Designer & Fashion Insiders Behavior (PLEASE READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING)

[MulletProof]

I don't get this 'you speak up now, BUT YOU WERE FINE WITH IT IN 2004, how can that be?!'. Self-screen how you speak up about things you feel very passionately about now and try to explain to yourself why you didn't on a random Monday of 2011, you have the answer. You most likely didn't do a 180 and had questions but were not even close to articulate it. Over time you thought about it over and over until you got oh-so fed up (even for reasons like seeing someone celebrate something you deeply resented) you spoke to someone about it, then you got confident and thought you could defend every point (since you've thought about it that much!) and finally.. said something in everyone's ego massager: social media. People do this all the time, it's almost a characteristic of this time in history, to be 'outspoken' without necessarily having a clean record or having to align to what you're saying because 'how dare you think you can know me from my social media!'.

I don't really care about sample sizes but it seems to me that it's the kind of seemingly minor issue that can be irritating, like 'f*ck this s*t.. OKAY let's find another skirt..'.. especially if it's something that is recurrent with specific brands (like you know you will struggle just by knowing you'll be working with céline samples that day). We've all dealt with that in our own fields, things we find stupid/unfair/morally questionable but also so small that it does not affects us directly or prevents us from doing our job so it never seems 'necessary' to do more than mumbling 'ugh..'.

What I like about her message is that she sounds polite and chill about it.. I get tired of the extremely dramatic American activism 'families are being torn apart! people have been suffering! women are starving! if you haven't been paying attention, it can only mean you're complicit! make.samples.larger!'. So yeah, very thankful about that..

 

[YohjiAddict]

That last paragraph had me in stitches...the Culture of victimhood in America at the moment is something else.

 

[Benn98]

I don't get this 'you speak up now, BUT YOU WERE FINE WITH IT IN 2004, how can that be?!'. Self-screen how you speak up about things you feel very passionately about now and try to explain to yourself why you didn't on a random Monday of 2011, you have the answer. You most likely didn't do a 180 and had questions but were not even close to articulate it. Over time you thought about it over and over until you got oh-so fed up (even for reasons like seeing someone celebrate something you deeply resented) you spoke to someone about it, then you got confident and thought you could defend every point (since you've thought about it that much!) and finally.. said something in everyone's ego massager: social media. People do this all the time, it's almost a characteristic of this time in history, to be 'outspoken' without necessarily having a clean record or having to align to what you're saying because 'how dare you think you can know me from my social media!'.

Scared your rookie posts will come to bite you in the you know what, lol?

Look, I understand completely what you mean and even agree with you to a point, but I think that with public figures specifically, there should be some responsibility. This is actually a very fine line. To what degree do we dismiss someone's past actions? I'm just saying that before you get on that soapdish and speak out on xyz, look at your own rap sheet, do some introspection, and if you've messed up, acknowledge that. See Anna Wintour. The memo she sent out to her staff wasn't just to bullet-point what she would do to diversify Vogue's crew; she acknowledged her leadership failings as well. Same applies to Carine. She regrets the fact that she didn't nurture young talent enough. There's something very endearing about that type of dual perspective. It means that you're not just thinking in the moment.
In Keira's case, she wrote that piece in the moment. Physically and emotionally torn, and though what she actually said was 100% accurate and justified, I was just amazed that she couldn't acknowledge her own part in perpetuating a certain body image and how harmful that may have been at the time.

 

[MulletProof]

Scared your rookie posts will come to bite you in the you know what, lol?

lol you got me there.

Nah, my mild shortneck/fatphobia is still very much alive. It's my level of English back then being brought to present what I would take as a deeply unfair and personal attack.

Yeah, I think acknowledging shortcomings or complicity makes for a better argument. Not in that vapid, I'm-about-to-be cancelled 'failed to reach the mark' way but out of genuine self-criticism that is capable of searching for healthier routes..

