of Viard's departure was completely reasonable, fair and unbiased. Not once did I read anything minutely resembling a personal attack on her character, gender, work ethic, or who she is as a person. The fact that so many people disliked the work and felt passionate enough to express those sentiments of disappointment and distaste is their freedom of expression.

The work was universally appreciated as being terrible and people responded proportionately. They criticised the clothes and the clothes only. Just as they respond negatively and with such might to designers like Sabato de Sarno and Demna Gvasalia's collections.

Again, it is because Chanel has such an important legacy and history. Society at large is invested in its image creation and brand integrity in a way that they aren't towards other less important brands. Add to that, Viard had all the resources in the world at her disposal, and access to Chanel historic archives, and people that knew Gabrielle Chanel herself. The expectations were naturally high.

The next person to design at Chanel will receive the exact same amount of scrutiny and criticism, and if Hedi does indeed sign on, he will torn apart in a much worse way than what Viard was. There are voices on the internet that are trying to imply salacious things because of his Celine advertising campaigns and his focus on youth, even those 90% of high-fashion brands, Chanel included, is equally as youth obsessed and dedicates an equal amount of brand creation and advertising efforts to the pursuit of eternal youthfulness.
 
look how long the life of that idea has lasted

verus anything we get these days

its so rare, if u don't see that i feel bad for you
This is so weird... why can't it be criticized? What? You think I'm calling current designs BETTER than that?

It's so stupid that so many in the fashion industry shriek all day about it being art, art, art (not Karl, I know)... and the second it receives any criticism. Harsh criticism. That's on the level literature, film, music, painting, etc. would get... well, it has a tantrum. Just like the video game industry lol. Wants to be called art without the nitty gritty.
 
You know, I remember the good old days when
Oh please... Anne Taylor Loft has better designs than Virginie's Chanel.
One of my oldest friends is the head of design for Loft. He's actually an amazing designer with really exceptional taste
 
One of my oldest friends is the head of design for Loft. He's actually an amazing designer with really exceptional taste
(Well, tell him that I was sad when Loft shut down its stores in Canada... they had some cute things, that I still wear... 😭)

Don't banish me... I used to work with elementary-school aged kids, you think you can get more fancy than Loft and not be punished for it by paint, glue, etc. Nah. One day a kid spilled my entire mocha on me. I know we're all wearing Margiela and Commes des Garçons all time here, I know, I know!!!
 
No creative director is above criticism and I don't know why the Virginie Army Defense is NOW coming to her defense.. But it's really simple if, you design something that's of poor taste you'll receive a whole different reaction from what the people around you are saying and this is what sucks about designers or fashion as a whole, Yes Men are killing creativity.
Indeed! I don't get the fuss. I think Virginie is a charming person but she has zero talent to be a CD. Same as MCG, she is terrible doing clothes (she has other talents business-related though). Same with SdS. It's also true that Dior and Chanel are maybe the most famous fashion brands in the world, so of course there will be more opinions and will be more passionated than the ones Matthew's Givenchy received.

The thing is that now fashion is an entertainment industry and with social media people can be vocal. The snobby part of me hates (I mean HATES) when people who think fashion is what Chiara Ferragni wears or who just like going shopping at Zara have an opinion on the MET Gala or on a HF collection, but this is the world we live in and nothing can stop that.
 
If the ~fashion elite~ didn’t want the unwashed masses to have opinions about the Met Gala or HC collections… why is it so public? I mean… these things used to be more private. Just because I’m not going to buy haute couture has zero bearing on me having an opinion on it, besides it all trickles down anyway. Zara produces better collections than some of the fashion houses we’re supposed to admire.
 
The fashion industry itself is pretentious as f*ck, irdgaf about Chanel Dior etc, not to mention i'm a Marxist. I wish I could eliminate all motivation to learn about fashion and focus on more interesting topics in life. I don't know why I fell in love with this sh*tty hobby in the first place, would rather watch soccer matches and play World of Warcraft. 🥹 Tho TFS is a lovely place
 
If the ~fashion elite~ didn’t want the unwashed masses to have opinions about the Met Gala or HC collections… why is it so public? I mean… these things used to be more private. Just because I’m not going to buy haute couture has zero bearing on me having an opinion on it, besides it all trickles down anyway. Zara produces better collections than some of the fashion houses we’re supposed to admire.
Exactly, when you are so public, you are obviously more exposed and you have the risk of having the sort of comments VV got in her Marseille show or the ones SDS gets after every collection… At the end of the day, the brands also benefit from the buzz when it’s positive (even if it’s just for a lipstick).

