I love fashion, but designers (and makers) being forced to create so much can honestly make it so overwhelming even as an appreciator. I feel it would be super cool to see what other ways fashion could be shown, so it can best fit a collection, not necessarily just a traditional runway. Then perhaps it can mix with more traditional art as well. Loved the video thanks.
You made such great points in this. I judge runway shows the same way I judge performance art. Concept, relationship to and between the performers and audience, materials, the spaced or set, reaction it causes, beauty, mood, and timing.
I think that the subjectivity flows both ways. The conversation around meeting art on its own terms is the same form of conversation as meeting a person on their own terms, and a piece of art, I'd argue, has a sort of personhood to it. For me this lens leads me to using terms like "that book was interesting but a really bad hang" or "that book was trying too hard" or "the vibes were good but i couldn't tell you what was going on, just left no impact." I think statements like this are specific and helpful due to leaning into the subjectivity. We know how to work with someone who's just going through some stuff right now, and we can judge whether they're working their way through it or just digging themselves deeper into a rut that won't be healthy for them long-term, and i think seeing the art in this light makes it easier because it's more based on how humans process things, even if it does make it much much harder to hang any sort of objectivity in the conversation.
I like this idea of meeting artists on their own terms. Although, I do find the ability to debate the subjective/objective merits of art really hard - especially when I don’t know the rules of the world that designer/artist has created, it gets really hard to tell when an artistic decision was purposeful or just gauche.
@@slightlyrancidcheese it’s almost enough to reject objectivity, imo. There is a lot of people trying to figure out the same thing, and I think the trick is to just talk to people with different perspectives (or listen to their videos), rather than finding one unified “objective” perspective to hang your hat on. In art, objectivity is just subjectivity blinded to itself. At the end of the day, dude, if you like it then that’s cool, if you don’t like it that’s also cool. The skill and joy of evaluation is to figure out where those feelings come from so that you can dig even deeper next time. It’s like wine tasting. The hope is that the practice of tasting all those notes means you enjoy wine even more than you initially did.
@@EmmisonMike tbh my background in the arts definitely tempers the urge to throw objectivity to the wind, and I do believe there is such thing as ‘objectively bad art’ beyond just art being made for the wrong reasons (ie consumerist bs). It’s why I try and separate my personal opinion from my critique, because I do think there are structures that we work within (and break) that maybe not define good art but certainly allow effective communication of ideas. Unfortunately sometimes I might not like the ‘tools’ used and that that mean I might not personally like that piece or designer/artist and to a degree colours my opinions on their work but I definitely try not to let it stop me from acknowledging and appreciating good art. (Conversely I try to acknowledge that sometimes something is objectively bad, but I just like it) however, I definitely agree that being able to debate and take apart works that I might not even personally like (especially if the other people I’m discussing it with do enjoy it) definitely allows me to appreciate the artistry and appreciate the art that is to my own taste even more.
So many questions... When deciding whether it was a good collection or not I think it depends on what you're looking for (beautiful wearable garments, the color palette, the shapes, silhouette, lines of that designer, new developments in fabric, artistic pattern design, use of decoration etc) If you're looking for artistic genius (McQueen, early Marc Jacobs, Schiaparelli, Gianni Versace, Westwood etc) then I just sit back and enjoy the ride. It costs them so much emotionally, physically, artistically to create that I'm happy to enjoy their vision whether it's wearable or not. I can appreciate a show on so many levels
What I most look for in a runway collection is how hard the designer has worked to uphold the identity of their brand vs how hard they’ve worked to try something new/reinvent. I watch a slew of runway shows expecting to be inspired by their core values individually I’d never hold a Rick show and a JIL show under the same microscope. If a brand can get away from items that sell really well and not just bring a new color-ways that always impresses me. Every label should have a creative universe it operates in so whatever label can bring new items into that universe and most seamlessly fit them in with the other established pieces - that’s what I deem as successful.