Link me to Wintour's letter please! I find her so full of ****.. what was the regret here? race? lol, you can't apologize without coming clean about A Rose in the Desert (my favorite Anna Wintour topic, yes).

YohjiAddict, it really is but not temporary.. goes back to the mid 20th century, cold war, gets to be the star of the post 9/11 crusade with that good ol' 'are you with us or against us' accusation, in the 'invasion, therefore freedom' of the 90s. The two-party system of course. Usually governments are one thing but I'd say either-or fallacies+victimhood do have a special place in people's hearts in my experience, at least they manifest individually all the time no matter what side you're in.

 

[Benn98]

lol you got me there.

Nah, my mild shortneck/fatphobia is still very much alive. It's my level of English back then being brought to present what I would take as a deeply unfair and personal attack.

Yeah, I think acknowledging shortcomings or complicity makes for a better argument. Not in that vapid, I'm-about-to-be cancelled 'failed to reach the mark' way but out of genuine self-criticism that is capable of searching for healthier routes..

Link me to Wintour's letter please! I find her so full of ****.. what was the regret here? race? lol, you can't apologize without coming clean about A Rose in the Desert (my favorite Anna Wintour topic, yes).

YohjiAddict, it really is but not temporary.. goes back to the mid 20th century, cold war, gets to be the star of the post 9/11 crusade with that good ol' 'are you with us or against us' accusation, in the 'invasion, therefore freedom' of the 90s. The two-party system of course. Usually governments are one thing but I'd say either-or fallacies+victimhood do have a special place in people's hearts in my experience, at least they manifest individually all the time no matter what side you're in.

Here it is. I don't even want to think of that Rose in Desert story because it makes my blood boil how JJB ended up being the scapegoat. AW basically left her long and stunningly illustrious career with a black mark. I recall nobody wanted to touch her afterwards and she never quite survived it.

Purely speculation from my side, but I believe money exchanged hands between the Assad administration and CN. There's just no way CN would be that hellbent on a puff piece.

 

[MulletProof]

^ it's not speculative, it's connecting the dots.

Due to its political nature and what she assigned so explicitly (a thumb of approval forever documented in her pages), she didn't downplay the issue waiting until the end with some touching letter, she did what every person in politics and lobbying, like she is, does: select scapegoat and press delete. So it was forgotten, no one makes anything out of it. Years later, wait until the fire is right around the corner and emerge as an ally that's been through a 'humbling, reflective process'. Right..

Will, totally see your point, just don't see it as a stunt, let alone a cause or like she's trying to be the Marianne of samples in fashion lol, it starts as 'here's a thought for a Saturday morning...' and she acknowledges that is her daily bread, therefore an element in her career, and also implies about the current efforts on celebrating and empowering (which deep down we all know are phony but okay) and how that dynamic of getting samples too small followed by the awkwardness of seeing the model feel bad/having to find something else might benefit from reconsideration and perhaps change.

She's not serving crybaby Dove commercial stuff like 'here's my size 12 model, THIS is real beauty and she feels awful she didn't fit into Hedi's size 0 Zara-looking junk!', she's saying the model is already size 4 and suggests size 0 is not a sample that's even accessible for regular models. There are no victims in this, just don't have size 0 models on your show, Hedi's more than okay casting people from bands and their chunky thighs just for the credential value, it's clearly a quick fix that would hardly compromise his "aesthetic".

 

[Lola701]

I can’t wait to see if Hedi is going to ban all of them from his future shows...We know he is petty and I would actually love to see it happen!

On one hand, I want to applaud Fran because she used social media in a very strategic way and she is going to create a conversation, a moment around this question...

But I can’t with the hypocrisy of the people commenting! It’s even worse when you have editors commenting! The entire industry worshiped Hedi’s aesthetic! It was never right. It wasn’t right in 2004, in 2012 and it surely wasn’t right when he got the job at Celine!
Everybody followed his lead! There was a time when models wore my size (36). Then it went down to 34 and then lower. Everybody followed that lead!

That’s what I hate about social media! People are making seems like things that weren’t never right are suddenly Not right at all!

