ERROR:
subscribe to style file blog via RSSThe Future of Fashion, Part Nine: Azzedine Alaïa
October 31, 2011 9:35 am
In this ongoing series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the fashion business.
There was an extra buzz in the front row at the Comme des Garçons show this season. A star was in our midst, and not just some movie actor or singer. Azzedine Alaïa, the great Tunisian-born, Paris-based designer, had come to support his friend, Rei Kawakubo. Fresh off the triumphant collection he showed during Couture in July, the first presentation he had opened up to the world’s cameras in eight years, Alaïa is more than great. He’s unique. He is the only major designer to produce collections on his own timetable, devoting his time to his private clients as well as to a thriving ready-to-wear business. (Richemont is an investor.) A few days after the Comme des Garçons show, I went to Alaïa’s headquarters in the Marais, a sprawling converted warehouse that houses his boutique, his cluttered studio (where the TV is usually tuned to the National Geographic Channel), and his living quarters. The thing that strikes you first is his vitality. He has the most infectious, mischievous giggle in fashion.
[Note: To see the full shoot of Saskia de Brauw, top, modeling Alaïa’s clothes, pick up a copy of Style.com/Print today. Photographed by Kacper Kasprzyk. Styled by Tony Irvine. Hair by Anthony Turner. Makeup by Janeen Witherspoon.]
You are one of the only designers who have managed to work outside the system. What is your secret?
No, it’s not a secret. Today I believe that designers are asked to do too much, too many collections. It’s inconceivable to me that someone creative can have a new idea every two months. Because if I have one new idea in a year, I thank heaven. I pray, I do everything, but God doesn’t always give me ideas. [Laughs.] That’s why I’m always late with the collection.
Is it possible for young designers to follow your example?
I don’t know, to be honest. Because it’s not up to the designers anymore, it’s up to the places that employ them and demand this work from them. In my case, no one demands anything of me. When I decide to do something, I do it. But I make sure it works, too. The proof is that you sell.
Do you think it’s possible to change the system?
I don’t know, but something has to change. There are too many designers who are in a bad state, who are sick, who feel obliged to take drugs. Me, I’m high on life.
Did the stress contribute to the Galliano situation?
Yes, and [Christophe Decarnin at] Balmain. McQueen. There is too much pressure. If it ends up destroying people, it’s not good. A human being is not a machine. Especially when it comes to creating. You wouldn’t ask a painter or a sculptor to do an exhibition every two months… I even think it’s hard for the buyers and the journalists. They have to run from New York to London to Italy, Paris. And when it’s finished, they start again. They can’t spend any time with their families, their children. It’s not good.
It seems very important to you to be independent.
Even if I was in prison, I could be free in my head. I can adapt easily.
Is it true that you were offered the Dior job?
I don’t want to go into that story again. [Laughs..] No, they asked me a while ago, at the same time as Galliano, when he was at Givenchy. They asked me for Dior, but I couldn’t do it.
Do you think you would have been happy working for a big house?
Anything’s possible. Read the rest of this entry >
The Future Of Fashion, Part Eight:
Ashley And Mary-Kate Olsen
May 26, 2011 10:14 am
In this ongoing series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the fashion business.
Dualstar, the world headquarters of Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen’s numerous enterprises, isn’t some high-tech fortress. Set on a nondescript Chelsea block, it’s a low-key loft building that seems to have evaded condo-ization. Step inside and you could be entering the studio of any up-and-coming downtown designer. There are the bare wood floors, the nice flowers, the cartons of takeout food. It’s all very normal, and you sense that’s important to these refugees from massive childhood fame.
At a stage in life where many of their peers are vying for a slot on Celebrity Rehab With Dr. Drew, the Olsens are appearing in 130 stores worldwide with their luxury fashion label The Row, and they have been nominated for the Swarovski Award for Womenswear, the top honor for emerging talent, at next month’s Council of Fashion Designers of America gala. They are among the few celebrities to make critically acclaimed clothes (Ashley, left, long ago gave up acting and Mary-Kate now says she is too busy to pursue it, too), and nothing is typical about their approach. They sell their line Olsenboye to JCPenney at the same time that they sell The Row to Bergdorf Goodman, they deliberately aim The Row at women much older than themselves, and though they were born into the digital generation, their embrace of social media is a wary one. Still just 24, they are literally part of the future of fashion.
In conversation, the sisters are by turns articulate and guarded. They’ve done the media dance before and they’re not going to be drawn out of their comfort zone. Ask them about John Galliano’s meltdown and you won’t get much. Ashley: “I think he’s an amazing designer.” Mary-Kate: “I think he’s a brilliant designer.” That’s not to say they lack warmth. They laugh frequently, and though they speak in soft tones, they’re not afraid to meet your gaze with their startled, green-tinted eyes. Ashley is in some ways the designated spokesperson for the pair, Mary-Kate the quieter and funnier one, but their roles are more fluid than that, and yes, they frequently complete each other’s sentences. Here they shed some light on the design process behind The Row, the accidental way they became fashion icons, and the reason Twitter makes them anxious.