First of all Bliss, love your Pants! I feel that what seems to be the divide is that there are two types of people, those who love Fashion and all the new things that it can evolve into and those who just want clothes to get dressed for their everyday life. For a lack of a better example not everyone is Daphne Guiness who loves Fashion and has an ample budget. And I agree Giorgio Armani was revolutionary for his times and also was Yves Saint Laurent, but as Karl Lagerfeld said many of us stay in the past at one point it takes a big effort to keep yourself current while letting go of who you were a decade ago. Cannot ignore since I am older that Social Media is a devouring machine wanting the next new thing at light speed and every hour on the hour, so we got to be cautious of how we consume information and visual stimulation. Thank you Bliss Foster for this great channel!
my philosophy on this is very simple: would i like the collection, had it been by a designer i dont know? it doesn’t really determine objective quality, however i find it helpful to figure out whether i personally like it or just being apologist towards a designer i like. as per objective quality, i find myself looking for a concept, innovation, styling, overall aesthetic and continuity throughout the collection including the setting of the runway show. the aesthetic of the show having a clear identity is important aswell, since sometimes it just really looks like she doesn’t know where she’s going. having studied desing, a huge factor for me is the quality of patterns and sewing. it can be quite a simple garment, but i’ll find myself absolutely drooling over it whenever the craftsmanship is so good you can clearly see it through the screen.
Before I've watched the video, how I art should be evaluated is in two ways, the first is how well the designer shows their vision, of looking at the show you can tell right away what they are doing that is good, looking at the show notes really helps to understand this metric. The second evaluation is just if you like it, there is a lot of art that that is just cool to you because of what you like.
To me ( a passionate follower of couture/ prêt à porter since I bought my first vogue magazine aged 13 in the 70’s 👵🏻) it’s not about just runway shows but it’s about ingenuity, cultural awareness and the perennial appeal and admiration of a designers work. The runway show is only important in that it transmits the story the designer is telling for that season… and if the clothes are continuing to be culturally relevant by stimulating the audience’s imagination with QUALITY items then that show is a hit in my opinion. The quantity issue has to be condemned and this is not just to save the sanity of those poor designers but to save the world from the threat the of the highly polluting fashion industry with its completely over the top totally unethical consumerism practices… 🙂🙃 bravo Bliss!
Sincerely, now that I'm studying my degree in fashion design, I must say that your videos have been a great source of imformation, I hope that soon I will be able to join yout patreon, LOVE YOUR WORK BLISS!
I haven't thought about this as much as others, but I tend to look for a quality of genuine-ness. If it feels forced or corporate, I don't lend it as much benefit of the doubt
imo, the best way to judge a designer’s work is to understand what they considered to make and what they really have made. This is an approach that secures you from judging kidsuper as if it was the row, because you could see that the final goals of these two brands are different. It is always about how the brand position itself in the industry and how it corresponds with the picture of this position or complement it every time new collection/photo shoot/pop up/collaboration is being released.
If I were to pick one crucial factor in judging a fashion collection, I would emphasize "Creativity and Originality." This is because creativity and original ideas are at the core of fashion design. They set designers apart, inspire trends, and capture the imagination of the fashion world and consumers. A truly creative and original collection can make a lasting impact. I think I see that more in street fashion today or maybe that is just my taste
Our family watched project runway for YEARS Together. We love to check out the shows here on YT and delight in all the different styles. I think for US as a family our first question is always, Did we have fun? Did we dream of adventures or stories while watching. Did I say OOH you would look AMAZING in that! Or this show is more for selling this show is more for advertising, this show is to sell shoes and earrings OR this is JUST OUTRAGEOUS!!! We do get disappointed when you can tell little effort in technique and styling but that's all apart of the fun too. . . But mostly did we have fun
For me what made Alexander McQueen runway shows so amazing was the emotions you felt by watching the story being told before your eyes. He wasn’t just showcasing a collection of clothes, his shows had social commentary, his shows questioned it’s audience and allowed a full experience for anyone watching. No other designer has come close to the intelligence that Alex put into his shows. To me Alexander McQueen made art and not just clothes. For the runways that come out now it’s hard to get that emotional impact. They are all basically the same cuz I mean how many ways can someone show a series of clothes and it not get repetitive. Unfortunately this was also Alexander McQueens downfall. The expectations are so high. The weight of the designer to out do themselves every time is not realistic and unfair.