And the nerve to talk about size when she is already working with an extremely skinny model!

Tbh, I wonder if Hedi designs pants and thinking about women. Only a man can fit into those pants!

Hedi is guilty but so are a lot of people in the industry!

 

[JohannesL]

Purely speculation from my side, but I believe money exchanged hands between the Assad administration and CN. There's just no way CN would be that hellbent on a puff piece.

Isn’t it the same as Vanity Fair give a spot of International Best Dressed list to the first lady of China? If you regularly read the NYT, WSJ, FT and the like, the propaganda from those dictatorship regimes are even more unparalleled.

 

[Benn98]

Via Vogue:

Kerby Jean-Raymond has decided that he’s going to start taking “the Beyoncé approach.” The Pyer Moss founder and creative director said that he’s not doing interviews for a while because he too often feels misunderstood or misinterpreted. He also feels that his backstory has been told plenty already: born to Hatian parents in Brooklyn, the self-taught artist and designer worked for Kay Unger before launching his own label in 2013 as a vehicle for art and activism, a means of bringing narratives to the surface that celebrate both Black joy and Black pain. But Jean-Raymond did make an exception for the second episode of Good Morning Vogue, Vogue’s new fashion news show exploring the changing nature of the industry and running Monday, Wednesday, and Friday throughout fashion month.

 

[JohannesL]

LOL, you don’t need any word to justify your decision, just look at Martin!

 

[[Piece Of Me]]

Not all-inclusive, pro-women Sarah, who brought a 'softer, more feminine element' to McQueen?!?



Reminds me of the time Keira Knightley railed after Duchess Kate for setting impossible standards to women who just had just given birth, yet failing to acknowledge the impossible standards she, along with Lindsay/Paris/Nicole/Rachel Zoe, set to millions of young girls during the 05' era when she was at the peak of her career.

I honestly would not compare Keira to the likes of Rachel Zoe. Keira has always been skinny, hasn't she? And she was like 17 when she burst onto the scene, so ofcourse body has changed but I do think she has always been naturally skinny, so to shame that or say that she can't say anything about the impossible standards woman face is bizarre.

 

[dodencebt]

Did Balenciaga seriously get Anna Wintour, Cathy Horyn, and Carine Roitfeld to advertise their show on social media?? What a low point for magazine editors.

 

[YohjiAddict]

^I mean we all know ethics in this industry are usually an obstacle to getting the desired income, but they shouldn't be so blatantly promoting one brand over all the others that advertise on their magazines. Particularly pathetic in Horyn's case who always acts so high and mighty about her journalistic integrity...

 

[Benn98]

Anna Wintour I'm not shocked about because duh. Also, how would she advertise it? She doesn't have any social media platforms.
The true shocker is the much revered Cathy Horyn. Not even an editor, but a fashion critic. No wonder fashion criticism is dead. I hope the viper tongued Flaccavento shoots his shot re this.

 

[FelipeV]

Miguel Adrover has called Riccardo Tisci over his iconic 2000's reverse trench coat. The shade of Olivier Theyskens in the comments is the best.



This is the original, it basically change the game for Burberry, at that time they threatened a lawsuit for using their pattern.


vogue.com

 

[Lola701]

Miguel Adrover has called Riccardo Tisci over his iconic 2000's reverse trench coat. The shade of Olivier Theyskens in the comments is the best.



This is the original, it basically change the game for Burberry, at that time they threatened a lawsuit for using their pattern.

View attachment 1159708
vogue.com

Suzanne Koller styled it inside-out. So I don’t get why he is calling out Riccardo...

 

[FelipeV]

Suzanne Koller styled it inside-out. So I don’t get why he is calling out Riccardo...

I guess is because he reposted it without any mention to M. Aldover. At the beginning i thought the the "copy" was a Tisci's idea but yeah, Suzanne Koller is the one to be called out here.