You have three or four lines now, The Row, Elizabeth and James, Textile Elizabeth and James, and Olsenboye. Was it a conscious decision to have different lines to address different segments of the market?
Ashley: No, it kind of developed over time. It started when we were 10, working with Walmart, so we already had a mass brand that was the Mary-Kate and Ashley brand. It was our names, it was our faces. The design development process was really done in house as well, so we went all through that process. Then we kind of stopped when we were 18 and came here for school, started developing the concept of The Row during our first and second year of school. While this was coming to fruition we started doing Elizabeth and James, too. Several months later…
Mary-Kate: I think everything kind of happened organically.
A: It just sort of organically started. Things come up and it depends on the timing, if we think it’s a good idea. We started doing handbags for The Row in our fifth year, which haven’t hit stores yet. Just slow growth, organic.
Were you concerned that having a line like Olsenboye, which sells at JCPenney, would detract from building a luxury label like The Row?
A: No, I think they’re just totally different markets, and we approach each market very differently but with the same integrity and the same intent. With The Row we manufacture and produce everything in the U.S, and in Italy for the handbags and one or two sweater styles. Elizabeth and James, Olsenboye is a licensed brand, so that is not in this house. We do a lot of our marketing and PR out of this office, a lot of the design and development process is in our partner’s office…We’re extremely involved in that design process; we’re just not taking on the operations.
You have separate design teams for each line?
A: Yes.
Specifically on The Row, where does the design process start for you?
A: It all starts with the fabrics…Then we go into kind of silhouette development, so we start figuring out our silhouettes, what we’re liking, what we’re leaning towards, an evolution of the previous season, certain pieces, so it really starts with this stylized proportion. Then, through that process, we start our pattern making off the silhouettes that we’re liking and the consistent themes that we start finding, the shapes. So we start twisting the fabrics and then we start trying different fabrics and patterns. And once we have all the fabrics, we have about three weeks to produce the collection.
That’s a different process from a lot of designers, who are inspired by this trip they just took or a photo they came across.
MK: You’d have to take a lot of trips, no?
The Row has become known for a sort of minimalist luxury. Do you feel your last collection [Fall 2011] was a departure?
A: More elaborate.
MK: Yeah, we haven’t really done a lot of color, and slowly over the seasons we’ve explored that a bit. And different techniques as well when it comes to the fur, beading, lace. But if you go through our entire collection, you’ve seen it all before. Meaning, pieces repeat. That fur T-shirt, for example, that’s this T-shirt [points to plain one she’s wearing] from a couple of seasons ago, so it’s always consistent. It’s just about how we can evolve and also give the option to either buy this version or that version, creating a story. Read the rest of this entry >
tags: Ashley Olsen, Elizabeth & James, Mary-Kate Olsen, Olsenboye, The Row
The Future of Fashion, Part Seven: Carine Roitfeld
February 12, 2011 12:44 am
In this ongoing series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the fashion business.
“This is my new office,” Carine Roitfeld jokes when I meet her in the lobby of the Carlyle on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. It is less than a week since she officially vacated her throne as editor in chief of Paris Vogue, and in this darkly lit grand hotel, it’s tempting to see Roitfeld, with her gray fur jacket and Russian roots, as a glamorous aristocrat in sudden exile. It’s an exile that will be short-lived, no doubt. She has already exerted an unmistakable influence on fashion, not once but twice: first with the porno-chic aesthetic she co-authored in the nineties as a stylist for Mario Testino and Tom Ford, then of Gucci; later, with her provocative, photo-driven, decade-long tenure at Vogue. Now everyone is speculating about her next act.
The moment we slide into a booth and Roitfeld removes a pair of Tom Ford sunglasses the size of saucers, a different woman emerges: talkative, immensely charming, unafraid to appear vulnerable, yet also fiercely determined. I barely have a chance to turn on my tape recorder before she is off and running on a variety of subjects: her mysterious departure from Vogue, the need to promote young talent, and dinners à trois with Riccardo Tisci and Karl Lagerfeld.
You were saying?
It’s strange for me to come back here to New York during the fashion show season and not to be the editor in chief of French Vogue. Of course, I’ve done it before when I was just a freelancer, but ten years is a long time. It’s like 20 times I came here for the shows, and suddenly I’m not the editor in chief. That’s a custom, so it’s hard to now be a freelance editor. But it’s exciting, too.
You’re skipping the circus this time?
I’m not going to the shows. Maybe I will see some friends at previews, but mostly I’ve come for the amfAR gala on Wednesday. I’m a big supporter of amfAR. And my son is giving an exhibition on Thursday. And I have to finish my book for Rizzoli. I’m very late, so it’s my last days to finish it. It’s supposed to come out September or maybe October of this year. So I have a lot of appointments. I’m quite busy.
The book is a look back at your career?
It’s a bit like that. I never like to go back, so to go back to a picture you did 20 years ago, it’s almost like going to a shrink. It’s a lot of emotion…Most of the pictures are the ones I did with Mario Testino…It’s mostly dedicated to Mario, that book.
Does one shoot stand out in your memory?
There are different ones, of course. I had a very good period where I was working at French Glamour and I was working for The Face. The “butcher” shoot with Eva Herzigova and those sort of stories. They’re memorable stories, and you say why? Maybe because it’s not just about fashion. It’s because it’s a moment of the time.
