Post translated in italian HERE
Couture disappoints ?
May we call this the worst Couture season ever? It’s actually quite depressing to write this article; it’s always depressing to write about boring and deceptive stuff. And when ‘stuff’ isn’t a random something but, well, Haute Couture, it’s even worst.
So here I am, pondering again these plain three days. What did we see? Pastels, revisitations of revisitations, déjà vus, zero energy, less creativity (except for Valentino and some Givenchy). It’s like the fall of the big ones, Galliano for Dior, Lagerfeld for Chanel (I never really liked his work for Chanel but this time it’s even worst), whitout forgetting the absence of Christian Lacroix and Martin Margiela.
It’s probably a paradox that one of my favorite shows of the week has been Armani; it was pretty and well-cutted and beautiful, sure, but it was the most classic show you could imagine. And classic isn’t usually my piece of cake… but still, whereas other designers attemped to do classic or classic thematics (especially at Dior and Chanel) failing, ‘Re Giorgio’ managed to keep simple yet still fancy. Isn’t Couture made for red carpet anyway? The only dresses I can really imagine at red carpets are those of Armani.
Tisci bugged me too. I saw that mesmerizing outfit on Hanne-Gaby (I liked the green one too, but this one is special, the color is simply fantastic) and then the other dresses… and it just pissed me off how it is a Valentino redux (the times near to Valentino’s adieu to fashion especially) with bold make-up. I think it’s sad that even Tisci didn’t really took any risk with his creations this time; there wasn’t a magical narrative such as the Pina Bausch one for example, or the ‘sailor for Taranto’, that were my favorite collections of all time.
It’s the same for Dior (though I must precise: Givenchy wasn’t bad to me and had really sharp looks, Dior was a complete catastrophe. I know it’s subjective, but it was to me a disaster), the formule is old and tired, we miss the pompe of De Betak’s big shows. Isn’t after all hypocrite how everybody tried to be ‘mediocre’ with Couture this time, ‘calm’, ‘moderate’? Isn’t it even worse than doing baroque impossibilities, exaggerations, dreams more than dresses? It really pissed me off. I don’t see the point of Couture if it is just about plain bad prom dresses and repetitions. There was a lack of energy that was really depressing, and I see the colors reflect this absence in a good way. Pastels were great at spring/summer 10, I found the thematic to be great because it was somewhat deconstructed, it was used in an unexpected way, it was disturbing. Pastels with metallics and vieux jeu clothing (Chanel) simply don’t work. Don’t get me wrong, I know some of you may have liked it and that’s perfectly fine to me, I personnally think it wasn’t ok, it wasn’t exciting, it wasn’t anything. Silly Barbies after all.
You could percieve the fraud of Couture this season (except Chiuri Piccioli, who frauded in another way) by a simple clue: did you notice how all the dramatic and over-the-top and excessive was in the make-up and the hair? I actually thought this was a GREAT season for make-up artists and hair stylists, who really had fun masking a little the plainess of the clothes themselves. If you forget the accessories – looking at Dior for example – you see boring dresses with boring cuts and unmatching colors. At Chanel you’re looking at boring tailleurs. At Givenchy an interesting outift as the one with the hat lose all its sense. Gaultier is even worse – how could someone create designs based on so many clichés (the Mexico – sauvage - disgusting stuff) ? Perhaps I’m being overly dramatic here – and I’m also writing too much. But I really got a sad feeling this time. Is it the way we want the new decade to start?
In this apocalyptic panorama of boring and plain and unsatisfying and recycled what really came out as an UFO was the Valentino collection: it is quite funny to observe that one of the most conservative, classic designers (you know I adore him, it is a compliment I’m making here, not a critic in any sense) maison was the most courageous this time. I still don’t know if it really fits with Valentino’s heritage. I miss Alessandra Facchinetti a lot (as I miss Olivier Theyskens every ‘fashion’ day), and of course as many have pointed out if Facchinetti’s designs seemed unValentino to Valentino what could we say about… these?!
But it isn’t the point here. I appreciated the way Chiuri/Piccioli introduced a new problematic -and perhaps too modern for us- concept in fashion. It kind of reminds me Viktor&Rolf, for the thinking aspect. But I really think what is even more important is the kind of quirky catharsis operated by the duo. Of course I first thought ‘this is ugly’. But ugly isn’t a bad thing. Ugly is an aesthetic, it is a way of seeing; it is a fantastic possibility to play with. And that’s exactly what Chiuri/Piccioli did: their was a childish experience. We have all played with Day-Glo, covering boring-colored fabrics (greige, beige, taupe) with these infamous unmatching shades. I remember I had always an almost sacred fear of doing that; you couldn’t go back, it was totally a revolution. I think this is the key to read and appreciate Valentino’s show whitout being too disgusted by the unusual color palette. Seeing the details again and again made me realize how I really liked it in fact. First I thought it was Sprouse meeting what Sprouse hated, Sprouse’ antithesis – a.k.a. greige and taupe etc. and that it wasn’t coherent. (It was also funny because I reread the Stephen Sprouse book just before seeing the Valentino collection, and of course there is a lot of Balenciaga, Givenchy, Preen & co but I still see Sprouse as the primary source of the thing). But anyway – deconstructing a shocking vision à la Sprouse, with day-glo and eighties feeling, with classic – also classic Valentino – black and BEIGE was like a fist in the stomach. This show was more a rhetoric act, a philosophical act, an art act than a mere fashion act. It is what makes it impossible to categorize or to note, it goes somewhere else. Hopefully it is perhaps a new intellectual/subversive trend for fashion, that might take years to be understood. But that is the point with revolutions. Of course you can read this show in many other ways – the way proposed by the duo, a ‘psychedelic Eden garden’, which is also great because it implies a fascinating genealogy of gardens in history and even gardens in fashion (perhaps that reminded me of Viktor&Rolf too). There is then the way the couture draping was like mummified. And then the way this is in a way an uchronic (promise I stop with these pompous terms!) show, because it deconstructed different eras whilst combining them (beige vs day-glo is here a tensed fight that make all of this experimentation work).
I wrote way too much.
Tell me what you thought about this season because I’m really interested in your point of view !