 

[MulletProof]

You'd think the actual designer gets the final look and say at what's happening with his own collection and how it's presented.. taking it on the stylist seems a bit off. Not to mention Riccardo himself is posting it on ig.

One would also assume that given his independent, 'Belgian-inspired' beginnings, the fact that he was still a designer 'to watch' in 2005, when Adrover had already acquired success and consolidated a reputation as one of the most forward-thinking designer of that decade (the very area Tisci was trying to break), that he would be well-versed in his field and profession, like any other young talent or recent graduate, at least to have a clue on what to create. So no, I don't buy it.. I can see how, if he had always been associated with these ultra-commercial houses, this could be just an innocent coincidence, but that's not the case.. he's 'borrowing' and didn't think credit was important because he assumes, like all of us, that when Miguel isn't showing, he's like.. flying eagles in Mongolia for a living. Unfortunately for Riccardo, it seems Miguel's rocking 2020 like the rest of us: extra glued to a screen and not missing on anything on the internet, so, busted.

 

[Lola701]

You'd think the actual designer gets the final look and say at what's happening with his own collection and how it's presented.. taking it on the stylist seems a bit off. Not to mention Riccardo himself is posting it on ig.

One would also assume that given his independent, 'Belgian-inspired' beginnings, the fact that he was still a designer 'to watch' in 2005, when Adrover had already acquired success and consolidated a reputation as one of the most forward-thinking designer of that decade (the very area Tisci was trying to break), that he would be well-versed in his field and profession, like any other young talent or recent graduate, at least to have a clue on what to create. So no, I don't buy it.. I can see how, if he had always been associated with these ultra-commercial houses, this could be just an innocent coincidence, but that's not the case.. he's 'borrowing' and didn't think credit was important because he assumes, like all of us, that when Miguel isn't showing, he's like.. flying eagles in Mongolia for a living. Unfortunately for Riccardo, it seems Miguel's rocking 2020 like the rest of us: extra glued to a screen and not missing on anything on the internet, so, busted.

But the thing is that the trench is a classic Burberry trench, not a runway piece and even if it was, unless someone tells me the contrary, Riccardo does not apply full looks policies on his work or any big restrictions.

I mean, the story of Adrover is beautiful on the paper but it does not work here.
I mean, Suzanne Koller is a respected stylist and in important figure in French fashion. It makes sense for Riccardo to repost her work than if it was styled by the editor of Elle Quebec.

It’s not like Riccardo has ever been shy about his references. I love Miguel and miss his voice but he is thinking too deep about that. And there are more elegant ways to express his feelings.

That « calling out » to say that you would have preferred a collab is tacky.

 

[MulletProof]

I see, it's from a publication and not a part of any lookbook/campaign/backstage shot directly from Burberry (as one would conclude when coming from the head designer's instagram). It does make him less 'dirty' so to speak but it doesn't change that the right thing to do is to credit, especially if you consider his position, the responsibilities that come with that and that he most likely knows the reference.

I'm not sure what you mean by shy.. are we talking about the comme des garçons look he blatantly ripped off at Givenchy? yeah, he let us know then that, just like Marc Jacobs, he will talk about 'inspiration' if he's borrowing from the legendary, mainstream, dead designers whose work is so known everyone will tell right away, but not so much if he's borrowing from designers and collections with a smaller and more peculiar clientele.

Frankly, if you think about any work situation where you have to ask for credit to yourself, it always comes across as a little sad... even if you know deep down that it's sadder to steal ideas and to have a start like the kind Tisci had in the early 00s, only to find him 15 years later devoid of creativity and churning out junk no more interesting than Supreme. Talk about eroded principles (assuming he had any to begin with). Since it's already a little pathetic having to claim your work as yours and in the process, admit your inferior notoriety (Adrover), calling out may be more dignified. Suggesting a collaboration is just a way to cushion the tastelessness of it all. There's no way Burberry would do something with Adrover of all people (when they'd be more than thrilled to do something with Kylie Jenner), those worlds and perspectives of design never mix like that..