You’ve been working on the book with [editor] Olivier Zahm and [art director] Alex Wiederin?
Always I like to have trouble. It’s not easy to have two big personalities like Olivier Zahm and Alex Wiederin working together, with me in the middle. But I know “star wars.” I spent a lot of time between Tom Ford and Mario Testino, so I learned how to deal with it.
Speaking of Tom Ford, people are curious if you’re going to work together again.
No, no, I’m not going to work with Tom. That was ten years ago. If I look back at my CV, when I was freelance, I worked mostly ten years with Tom Ford at Gucci and Yves Saint Laurent. And after [that] I stopped and it was ten years at French Vogue. Now it’s a new decade and I don’t want to be doing what I was doing ten years ago. Of course, Tom is my friend and if he asks me what I think, I will answer. But I will not go and stay one week before the show and work with him.
What did you think of the super-exclusive show he did in New York?
I think it was very smart of him, just 100 journalists in his shop, and he was talking about each model and he had a sense of humor, so you see a lot of people laughing, which is fun…He did totally the contrary of everyone else and he made a big buzz, a big excitement. I think it was good not to see the [clothes] afterwards immediately on the blogs. For the editors, you feel more VIP, and it makes the buzz bigger and everyone knows about the Tom Ford collection. And really nothing came out. It was very controlled. Tom is a very controlled person, so he controlled everything…And his genius is to make the girls even more beautiful than they already are. It’s his talent. One of the girls was my daughter, and when she came out, I was anxious for her, but I thought, my gosh, she had never been so beautiful…I don’t know what he’s going to do for the next one.
It’s in London.
Is it? See, I don’t know.
We won’t see you modeling?
He didn’t ask me.
What are some of your plans?
You know, I have many projects, but as a Russian, I am very superstitious, and nothing is totally clarified. I think it will be [clearer] in one month. It’s just one week since I left the magazine, but I have a lot of ideas. It will of course be in fashion, but I don’t know exactly which way—magazines or maybe the muse of someone, I don’t know exactly. But what I’m sure of, because I discovered this at the end of my decade [at Vogue], it’s very important to help young designers. My last issue is the March issue, and it’s dedicated to young designers, no advertisers, just young designers, because I think they really need the support…When you meet these kids, you learn a lot from them, and I think it gives them a lot of positive energy…I definitely want to work on a project with young designers, not just French but international…I grew up and I think I have better ideas than I had ten years ago. [For the last ten years] I didn’t have a lot of time to think about the big picture or how fashion is going to be in some years. Now it’s a good moment for me to think about fashion for today, because a lot of things have changed, and when you’re working you don’t see all these things changing. But when you stop, you can see it. You have to understand the new way of working with fashion.
What are some of those changes?
Everything is going so quick now with the Internet, with the blogs. It’s very important. There are two possibilities; either you go very quick to the Internet or you go to magazines and you make it like a collector’s item. [I still think] it’s very normal to have all these fashion weeks and to go to all these shows. Can you show them through movies? I don’t think this is possible. It’s very exciting to be at the runway, to hear the music, to feel the atmosphere, to feel what people like or don’t like. Even if there are too many shows—I would love if there were less shows—I think we have to live with the shows. But after, maybe there is another way to make fashion stories.
You were one of the first editors to become a star of the street-style blogs. Were you conscious that was happening?
I’m never conscious about those sorts of things. I was never conscious that I was becoming an icon or I’m not an icon, because my family, my kids, my husband keep me down-to-earth. But it’s true that, when you go to a show now, the photographers are more interested sometimes in the dress or the jacket you’re wearing than to photograph the show, and I think this is totally wrong. It’s an honor and you smile to the people. But is it normal? I think there is something a bit weird, that more people want to see these looks than want to see what John Galliano or Dolce & Gabbana did for the show.
Now a lot of editors—Anna Dello Russo, Giovanna Battaglia—have become street-style stars, but you started it.
Because I have a specific look. Black eyes, hair in my face, high heels. Maybe it was a strong look in the streets that made me the first one. Anna is funny, she has an incredible look. And Giovanna, she is very chic in an Italian way. And there are other ones coming. I’m sure there is a lot who want to push me out of the way, because this is fashion. It’s never very faithful, you know, and people want change all the time. This is the purpose of fashion, so I don’t know what is going to happen with me. But my look is not going to change very much.
Does that kind of attention make an editor’s job more difficult?
When you see ten shows in one day, it’s very difficult to have a [considered] reflection. People come up to you with a microphone after the show, and sometimes you’re [not ready] to say what [you] think of this show. Sometimes it takes a week to digest everything. I’m not very good just after a show. Sometimes you love it, but you don’t know why you love it. You have to digest, and after you have better answers.
I’d like to talk about Paris Vogue. Was there a moment where you felt you’d really defined the voice of the magazine?
