It's funny how someone who claims to be always looking forward when it comes to clothes creates such retro images consistently and almost always in black and white. He pretty much ignores the last 50 years of photography. But I suppose photography isn't his true medium...
Andrew: I suspect those claims about his fashion, his 'true medium' as you say: Isn't Chanel's appeal basically retro? Consider this - the core of the brand, which is couture, is made possible by ancient and traditional crafts
But the end vision/result always moves forward; and the colours! So Masterful! The success of Chanel isn't possible without his innovation. Those recent Farm Girls were hardly retro. That show so humourously and elegantly addressed the current state of the world, yes to put it dramatically! The clothes were so relevant and real. And what about that show with all those glorious paper hats where he addressed white as a colour? He uses the ancient crafts and technologies not to recreate masterpieces but to forge ahead and really affect clothes making today... Nu?
j'adore Karl and chanel but the 'farm girls' collection is RETRO. i wud argue that its retro-ness is part of its appeal. (quite apart from the clothes, the whole idea of 'farm girl' is already retro... as old as marie antoinette?). Macrame? Crinolined minis? Clogs? Denim suits? I loved it, and it felt fresh and appropriate when i was shooting it just last week (i found it romantic - i always go to chanel for a blast of romance), but it's hard to see it as being entirely innovative. i think karl lagerfeld's genius is in taking a traditional craft - in the 'white' couture collection it was origami - and highlighting and exploring its beauty and possibilities. it's his way of appreciating what he acknowledges as a 'dying' craft (it's like all the metiers d'art ateliers chanel has been buying up on his behest - all the feather works and lace makers and boot makers). But its relevance to clothes of today and the future? Almost nil; i think by highlighting certain crafts in a couture show, it only serves to underline how anachronistic these crafts have become and i hazard that that is its real appeal (to most, anyway) - that the craft is now so rare and precious (and so at odds with the reality of high street fashion)that it deserves an elevated platform. again, i love it; bring it on! i wud love a crochet chanel jacket with a border of strawberry embroidery! there's nothing like meticulous hand work that adds that finish and human touch to clothes (or anything for that matter). but i would stop short of saying that it "moves fashion forward" (this is such a cathy horyn phrase!). it doesn't. they are pretty, bourgeoise, romantic, seductive, adult, sophisticated... retro!
The original point of this chain of comments was about the contrast between Lagerfeld's photography work and his fashion design work. As you said, you found the "Farm Girls" to be "fresh and appropriate". This to me is innovative, that he is able to achieve this especially in the retro language of the Chanel brand. Contrast this to the his photography and it is clear that there is no freshness at all in the photography, nor is it relevant to the present. That is the main conflict I found interesting. He is such a master in moving forward within limitations when it comes to fashion that it is surprising that in other mediums, it is not the case.
In the case of his photography, I just think of it as clues to his fashion collections - it makes one have an inkling of the kinds of images he is probably looking at when he is making his clothes as well as what inspires him (obviously, it is the model baptiste!). No, don't think he is "moving photography forward" but there is also a sense that photography has reached its limits... the way images are being manipulated now reminds me more of illustration rather than photography. perhaps it is the limitation of the medium rather than of any individual...
Karl Lagerfeld shot Toni Garrn and Baptiste Giabiconi for German Vogue's February 2010 cover story that's inspired by Marlene Dietrich.
It's funny how someone who claims to be always looking forward when it comes to clothes creates such retro images consistently and almost always in black and white. He pretty much ignores the last 50 years of photography. But I suppose photography isn't his true medium...
ReplyDeleteAndrew: I suspect those claims about his fashion, his 'true medium' as you say: Isn't Chanel's appeal basically retro? Consider this - the core of the brand, which is couture, is made possible by ancient and traditional crafts
ReplyDeleteBut the end vision/result always moves forward; and the colours! So Masterful! The success of Chanel isn't possible without his innovation. Those recent Farm Girls were hardly retro. That show so humourously and elegantly addressed the current state of the world, yes to put it dramatically! The clothes were so relevant and real. And what about that show with all those glorious paper hats where he addressed white as a colour? He uses the ancient crafts and technologies not to recreate masterpieces but to forge ahead and really affect clothes making today... Nu?
ReplyDeletej'adore Karl and chanel but the 'farm girls' collection is RETRO. i wud argue that its retro-ness is part of its appeal. (quite apart from the clothes, the whole idea of 'farm girl' is already retro... as old as marie antoinette?). Macrame? Crinolined minis? Clogs? Denim suits? I loved it, and it felt fresh and appropriate when i was shooting it just last week (i found it romantic - i always go to chanel for a blast of romance), but it's hard to see it as being entirely innovative.
ReplyDeletei think karl lagerfeld's genius is in taking a traditional craft - in the 'white' couture collection it was origami - and highlighting and exploring its beauty and possibilities. it's his way of appreciating what he acknowledges as a 'dying' craft (it's like all the metiers d'art ateliers chanel has been buying up on his behest - all the feather works and lace makers and boot makers). But its relevance to clothes of today and the future? Almost nil; i think by highlighting certain crafts in a couture show, it only serves to underline how anachronistic these crafts have become and i hazard that that is its real appeal (to most, anyway) - that the craft is now so rare and precious (and so at odds with the reality of high street fashion)that it deserves an elevated platform.
again, i love it; bring it on! i wud love a crochet chanel jacket with a border of strawberry embroidery! there's nothing like meticulous hand work that adds that finish and human touch to clothes (or anything for that matter). but i would stop short of saying that it "moves fashion forward" (this is such a cathy horyn phrase!). it doesn't. they are pretty, bourgeoise, romantic, seductive, adult, sophisticated... retro!
The original point of this chain of comments was about the contrast between Lagerfeld's photography work and his fashion design work. As you said, you found the "Farm Girls" to be "fresh and appropriate". This to me is innovative, that he is able to achieve this especially in the retro language of the Chanel brand. Contrast this to the his photography and it is clear that there is no freshness at all in the photography, nor is it relevant to the present. That is the main conflict I found interesting. He is such a master in moving forward within limitations when it comes to fashion that it is surprising that in other mediums, it is not the case.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of his photography, I just think of it as clues to his fashion collections - it makes one have an inkling of the kinds of images he is probably looking at when he is making his clothes as well as what inspires him (obviously, it is the model baptiste!). No, don't think he is "moving photography forward" but there is also a sense that photography has reached its limits... the way images are being manipulated now reminds me more of illustration rather than photography. perhaps it is the limitation of the medium rather than of any individual...
ReplyDelete