When I think of if designers are only as good as their last collection, I personally think of Moschino. As a new fashion student in 2019, Moschino felt like a gateway drug into fashion, I could look at it and immediately understand what was being spoken to me, it felt like something I could see myself designing. Now 4 years down the line I find myself not looking forward to their next collections simply because I know it will just tarnish the mental reputation I have of their brand I’ve built up over the years. Part of me knows they will never achieve the perfection I saw back when Jungle Red had just released but I always cling onto some hope that maybe, just maybe they have something else up their sleeve to pull me back. The sad reality is that usually they don’t. Maybe the brands we love just lose their spark, or perhaps once we find perfection in designers work, none of their subsequent work can compare so we redirect our love to other brands in favour of distaste for what used to be our favourite. For me that’s Schiaparelli, sorry Moschino. If it’s any consolation though, Jungle Red is still my favourite collection.
I would appreciate A LOT a video about fashion for petite women. We are always horribly overlooked, maybe you have something interesting to say about it.
Currently designers work to please CEOs and maintain a healthy bottom line. Their work is no longer about the silhouette, the lines, the cut, the context and conceptual design, the presentation, the thought process and inspiration… everything we’re seeing now is a repetition of what was. Only few few independent designers still put a lot of serious thought and a bit of their soul into their labels. A lot of designers (incl. some independent ones) are all hype and clout and seek attention for mediocre product in a fancy packaging. Others can go on and on about investing too much in the presentation and too little in the design itself. Dior men looks like gucci men looks like LV men and nothing is special, one Bermuda after the other and you cant tell which is which without the label
I do think a lot more goes on behind the scenes, but I do agree that a lot of designers work these days is pleasing CEOs. I feel a lot of good art n fashion is lost due to most things having to be RTW or practical.
The issue is that starting and running a fashion label, especially in the high fashion realm, is prohibitively expensive for most people. Even with the most minimal of operations (samples made in house, small production runs, no runway shows, friends as models, social media marketing), producing a small collection can easily cost €10'000 to €25'000. Double that if you're following the industry standard of producing two collections a year and that's easily €50'000 a year, which is a steep investment for most people. That number will only go upwards, the more established you get. Customers will start demanding better quality and wider size ranges. Buyers start asking for larger product ranges and gender-specific items. Fashion press will start expecting to actually see the clothes beyond a digital screen. Running a small, but established label like Marine Serre or Ludovic de Saint Sernin can easily cost €100'000+ a year, if you include larger collections, secondary product lines, runway shows, campaigns, influencers, digital media. A medium sized brand like Jacquemus can go up to €500'000+ a year with their destination shows and numerous collaborations. A large, global brand like Lemaire or Isabel Marant demands €1'000'000+ to finance its operations. All of that money has to come from somewhere, especially if the designer wants to stay fully independent. Then you have the corporate houses which are a completely different beast altogether. Running Courrèges probably requires €10'000'000+. A house like Loewe or Céline? €100'000'000+. The "top of the food chain" houses like Gucci? €1'000'000'000+ and the chances are all of these numbers are a gross underestimations. That is a lot of money, even for a billionaire. How are they making it back? What about the houses that deal with a Haute Couture operation like Dior? What about houses that are corporate, but standalone like Hermès and Chanel? What about similar houses that are significantly smaller like Alexandre Vauthier and Iris Van Herpen? Fashion, like every business, needs a bottom line to support itself and this isn't a newfangled millennial concept either. Numerous of reputable couturiers that were popular in the early 20th century had to close in the 50s and 60s, because they refused to appeal to the changing markets and therefore couldn't support themselves anymore. It's unrealistic and somewhat ignorant to expect designers to ignore business to solely focus on creating "art". The "art" needs to funded by something, if not by itself. Otherwise, it's just an obscenely expensive hobby.
I feel like they took too much from the realm of software product design. Only improving on things that sell and dropping anything that doesn’t. Leaving very little room for experimentation and exploration of the artful side of fashion. At the end of the day it is a business and if they can’t sell then they can’t hire designer or artists.