It took a little time, because when I came to Vogue ten years ago, it was not the Vogue it is today. Joan Juliet Buck, who I was working for as a freelancer, was more a journalist editor than a fashion editor, so it was focused more on the text and writers and not so much on fashion. And me, I come with all my fashion ideas, but it was very difficult at the beginning, because a lot of photographers, it’s easy to forget, didn’t want to work for the magazine…Each time we try to be better and better, and it takes almost ten years to be a team, and now I think the best team is there. It’s very sad to leave your family after ten years…But I think the times are changing, too. I said to Jonathan [Newhouse, chairman of Condé Nast International], when I can make it ten, it will be great for me. And I think in the last [period] that maybe I got less freedom than I got before, so I think it was just the right time for me to leave, because I want to enjoy and do everything that I want to do. And Jonathan was an amazing boss, because he let me do such crazy things. To put a black transsexual with a beard and high heels on the cover? I don’t think a lot of presidents will let you do that. I think it was fun to look at French Vogue. Each month was a new happening. But I think now they want to change a bit. Even the French president [Xavier Romatet, of Condé Nast France] now wants something a bit [pauses]…sweeter I would say, and if I cannot have a lot of fun, then I prefer to do something else.
You felt you had less freedom at the end?
I think yes. I think the French president—maybe not Jonathan—but the French president thinks he wants something more [pauses]…I won’t say I’m too provocative; it’s my way of expressing myself, you know. They won’t change everything, because when something has been so [successful], it would be stupid to change it. Maybe they want [things] a bit more easy for everyone. It’s true, I’m always pushing. I like that. I’ve always been provocative, but what I’m going to do next is a new way of provocation. I did for many years porno chic. I was the queen of porno chic. And I will do something totally different now.
Are advertisers too powerful now, to the point where it stifles creativity?
Of course they’re very powerful. And more and more powerful…But I never talked, myself, to the advertisers; I talked to my readers. Always I has this way of thinking, and maybe that’s the reason I had more and more readers…We never felt forced to photograph something.
Did you feel the pressure of political correctness?
I think it’s sad because when I did this Tom Ford issue, for example, we put a lot of little girls with makeup, a lot of jewelry. It was for Christmas and it’s nothing compared to what Guy Bourdin did 20 years ago or what I saw in all the magazines ten years ago.
But the shoot with the kids did cause waves?
Yes, but when you put kids, you always know it’s going to be a problem. There was no nudity, it was always a T-shirt under the evening dress, but you know, people see what they want…These are the risques du métier.
There are rumors that you were fired because of the Tom Ford issue.
No, that’s wrong…I think it was a controversial issue, but they were all controversial issues. I told you, at the end of this decade, I could see that the new president in France wanted to change the direction of the magazine. I’m sure the Tom Ford issue is not the way they’re heading in the next few years, but it was not because of the Tom Ford issue. I was not fired, because if I was fired, it would not be a very nice ending. It was a discussion between Jonathan and myself, and he never fired me…I know I did a good job. I know the March issue is a record in terms of advertising. So I’m not leaving a sad magazine, an empty magazine. I’m leaving a magazine that has an epic stop. I’m very happy about that.
Do you feel you’re leaving the magazine in good hands with Emmanuelle Alt?
I think the team is perfect. And I think it’s like a boulevard—an easy road in front of them. For six months, it’s the same program as today, because everything for this season was almost organized. So we’ll see what happens next season. I think it would be stupid to change too much, because I think it’s doing quite well. But everyone has their own personality, and Emmanuelle is very different than me, so we’re going to see what she’s going to do. But I think it’s going to be a bit easier for her than it was for me ten years ago, because everyone wants to work at French Vogue now.
People say you and Emmanuelle Alt are not on speaking terms.
It’s true that we are in not in the best relations, [but] I don’t want to talk about it, to be honest.
What are you proudest of achieving at the magazine?
To enjoy going to the office for ten years. Because I’ve worked for all those other magazines, and I know it is not like this everywhere. I think the reason the magazine was good was that we enjoyed doing the magazine, and I think the readers felt this…I also just realized at the end that you get big, big power when you get that job, and you can make someone a celebrity. Look what happened to Lara Stone. She wanted to stop being a model. She had no success at all. And my friend Riccardo Tisci said to me, “Oh, you have to look at that girl, she’s amazing.” And I believed him and I booked her, and after that I booked her for each issue. She was the cover of my special anniversary issue, the cover of the February issue. I gave her eight or nine covers, and now she’s one of the biggest stars. It’s very exciting to make someone a star, and it was something you could do with French Vogue…It’s like my friend Peter Philips. I started with him when no one knew him. He was an assistant, and now he’s the head of Chanel [makeup]. It makes me happy to see all my friends [succeed] too, because I like to share the cake with other people.
Your father was a movie producer. Perhaps you inherited some of that from him?
I hope I will have the same serenity and sagesse, wisdom, as my dad. Maybe he wasn’t the biggest producer in France. He had a great catalog, but there were people who were bigger than him. But he was one of the most respected ones. He was like a godfather in this business, and when he died and I saw all these people, very well-known people, come to pay their last respects, I thought, oh my God, I hope I will have the same wisdom as him. Everything I did was following in his footsteps, and it’s true he always protected me, so I hope he would be proud of my new decision. People say, “Why did you leave French Vogue? It’s crazy.” But I say, I always liked challenge. When Tom Ford asked me to consult for Gucci, I had never consulted in my life. I didn’t know what consulting was, and look, we made something amazing. I have a lot of ideas coming, and it’s more exciting than getting older in your golden cage.
