The 'Outfit Look-Alikes' Thread

[blueorchid]

It's hilarious to say that Ralph Lauren isn't a copy. His entire image is a caricature of WASP and western American "culture" (lol). Come on... Not that he's not good at he does, but get real.

 

[Lola701]

That's the thing, fashion is not architecture, clothes are not buildings, fashion designers are not architects ... Or movie directors. They're clothes makers.

So then we can’t really discuss if we don’t look at things from the same paradigm…

I see a fashion designer like an architect or a furniture designer. For me, Yves Saint Laurent, Pierre Paulin and Renzo Piano were doing the same thing: Design.

After, it’s a matter of scales and context but their designs were always informed and rooted in a deep understanding of the technical aspect of their fields, beyond aesthetic choices. And none of them are craftsman or handicrafts.

So, yes we don’t look at things from the same POV anyway.

 

[avonlea002]

I miss John doing true couture and I really miss McQueen. His process is still the most interesting to me. Since he was a tailor, he could tell amazing stories through draping and cutting. He was a real couturier.

As if both of them didn't copy and borrow from other designers lol. John's collections after CSM were heavily based on Yamamoto and Westwood, then he moved on to Vionnet and historical costumes. Even his recent couture collection for Margiela had Vionnet copies. All that doesn't make him any less genius.

 

[blueorchid]

That's the thing, fashion is not architecture, clothes are not buildings, fashion designers are not architects ... Or movie directors. They're clothes makers.

Armani is really an exception. There's close to nobody like him except for Ralph Lauren maybe. The two of them don't strike me as designers who copy. They seem to want to put their spine on everything.

I get what you're trying to say, but... it's all a matter of degrees. Not all architects are Frank Lloyd Wright. Not all directors are Ingmar Bergman. Not all designers are Vionnet. But that doesn't mean they can't try to be creative.

 

[UltimateF1]

As if both of them didn't copy and borrow from other designers lol. John's collections after CSM were heavily based on Yamamoto and Westwood, then he moved on to Vionnet and historical costumes. Even his recent couture collection for Margiela had Vionnet copies. All that doesn't make him any less genius.

I also read somewhere that in the beginning of his career, Galliano was also very inspired by Moschino. I do not have access to 70s-80s collections of Moschino so i cannot validate it. but Jeremy Scott was also doing some 2000s Galliano references while at Moschino and I didn't know if he was referencing Galliano shows or Moschino archives....

 

[imjustken]

So then we can’t really discuss if we don’t look at things from the same paradigm…

I see a fashion designer like an architect or a furniture designer. For me, Yves Saint Laurent, Pierre Paulin and Renzo Piano were doing the same thing: Design.

After, it’s a matter of scales and context but their designs were always informed and rooted in a deep understanding of the technical aspect of their fields, beyond aesthetic choices. And none of them are craftsman or handicrafts.

So, yes we don’t look at things from the same POV anyway.

When you put it like that, I really understand your point of view. It's very free. You're right, we don't have to limit our reference points, our role models, our icons, our inspiration. We can widen it as much we want.

 

[gallianostan]

John's collections after CSM were heavily based on Yamamoto and Westwood, then he moved on to Vionnet and historical costumes.

ugh those early yohji/viv inspired collections were some of his best. fallen angels, afghanistan repudiates western ideals... his early deconstructed silhouettes were just gorgeous

 

[Kennnnn]

ugh those early yohji/viv inspired collections were some of his best. fallen angels, afghanistan repudiates western ideals... his early deconstructed silhouettes were just gorgeous

For me, his spring 1994 collection was just magic...

 

[gallianostan]

For me, his spring 1994 collection was just magic...

despite it being a watershed show, i'm not in love with princess lucretia as much as most people are... i enjoy the narrative through-line and the bias cut sequence is delicious as always but it doesn't move me as much as the following collection (the sao schlumberger show), which was groundbreaking, or olivia and filibuster (spring '93), which was a historical fever dream. perhaps it was those giant telephone wire ballgowns which i found a bit sloppy/costumey lmao

 

[Kennnnn]

despite it being a watershed show, i'm not in love with princess lucretia as much as most people are... i enjoy the narrative through-line and the bias cut sequence is delicious as always but it doesn't move me as much as the following collection (the sao schlumberger show), which was groundbreaking, or olivia and filibuster (spring '93), which was a historical fever dream. perhaps it was those giant telephone wire ballgowns which i found a bit sloppy/costumey lmao

I went to look at the collections again after reading your post. I realise I meant to say spring '93, not '94. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. The Sao Schlumberger show was also great, as was the collection right after.