I feel like the criteria that the success of a runway show is determined by whether it accomplishes the goals it set out to achieve is diminished when you take true camp into the equation; is it "good" art? It doesn't achieve its goal, however that is really what makes camp art so impactful.
Speaking personally as an artist who has supported themselves in fashion retail for 12 years or so, I think you pose some really solid questions. I think there is however a slight false dichotomy within the question of “should this piece of clothing be judged as art or as commodity in a part of business? I know that’s not exactly the question you asked but forgive my paraphrasing. I would argue that “design” is where those things meet; art can serve society and become a product, such as a Tshirt or other item of clothing, when it is made available for a price. My partner is a painter, and whilst I don’t think her income is large by anyone’s standards (she is just beginning to make money from painting at age 33), her paintings are most certainly a luxury and out of the price point of 99% of consumers. This is why I love fashion. Because business and art find a really beautiful middle in clothing. The ugly side is fast and goes to landfill; the ‘high art’ side only reaches the eyes of a select few within the industry, as you’ve mentioned in previous videos.
For me, i mostly just look at Rick collections, and the way i determine what's a good rick collection is: consistency, how well does each look compliment each other, one look alone may be weird, but if that look in contribution to the show is purposeful, it makes it good. Like, consistency as in how each look contributes to the show in whole. Another thing i look for is material, i love the way rick slowly gets more in detail as to what kind of fabric he uses, what certifications do the fabrics have and what processes are involved in the clothing making process. And last is just wearability, can i see myself wearing any of the items, if i have the money for it. That's why i thought Strobe was rly good, edfu was ok, luxor was pretty bad and the most recent, Lido was rly rly good. But this is just my perspective on rick, i'm not well researched enough in other designers' works.
I find my own process follows this rough outline (get ready for a long brain dump): Purpose/intention - what is it? Can you actually identify what the designer was trying to do? (If you can’t even identify the purpose of the collection, I’d argue that would be a massive failure upfront). Were they trying to produce art? Was it a critique? Was it an ode to a previous designer/collection? Was it an attempt to keep stakeholders happy? Was the goal a good one? - Was the intention uninteresting or a rehash of something already done? Was the idea really basic? Were they reaching way too far? Was it just a cash grab/ attempt to appease financial stakeholders? Was it in poor taste? Was it actually a really nuanced idea? Was it a great conversation starter? Effective communication of idea - once you know the intention, did the designer actually do a good job of it? Did they reach for the stars and fall short? Was there an insufficient commitment to the bit for it to actually do a good job of communicating the designer’s intention? Was it intentional or did they stumble into it? Were there outside factors that may have influenced the collection? This is often the most subjective part of the process and I’d say the best point for discussing the merits of the collection. Use of techniques/ tradition - I’m all for breaking tradition but I think there is something to be said for a respect and understanding of the ‘rules’ and techniques of fashion and sufficient skill so that you know the ‘rules’ you are breaking. even deconstructive ideas are just that - a deconstruction of tradition. This is definitely included to a degree in the effectiveness part, but I like to separate it as this tends to be slightly more of an objective critique and effective communication is definitively highly subjective. Do I like it? - just as you can dislike good art you can like bad art, but try to identify why you like a collection/ piece beyond the scope of trying to identify what makes a collection ‘good’. Debate! People have different opinions, go out and search for others. Let your own opinions shift with new ideas and time This isn’t a firm process, and it definitely comes from my background as an artist but everyone does things differently. I find it very hard to broach the tension between subjective and objective taste but I enjoy the thought process involved in taking apart a collection. I’m aware that this doesn’t even come close to touching on all the aspects involved in how collections are produced ( like needing to stay afloat in an ever-more competitive industry, the need to include ‘bits’ to keep attention, trying to fight against investors/financial stakeholders, etc ) and there are so many interesting things to discuss.