In general terms, do you see a positive future for magazines?
I think it will be very difficult for a lot of magazines, because now you see so many things on the Internet right away and you cannot be as quick as the Internet. Maybe some magazines will stay, but they have to be very beautiful, like collector’s items…Today we have to think differently. [Take] globalization. Ten years ago we never thought we were going to have a Vogue in China, and it’s one of the most successful Vogues, so if you’re not moving, you’re dead. Maybe it’s about going to other countries, to find another way to be interesting in fashion, to talk to a wider audience.
Any interest in working on the Internet?
I’m not an Internet [girl]. I’m not writing on blogs. I’m not a Facebook girl. Even though there is a fake Facebook with my name, it’s not me. I’m not on Twitter, it’s not me. But I think if I’m not going on the Internet, I’m going to totally disappear, because the future is the Internet. It’s very difficult for me to work on the Internet, but maybe I will find a way. I think this is very, very important.
Do you feel you did enough on the Internet at Paris Vogue?
No. I never took care of the Internet for Paris Vogue, never, because honestly I had no time to work on the Internet, and I don’t think a lot of magazines have success going on the Internet. You have to be thinking totally differently if you want to do something on the Internet. Even French Elle or Grazia, they’re very popular magazines, but on the Internet they’re not so popular, so there is something that doesn’t work. You have to think about exactly what people need on the Internet. It’s not that you do a continuation of the magazine.
Would you be open to editing another magazine?
Why not? I’m open to many opportunities. There are not so many ways to show fashion…To show fashion you need a magazine most of the time. Each time we were doing a magazine, it was like giving a dinner…You know this thing called Le Festin de Babette? She spent all her money just to make one dinner. It’s a bit like when you want to make a special issue. You give everything you have, your charm, your money, your relationships, to make something fantastic. You have to be very generous.
The photographers you worked with at the magazine—David Sims, Mario Sorrenti, Terry Richardson—they are the establishment now. Do you see a new generation of photographers breaking through?
There are some coming through, but when you have a magazine and you have the best ones, it’s difficult to put someone new between them. They want to be all at the same level. But I think now, we need new stylists, we need new photographers, and I’m starting to check and see some very good ones. And if I’m doing something new, I would love to use a new generation, because I think it’s good when people are very hungry…Personally, I think I had more creativity and talent 20 years ago when we had no money to do a story, [and we had] to do it in two hours after a money job when we got to keep the studio…I think everything is too established now. I think it’s good to break the rules. It’s like the models. It’s easy to have the five tops. I love risk…Now I found a new girl called Saskia. She has short hair, no one knows her, and this is going to be my last cover.
Where do you find new talent?
You have to be surrounded with people with [good] eyes. For example, my friend Riccardo Tisci. He’s really someone of his time. I’ve [tried] to nourish him, but he’s also nourishing me a lot with his instincts about models, photographers, singers. It’s very important for me to have some of these friends…He’s very exciting, he’s very aware, and each time he gives me good advice. Lara, Saskia—Riccardo introduced me to them, and he showed me some new photographers and I’d love to use them.
Why do you think it took people a long time to appreciate his talent as a designer?
I met Riccardo when he was unknown and doing his own show in Milan. A sort of very underground show. And to go from a very big-name show to an underground show was very exciting for me, so I met Riccardo this way, and after, I tried to make him come to Givenchy when they were looking for someone. I know they were not so happy at the beginning, but now they understand his vision. Sometimes it takes a bit of time. He was very young. It’s a lot of pressure on your shoulders, but I think since two or three seasons, it’s better and better. And his last Couture presentation was amazing. And even the men’s show, where people had to wait two hours because there was a problem with the electricity, no one stood up, everyone was staying, because they know something was going to happen at that show. Even if they don’t like everything, there is something new…He’s doing a book for Visionaire and he asked me to be in a picture. And it was fun to do it and he’s full of oxygen. And I just introduced him to Karl Lagerfeld and now they really like each other. It’s funny to have dinner with the two of them, because Riccardo is not intimidated by Karl; he is totally comfortable, and Karl has a lot of fun with him. You spend a very good evening listening to them. Maybe I’m a good go-between.
Which other designers do you admire?
Oh, there are a lot of designers I admire. There’s a long list. In the young generation, of course I love Nicolas Ghesquière. There were these problems with Balenciaga last season, but I know him since the beginning. I was one of the biggest supporters of Nicolas, and I just saw him for a cup of tea and now everything is fine again between Nicolas and me.
What was the real cause of your disagreement with Nicolas?
Sometimes people like to put oil on the fire, to make something bigger, and afterwards with blogs and the Internet, things [get out of] proportion. But now it’s gone back like before and I’m very happy because I think he’s full of talent.
There were rumors that you were consulting for other brands while you were editing Vogue. But you recently told Women’s Wear Daily that wasn’t true.
