Paris Not on Easy Street

A look from the Fall 2008 Comme des Garcons show. (Jean-Luce Huré for The New York Times)

(Jean-Luce Huré for The New York Times)

I have several thoughts about recent posts here, notably on Prada and Jil Sander, and some observations about the men’s shows we saw today. There is no trace of self-conscious in Junya Watanabe’s clothes, as there is with so many designers, no gender manipulation that blows up in his face and only makes the rest of us laugh sadly with disappointment. He showed the shrunken blazer, a style he has done before (before Mr. Browne), as if to express the general distaste and contempt that young men have for this formal look. They scorn it, and so does Junya, now showing the coat with ties and shirts that are so glossy and colorful as to perhaps tempt the militant boys into an establishment uniform. A number of the jackets combined classic tweeds with bits of other fabrics, seemingly from a rag bin. OK, he made his point, and didn’t sit on it proudly or for too long.

The music at Comme des Garcons was American, straight from the Depression 30s…that weakly cheerful paper moon song, etc. Rei Kawakubo’s show, held at a cheesy nightclub on the Rue de Rivoli, opened with washed tartan jackets over T-shirts and wool shorts with half kilts around the front. Punk was my initial thought. But then, out came crushed top hats, ransom-note style graphics that invoked store close-outs, and jackets with hems that had been cut to resemble severe wear. Of course fashion shows held in nightclubs, however cheesy, are “nothing but make-believe,” to use a line from one of the songs, but there was a pessimism about this collection. Although I prefer Kawakubo when she is more abstract and less literal, and more in one of her world-breaking moods, she touches on the fact that these are hard times, and in so many ways beyond market slumps. There is also something confrontational about the clothes, apparent in the ransom-note graphics, and I imagine it’s aimed in the direction of the luxury makers.

I’ve really enjoyed the posts from the last week—from RC, Marko, Anjo, Houken, Miss Gretchen, among others. E Frantz and Alex A, thanks for providing so much background on couture and the supers. (I always enjoyed watching Carla Bruni for her glide walk and a slight air that said, “I don’t really need to do this—this is not my life.” I wish her well.)

On the subject of Prada, I see mainly the influence of Martin Margiela, with his recent plays on nudity and the body. I don’t at all think the suit has gone out of fashion, or out of importance in men’s lives, whether for work or pleasure. And it provides men’s designers with a primary shape/silhouette to continually modify. I think Miuccia Prada has done some interesting things this season with the suit itself, with her choice of sleeker fabrics and the outward elimination of things like buttons. Perhaps she will develop the idea (I agree with Marko on that notion).

But in the last three and a half years we’ve seen some very good uses of smooth, body-skimming fabrics and corresponding, in-to-the future shapes. We’ve seen clothes that looked molded or suggested a seamless look. The collections I’m referring to are Raf Simons’ “History of My World” show in Paris in July 2004, in which he uses many sleek, high-tech fabrics and a monochromatic scheme around gray, and Nicolas Ghesquiere’s spring 2008 show for Balenciaga, where the fabrics looked spongy and molded, as if by a machine. Did Miuccia really advance anything? I think not—not this time. I find the bikini illusions and clerical collars completely irrelevant.

A model wears a look from the Fall 2008 Junya Watanabe collection. (Jean-Luce Huré for The New York Times)

As for the Jil Sander show, the silhouette strikes me as the most interesting and sane at the moment (I’m in the mood, Marko, for sanity, though perhaps we don’t really disagree). The shape and fall of the coats look contemporary and visually clear, and I like the heaviness of the shoes, or, at any rate, the weight they give to an individual’s appearance. It feels modern. I suspect that the marble prints will be influential, though maybe in other applications like jeans. And I do agree that it’s a transit collection, between one thought and the next. His men’s collections for Jil are bound to progress at a different pace than his women’s. For one thing, he has his mind continually on the Raf Simons line, on its history, and, for another, the women’s line represents a new challenge for him. So he’s certain to view it differently, perhaps harder.

I really found RC’s thoughts on the uniform interesting and relevant, especially the mention of Hillary Clinton. The pantsuit has become her thing on the campaign trail. She represents change but she never (or very seldom) changes her suit! At the same time, it’s presented her with a very narrow means of self-expression. She can’t be too casual (like the male candidates, with their sweaters and jeans). She would get hammered. And she’s already been slapped for showing the tiniest bit of cleavage—for being a woman. There’s so much to say about that little paradox.

And thanks, Houken, for pointing out that most designer collections are designed by teams of people. This is significant in terms of how many people today access fashion. It’s not just because of the rapid changes in information technology that allows them to access it. But it’s also because the majority of desirable brands at the moment are designed by teams. There’s a built-in democracy with desirability, and in a way this approach is modern because it suggest community. But it doesn’t mean you get a vision that offers a singular view of the world. In fact, you don’t: Witness the incredibly uniformity of fashion.