So the “crowds shouldn’t talk about designers negatively” doesn’t make much sense to me. When you accept a role like that you become a public figure, for the good and for the not so good. And, tbh, criticism in fashion is quite light. I’ve never read something too out of place tbh.

The worst for me is when someone says, while watching the MET gala: she’s out of theme 💀 and they didn’t even understand the theme in the first place. But that’s part of fashion in 2024.
 

The Fashion System Is Creaking. Will It Collapse?​

The current formulaic, corporatised, anodyne approach to fashion is not working. The industry needs to find its courage to be creative again, writes Imran Amed.
A collage of cracked ground with designer labels

The sheer scale of these businesses means there is a lot more at stake.(BoF Team)

By
14 June 2024
BoF PROFESSIONAL

LONDON — Lately, something has not been feeling quite right in luxury fashion. First Kering, and now LVMH and Chanel, seem to be creeping into crisis management mode.
As has been well documented, Sabato De Sarno’s creative directorship at all-important Gucci has not yet ignited industry interest. Meanwhile, customers haven’t had the opportunity to see much new product in store, hobbling Kering’s post-Covid performance. None of the other Kering brands are registering meaningful growth that can make up for this, leaving the group with a very complex multi-faceted turnaround to execute.
Over at LVMH, things are getting more challenging too. According to market sources, sales at Dior are flagging, which perhaps explains why the house’s March 23 men’s show in Hong Kong was “indefinitely postponed” just a few weeks before it was due to take place. Meanwhile, Fendi and Givenchy seem to be in stasis mode, while reports that Hedi Slimane is about to leave Celine following “thorny contract negotiations”with his bosses at LVMH further complicates matters.
And then just last week, Chanel suddenly lost its creative director, Virginie Viard, and in a not very Chanel way, especially for someone who had dedicated 30 years to the house. The fact that Viard’s exit happened so quickly with no succession plan in place makes it clear that neither side had planned for this to happen now. Chanel’s creative conundrum comes amid market reports that sales are down in almost every market this year.


But it’s not just these designers and these houses that are troubled. Burberry’s mooted elevation strategy is not yet delivering results and Lanvin, which has been without a creative director for more than a year, seems to be languishing even if CEO Siddartha Shukla is working hard to keep the brand relevant. After John Galliano wiped his Instagram account, the rumour mill started whirring that he would be leaving his creative directorship at Maison Margiela.
Meanwhile, a number of talented designers remain without big jobs. Pierpoalo Piccioli suddenly exited Valentino in March and Sarah Burton announced last autumn that she was leaving Alexander McQueen. Both designers had worked with their respective houses for more than 20 years and haven’t popped up anywhere else, in spite of their talent.Neither have Riccardo Tisci or Claire Waight Keller who left Burberry and Givenchy several years ago.

What explains this pattern of events? There are a variety of forces at work, but I think it has something to do with a gradual breakdown of the social contract between creatives and their corporate bosses, who are not championing creativity in the way they once did.
Once upon a time, people like Bernard Arnault and Francois-Henri Pinault were willing to take creative risks to boost the fortunes of small-ish fashion brands. When Arnault appointed Marc Jacobs to become the first creative director of Louis Vuitton in 1997, the brand had no ready-to-wear collection. Arnault knew Vuitton could benefit from an injection of creative energy, just as he did with John Galliano at Dior that same year.
Now, the sheer scale of these businesses means there is a lot more at stake. And as luxury brands brace themselves for an extended ‘normalisation’ period, it seems the mantra is to take the safe route — even if that means appointing no creative director at all. Chanel is unlikely to have a new creative director for sometime, and LVMH-owned Berluti has been operating without a creative director for several years.