I didn’t have the time…You do so many shows, go to New York, London, Milan, Paris; you do many photo stories for your own magazine. Even if I’m a Superwoman, I don’t know when exactly I would find the time to spend one week [consulting] with someone at the shows. This is impossible.
Do you feel freer now?
I never felt not free. Even when I was doing so many things, I never had an office life. OK, I have no boss now. That’s a big difference. I’m my own boss and it’s a good thing and a bad thing to be your own boss. You can do whatever you want, but you need a protector. I need protectors, because it’s very difficult to do everything by yourself. I have a lot of people who want to do projects with me. It’s the reason I’m in New York. There are a lot of people to meet here. I think things will come more from New York than Paris. You’re never a king in your own country. You’re always better in another country, no? So I hope that Americans will still like me.
Why wouldn’t they?
People sometimes think I’m very cold, but I’m not. I’m a very shy person. When people know me, I’m not cold; I’m quite a nice person. It’s difficult as the editor of a magazine to be totally yourself because you’re a bit frightened. Now I think I go back where I was ten years ago, so I get younger, which is always good. Younger with dreams and younger with energy. Younger with risk, because now it will be my own risk; it won’t be Vogue’s risk. Always I will be a risky woman. I will keep this legend.
tags: Carine Roitfeld, Future of Fashion
The Future Of Fashion, Part Six: Alber Elbaz
May 17, 2010 9:30 am
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological change. In this series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
When Alber Elbaz phoned me from Paris, it was 8 p.m. there. The end of a long workday? No, he said, he was planning on spending a couple more hours in the studio after we finished. The word poetic invariably attaches itself to descriptions of the clothes Elbaz designs for Lanvin, but you get the feeling that behind the famous floppy bow tie, there is a hard-won sense of resolve. During our conversation, somewhat condensed here, he spoke frankly about the problems the industry faces, his observations frequently punctuated by bursts of humor.
I’ve been asking everyone this question, but I’m particularly interested in your perspective as a designer. What role does a fashion show still play in delivering your message?
It’s almost like asking someone what is the role of a table if you want to serve dinner. Of course you can have some dinner in bed and you can have it also on a plate and just on the floor, but I think that when you put it on the table, it’s the most pragmatic. There are certain things that I guess are essential and this is one of them.
There’s been a lot of talk about doing shows on film, but it sounds like the live experience and a live audience are still very important to you.
Maybe I’m kind of an old fashioned guy, I don’t know. I think that if you want to pass emotion you have to write a letter. Emotions do not pass in SMS or in e-mail. I think that you have to be there, you have to feel it…I know that now with Facebook, some people tell me, “Oh, I have 700 friends.” Another person tells me, “I have 3,000 friends.” And I tell them I have only two friends. So now who has more friends? They do or I do? And how do you actually value it, by number or quality? I believe that we have to go forward and I believe that we have to go with change, but there are certain things that are beautiful to leave as they are. And fashion is not always about what’s new, it’s also about what’s good. And I think if you need to see what’s good, you have to be there.
Perhaps I shouldn’t have been, but I’ve been surprised by how passionate people are about this. Buyers, critics, designers, they all still feel that, despite the overscheduling, live fashion shows are important.
I think the problem is that we all feel we have too many of those. I think this is the major problem that we are all feeling and experiencing. And I always say that doing a collection is almost like writing a book or making a movie, and I don’t know any other industry that can produce six movies a year by the same director. That’s the thing. You cannot write six books a year. You cannot produce six movies. You can’t do six collections a year. And I think this is actually what is making fashion be the way it is today. I know a lot of people complain that there is not enough change and that fashion in the past was much more creative than today, and I think a big part of this phenomenon is that we don’t have the time to think, we don’t have the time to project, we don’t have the time to digest. I’m not talking about, like, “Oh, we need to travel for inspiration,” because I do in fact believe that the best traveling you do is from your couch while you eat potato chips. But I think we just need the time to think and to look at it again and to have another perspective. Read the rest of this entry >
tags: Acne, Alber Elbaz, Geoffrey Beene, Lanvin, Yves Saint Laurent
The Future Of Fashion, Part Five: Julie Gilhart
April 8, 2010 11:01 am
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological change. In this series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
Julie Gilhart is fashion’s free spirit: a passionate surfer, an early champion of ecologically minded clothing, a vocal supporter of political causes. But as the fashion director of Barneys New York, she’s a free spirit who guides the buying decisions of a multimillion-dollar, multicity luxury retailer. When she joined the company, she told them she would work for them for only one year. Eighteen years—and at least three changes in ownership—later, she’s still there. During our phone conversation, somewhat condensed here, she discussed the need for the fashion system to change, the importance of keeping your ear to the ground, and why she hates markdowns.
Does selling by season still make sense? Sure, it was cold in New York this winter, but the way people live now, a lot of time is spent indoors, in air-conditioned or heated environments. Are seasons still important?