Loewe Autumn/Winter 2024
Loewe Autumn/Winter 2024 (Spotlight/Launchmetrics)

There are exceptions to this fashion monotony, of course. Jonathan Anderson’s Loewe manages to both surprise creatively and create commercial impact. Prada and Miu Miu are also creative highlights that are driving commercial success. Both Anderson and Miuccia Prada have a proven ability to push things forward, while also finding ways to ensure the business is still growing. These brands may soon face a different challenge. They need to carefully balance growth with over-exposure, as if growth happens too quickly, it may not be sustainable over the long-term.
Most of the brands that compete with Prada and Loewe for attention have backed away from high-risk, high-reward fashion driven by creativity. Now the approach is more formulaic, akin to selling luxury merch in an overpriced supermarket. Karl Lagerfeld may have predicted with his Autumn/Winter 2015 Chanel show.
This is a world where one brand’s $1,000 hoodie is indistinguishable from another’s. Where it is easier to copy the shape of a box bag with gold logo hardware that is working at another brand, than coming up with a unique shape of your own. Customers have cottoned onto this, and would rather spend their money on one-of-a-kind experiences or hard-to-find vintage pieces than have the same thing as everyone else.


Karl Lagerfeld at the Chanel's Supermaket during the Chanel show, as part of the Paris Fashion Week Womenswear Fall/Winter 2014-2015
Karl Lagerfeld at Chanel's Fall/Winter 2014-2015 show. (Getty Images)

But the lack of creativity and magic does not end there. The fashion system has also been buffeted by the sudden collapse of Matches and Farfetch, and the slow but steady decline of the once-dominant luxury e-commerce behemoth Yoox Net-a-Porter, which is a shell of its former self. The experience and assortment at Farfetch was not so different from Matches which was not so different from Net-a-Porter. This is in part because the people who bought or invested in these companies had no real. understanding of the creativity and taste required to create world-class retail. (Some of them did not understand how to manage technology either, but that’s a whole other analytical exercise.)
This meant the only way to compete was on price, which led to a downward spiral of discounting, training customers to wait for discounts, making profitability almost impossible to achieve. Sadly, the collateral damage has been independent fashion businesses that dependend on these platforms in the early stage of growth. Independent brands on both sides of the Atlantic are now on the brink, further diluting the creative lifeblood of fashion.

The result of all this is a fashion industry that fails to inspire customers, and not even ourselves. The current formulaic, corporatised, anodyne approach to fashion is clearly not working. This leaves me with the sinking feeling that things are about to break down. Maybe that’s what fashion needs to find its courage to be creative again.
 

The Fashion System Is Creaking. Will It Collapse?​

The current formulaic, corporatised, anodyne approach to fashion is not working. The industry needs to find its courage to be creative again, writes Imran Amed.
A collage of cracked ground with designer labels

The sheer scale of these businesses means there is a lot more at stake.(BoF Team)

By
14 June 2024
BoF PROFESSIONAL

LONDON — Lately, something has not been feeling quite right in luxury fashion. First Kering, and now LVMH and Chanel, seem to be creeping into crisis management mode.
As has been well documented, Sabato De Sarno’s creative directorship at all-important Gucci has not yet ignited industry interest. Meanwhile, customers haven’t had the opportunity to see much new product in store, hobbling Kering’s post-Covid performance. None of the other Kering brands are registering meaningful growth that can make up for this, leaving the group with a very complex multi-faceted turnaround to execute.
Over at LVMH, things are getting more challenging too. According to market sources, sales at Dior are flagging, which perhaps explains why the house’s March 23 men’s show in Hong Kong was “indefinitely postponed” just a few weeks before it was due to take place. Meanwhile, Fendi and Givenchy seem to be in stasis mode, while reports that Hedi Slimane is about to leave Celine following “thorny contract negotiations”with his bosses at LVMH further complicates matters.
And then just last week, Chanel suddenly lost its creative director, Virginie Viard, and in a not very Chanel way, especially for someone who had dedicated 30 years to the house. The fact that Viard’s exit happened so quickly with no succession plan in place makes it clear that neither side had planned for this to happen now. Chanel’s creative conundrum comes amid market reports that sales are down in almost every market this year.


But it’s not just these designers and these houses that are troubled. Burberry’s mooted elevation strategy is not yet delivering results and Lanvin, which has been without a creative director for more than a year, seems to be languishing even if CEO Siddartha Shukla is working hard to keep the brand relevant. After John Galliano wiped his Instagram account, the rumour mill started whirring that he would be leaving his creative directorship at Maison Margiela.
Meanwhile, a number of talented designers remain without big jobs. Pierpoalo Piccioli suddenly exited Valentino in March and Sarah Burton announced last autumn that she was leaving Alexander McQueen. Both designers had worked with their respective houses for more than 20 years and haven’t popped up anywhere else, in spite of their talent.Neither have Riccardo Tisci or Claire Waight Keller who left Burberry and Givenchy several years ago.