From a psychological perspective, seasons are really important. And coming from Texas, where you don’t really have a lot of seasons, to have fall, winter, spring, and summer is really, really nice and romantic. And to build the spirit of fashion around that is really nice. In the past, it’s been the reason why you shop: “I need my spring clothes. I need my fall clothes.” I think the new paradigm is, “There are new things in the store, what do I need?” Today I have on a dress that I can wear all year round, and in the winter I put a coat over it. The rules of what you buy now are different. What we’re trying to say is, buy quality, know what you’re buying, buy things that are going to last a long time and that you’re going to wear frequently. Maybe next season you won’t buy a coat, but you buy a nice pair of boots. It’s probably the worst thing for people to say, in retail—because retail is all about consumption. But the thing is, if you define yourself as a place that has quality and integrity and always brings to the table good design and value, you’re going to get customers to shop in your place, because you’re actually really thinking about that. Seasons are now more defined for us as a chance to buy new things. It’s antiquated to say, “I’m going to buy my spring wardrobe, my fall wardrobe.” Now it’s, “I think I’m going to buy pieces that I can wear and need and can wear for as long as possible.” But there’s [still] a reality to it. You need your boots if you live in a snowy place, and you need hardly nothing if you’re living in L.A. in the summer. So there are different needs for different places.
How does the proliferation of collections—pre-fall, Resort, and so on—play into this?
It’s a flow, so that you always have new things coming in the store. But I think it’s been abused, and everybody needs to edit that down a bit. We don’t need so many things…I’m being very frank. The runway collections actually come late in the season, and the reality of the way American retail is set up, things go on sale not that long after the runway pieces come in. So there should be less pieces in the runway, and our buys shouldn’t be weighted in the runway. They should be weighted into the pre-collections, so you have longer to sell, and you can put a mix together and it looks like a more edited exclusive product in the store. Balenciaga is one of my favorite shows to go to because Nicolas [Ghesquière] only does 35 exits, which is really small for a show, but you can almost memorize those 35 exits. They’re put on Style.com, they’re shot in every single magazine, they’re everywhere—so by the time they come in the store, I don’t know if I so want the whole runway exit thing. Maybe I want a piece of it, but the bulk of what we’re going to sell in a collection like Balenciaga is going to come in before those runway pieces come in. Does that make sense?
Yes. I don’t think any of us have the answers yet, but there’s a general sense that there need to be some changes in the system.
Definitely. I think you’ll find retailers, designers, press people uneasy about the system right now. It needs to change. But [New York Times photographer] Bill Cunningham told me one time that fashion was just a reflection of the times, and I think that’s so right on. We’re in the situation right now where what has worked in the past isn’t working any longer, so we really need to change a lot. What that means, I don’t know. But that’s where the creativity of fashion comes in. We need to look at these people that are doing things in a really good way. The way the designer sees things is a big platform for us, too. Where are things made, how are things made. All of that’s becoming more important.
tags: Barneys, Future of Fashion, Julie Gilhart
The Future Of Fashion, Part Four: Olivier Zahm
March 10, 2010 6:20 pm
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological change. In this new series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
Olivier Zahm’s love of women is well documented, not least by Zahm himself on his Web site, www.purple-diary.com. But the French editor and founder of the twice-yearly independent publication Purple Fashion has many other passions: art, fashion, his daily uniform of white or gray jeans and black Yves Saint Laurent leather jacket, parties, freedom. There may be an element of self-promotion behind some of this, but in an increasingly conformist world, Zahm offers an original, entertaining, and astute voice. During our conversation, conducted by phone last month between New York and Paris and somewhat condensed here, he discussed his conviction that magazines will exist as long as fashion exists, his suspicion that the financial crisis was just a pretext to scare people, and his fervent wish that the world in general—and Lindsay Lohan in particular—would stop spending so much money on clothes.
What was the original impulse behind Purple Diary?
[It happened] in a way by accident, because the Purple Diary was just a section of a bigger project I had, and because I started to take pictures every day of parties or pictures of my life, I needed an interesting way to use these pictures and not to let them go into digital archives and disappear. Because now everything disappears. It’s digital, but if you don’t copy your hard drive, pictures disappear after one or two years…So then I had this idea of having a personal diary, an intimate diary, mixing intimacy or privacy with my public life and creating a sort of contrast between what’s really intimate, like sex and love, and what’s really public, a party, a fashion show, an exhibition. What’s meant to be public and what’s meant to be private and make them, like, coexist. It was suddenly exciting because it was, in a way, breaking the barriers of something, which is actually what the medium itself, the Internet itself, does. For celebrities it’s a nightmare, but for me it’s a pleasure. It’s a decision. I would love to go further into intimacy, but my girlfriend and my lovers are sometimes a bit reluctant.
Have any of the reactions to the blog surprised you?
What surprised me is the number of people coming, because I print 60,000 copies of Purple [a season] and I have 100,000 [weekly Web site visitors], more visitors a week on the blog than I have readers in one season with the magazine…I can tell from the discussions I have that people know that I’ve been there, I’ve done this, I’ve seen that exhibition or this film, and then it comes into the discussion and it’s changing my life in a way and my interaction with the girls, with the friends. It hasn’t changed my interaction with the advertisers yet. [Laughs.]
Well, let’s talk about that.
I haven’t found the right way to make a little money off it because I don’t want regular advertising. I think it would be really bad. So I don’t want advertising [of that kind]. I’m looking for a way to involve brands, but I haven’t found it yet and it’s not my priority.
The Future Of Fashion, Part Three: Hedi Slimane
February 23, 2010 8:43 pm
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological change. In this new series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
When I approached Hedi Slimane about doing this interview, his first in almost three years, he agreed on the condition that he could answer my questions by e-mail. Well, why not? This series is about the future of fashion, and—who knows?—perhaps this type of electronic exchange is the future of journalism. Besides, I thought that Slimane might bring a unique perspective to the subject at hand. He has been both an insider (as, among other things, the highly influential designer of Dior Homme from 2000 to 2007) and an outsider (since stepping away from Dior, he has pursued a more nomadic existence, focusing chiefly on his photographs for magazines and his Web site, www.hedislimane.com). Here, he discusses today’s “costly and overwhelming fashion avalanche,” whether or not he plans to return to design, and the enduring relevance of Pete Doherty. If this interview reads less like a conversation than a kind of manifesto for the future, I don’t think it’s any less interesting for that. Ultimately, though, it’s up to the reader to decide how well this format works.
How do you think technology—tweeting, blogging, social media, etc.—has affected fashion? For better or worse?
It has affected different aspects of fashion tremendously. From commentary to fashion design, communication, and distribution.
The fashion Internet community is like a global digital agora tweeting passions and opinions. Anyone knows better, and each one is a self-made critic.
This is a fascinating idea, as I always favored amateurism (”the one that loves”) over professionalism, attraction over experience. It obliges anyone in the industry to think in a fresher way.
Of course, it is hard to say if any “authority,” someone like Suzy Menkes, might one day come out and use digital means to lead with integrity, enough background, outside of any conflict of interest.
On a design perspective, it has allowed any young designer or indie brand to get an instant audience, if used with wit and invention.
I am not quite sure of the future of retail as we know it. This is a truly important thing, maybe the most important one, as it might already mean there is nothing standing between the design and an audience/consumer.
Finally, the better and the worse have always been part of fashion, with the Internet only magnifying it and creating a joyful and noisy digital chaos.
The bottom line is that any note can create music. It is only a matter of taste.
Read the rest of this entry >
tags: Hedi Slimane
The Future of Fashion, Part Two: Cathy Horyn
February 14, 2010 11:47 pm
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological change. In this new series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
On a recent midweek morning, I sat down with Cathy Horyn, the New York Times fashion critic, at the Dean & DeLuca coffee bar on the ground floor of the newspaper’s Renzo Piano-designed midtown office building. She said she was feeling the effects of a simmering cold, but it didn’t visibly affect her sharpness. Unlike many of her peers, Horyn has embraced the digital world, first through her blog, On the Runway, and more recently with her Twitter page. Her readers will know that she has been giving a great deal of thought to live streaming, shifts in manufacturing practices, and other contemporary developments. During our conversation, somewhat condensed here, she talked about the critic’s evolving role, her sense that leggings are the enemy of innovation, and her belief that, in design, technique matters now more than ever. (Note: This interview took place several days before we heard the awful news of Alexander McQueen’s death. Horyn clearly regarded the designer as a true innovator, and she said his Paris show was one of the only ones that you simply had to see each season. I have retained her references to him where I thought it made sense to do so.)
You tweeted for the first time from the Couture shows last month. Did you enjoy it?
I like the size of it. I like the limitation. I’m not sure I can really finesse or understand all the abbreviations that people use. By the time I’ve figured out the abbreviation, the event is finished. [Laughs.] But I think I can contribute something interesting.
Read the rest of this entry >
tags: Cathy Horyn
The Future Of Fashion, Part One: Robert Duffy
February 10, 2010 6:00 am
As we enter a new decade, the fashion business, like the rest of the world, is encountering significant economic and technological changes. In this new series, Style.com’s editor in chief, Dirk Standen, talks to a number of leading industry figures about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
When I spoke to Robert Duffy, the president of Marc Jacobs, by phone last week, it was 12 days till showtime. “I don’t have one finished sample, one piece of clothing that’s finished, not one,” he said from the label’s Spring Street offices. “I don’t have one shoe or one handbag that’s going to be in the show that’s finished.” He did not, however, sound particularly concerned by this state of affairs. In fact, he sounded cheerful and energized. That unflappability has presumably served Duffy well over the last two and a half decades, as he and Jacobs have gone from being the self-described “rebels” of American fashion to becoming the leaders of a global mega-brand. During our conversation, somewhat condensed here, he talked about his experiences with tweeting and live streaming, the reason a $15 flip-flop could be the future of retail, and why having celebrities at your fashion show is boring.
You’ve just started tweeting. What’s surprised you so far?
What surprised me is how famous Marc is.
Really?
I’m just working with the same person for, it’ll be 26 years in May, so I have absolutely no idea. I mean, sometimes when we walk down the street and stuff, I hear people screaming at him. But I was floored…The best thing about [tweeting] has been listening to what people have to say, and these are real consumers. People were commenting about what they bought and how they long they’d kept it and when and where they’d bought it. That’s really been an eye-opener for me.
tags: LVMH, Marc Jacobs, Robert Duffy, The Future of Fashion