What explains this pattern of events? There are a variety of forces at work, but I think it has something to do with a gradual breakdown of the social contract between creatives and their corporate bosses, who are not championing creativity in the way they once did.
Once upon a time, people like Bernard Arnault and Francois-Henri Pinault were willing to take creative risks to boost the fortunes of small-ish fashion brands. When Arnault appointed Marc Jacobs to become the first creative director of Louis Vuitton in 1997, the brand had no ready-to-wear collection. Arnault knew Vuitton could benefit from an injection of creative energy, just as he did with John Galliano at Dior that same year.
Now, the sheer scale of these businesses means there is a lot more at stake. And as luxury brands brace themselves for an extended ‘normalisation’ period, it seems the mantra is to take the safe route — even if that means appointing no creative director at all. Chanel is unlikely to have a new creative director for sometime, and LVMH-owned Berluti has been operating without a creative director for several years.

Loewe Autumn/Winter 2024
Loewe Autumn/Winter 2024 (Spotlight/Launchmetrics)

There are exceptions to this fashion monotony, of course. Jonathan Anderson’s Loewe manages to both surprise creatively and create commercial impact. Prada and Miu Miu are also creative highlights that are driving commercial success. Both Anderson and Miuccia Prada have a proven ability to push things forward, while also finding ways to ensure the business is still growing. These brands may soon face a different challenge. They need to carefully balance growth with over-exposure, as if growth happens too quickly, it may not be sustainable over the long-term.
Most of the brands that compete with Prada and Loewe for attention have backed away from high-risk, high-reward fashion driven by creativity. Now the approach is more formulaic, akin to selling luxury merch in an overpriced supermarket. Karl Lagerfeld may have predicted with his Autumn/Winter 2015 Chanel show.
This is a world where one brand’s $1,000 hoodie is indistinguishable from another’s. Where it is easier to copy the shape of a box bag with gold logo hardware that is working at another brand, than coming up with a unique shape of your own. Customers have cottoned onto this, and would rather spend their money on one-of-a-kind experiences or hard-to-find vintage pieces than have the same thing as everyone else.


Karl Lagerfeld at the Chanel's Supermaket during the Chanel show, as part of the Paris Fashion Week Womenswear Fall/Winter 2014-2015's Supermaket during the Chanel show, as part of the Paris Fashion Week Womenswear Fall/Winter 2014-2015
Karl Lagerfeld at Chanel's Fall/Winter 2014-2015 show. (Getty Images)

But the lack of creativity and magic does not end there. The fashion system has also been buffeted by the sudden collapse of Matches and Farfetch, and the slow but steady decline of the once-dominant luxury e-commerce behemoth Yoox Net-a-Porter, which is a shell of its former self. The experience and assortment at Farfetch was not so different from Matches which was not so different from Net-a-Porter. This is in part because the people who bought or invested in these companies had no real. understanding of the creativity and taste required to create world-class retail. (Some of them did not understand how to manage technology either, but that’s a whole other analytical exercise.)
This meant the only way to compete was on price, which led to a downward spiral of discounting, training customers to wait for discounts, making profitability almost impossible to achieve. Sadly, the collateral damage has been independent fashion businesses that dependend on these platforms in the early stage of growth. Independent brands on both sides of the Atlantic are now on the brink, further diluting the creative lifeblood of fashion.

The result of all this is a fashion industry that fails to inspire customers, and not even ourselves. The current formulaic, corporatised, anodyne approach to fashion is clearly not working. This leaves me with the sinking feeling that things are about to break down. Maybe that’s what fashion needs to find its courage to be creative again.
why is john even in that picture? he's literally still employed. why are people trying to make him happen at other houses so badly? jfc

also why do these articles keep spreading the total lie that john only recently wiped his ig? it's been empty since LAST YEAR. trust a f*cking moron like imran ahmed to get his facts wrong. high school level journalism.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Statistics

Threads
211,105
Messages
15,141,091
Members
84,868
Latest member
trashmagic
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->