Man, so much good stuff in here. I've been into fashion for a long time but I've only been interested in watching runway shows for the past year or so, and for me the process is very much asking myself if I liked it first, then building context (so be subjective and then looking for objectivity.) I think because there now exists such quantities, if your curation doesn't start with what genuinely appeals to you, it can quickly feel either like a waste of time or very shallow, like when you interact with anything you have no true interest in because it's popularity. The mainstream conversation can be important because it furthers context, but at some point people have to realize that even if you can access everything, it's not all for you. I think when we're deciding if something is good or bad in fashion in general, we're trying to guess if it'll reach a level of recognition that means it'll endure, and and there are so many ways that that can come about. It could be through popularity, consistency (even if it's consistently terrible,) innovation, or how wearable it is, but things like novelty, aesthetics, or even the following/community, can be equally important, which kind of does make that case for quantity- the more stuff you release, the more likely you are to hit on something. I don't know that a designer's specific goal matters so much as the effects of those goals, i.e. where it pushes them and how it appeals to their audience, if only because I don't know that there are enough people judging them by that metric to make it seem so. Personally though, I'm someone to whom the end result does make or break whether or not I think something is good. It doesn't have to be super wearable, but if it looks good on my little screen and the end result is cheap materials and sus construction, that's the kind of lack of intention that's going to make me disappointed (which I think is why I'll never be that invested in runways.)
i think the story of the creation of the collection is also incredibly important. what were the inspirations, what techniques were used, what did you experiment with?
I don’t think it’s possible to develop a rubric to judge runway shows, but it may be possible to apply the same principle that is often used in creative athletic performance. Unless it’s something absolutely brand-new, like a new fabric, most concepts have been used before so there is a standard to benchmark against it. For a show to be good it has to meet that pre-existing benchmark but then just slightly go beyond that level of perfection already in place. It’s hard because it involves risk, the designer can fail here. It’s why we think it gets dull if it doesn’t change up. The reason we noticed in the first place was that creative risk. It’s about retaining what works but bringing in something risky. I think that’s what people mean when they say they like that the brand has kept up, but still stay true to its roots
Everyone you are missing out if you don’t join the Patreon! This channel is truly unique, highly education due to its meticulous research and penetrating thought provoking culturally significant content! BRAVO BLISS 🙌🏼👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🤩
Personally, I believe that a good fashion show is one that strikes a balance between "fashion" and "show". There must be a coherence between both elements, a narrative. But I also believe that if there is a "measure" to evaluate it, it should always be the "fashion" element.
Yesssss! The internet is very reactionary, but that’s because we can be rude behind our electronic devices. It’s almost like asking…”What is ART!” This question and more will be asked; probably until the end of time. One of the reasons I’m even watching this today is because you quietly crept into my feed, and totally agreed with my insane love for Margiela and Rick Owens. Art makes you feel! I know this isn’t a mind blowing check, but I appreciate you. Carry On Dude!
Bliss, wonderful video. I think the answer to your question about what makes a good show is “Believability” Believability allows the space for each designer to be judged in their own lane, but hold them accountable for the work they are putting out. If the fantasy they sell seamlessly blends with the presentation they give then I believe in them and trust what I’m seeing is good. But if silhouettes are off, or fabrics are strange we start to doubt what we are seeing and we cannot suspend our disbelief. Furthermore, a brand can have a poorly reviewed show in the present but upon retrospection that same show may be celebrated. Think early Alexander McQueen. It is a shame that we have to focus on sales and profits because if you take away commercialization and focus on new creative ways to deliver fashion, even poor performing pieces can still inspire the brand to something better that happened elsewhere in the collection or future collections because of it.
I love this immediately. Believability seems like a great metric. I have a question tho. What do we do about inherant bias? For example: I love fashion but I really dislike camp. With your system, I feel that I’d still roll my eyes and say “this is super tacky, I don’t believe it”. Maybe I just need to gauge believability but do so in good faith? I’d love to hear your thoughts 💫💫
I love this idea of believability (or to be fancy verisimilitude). The idea that something doesn’t necessarily have to make sense in the ‘real world’ but only within the world the designer has created/ is creating is fascinating, and I think a great way to attempt to remove your own subjective opinion from how you look at a collection/designer. It also feels like a great way for a designer to create unique collections that all ‘add up’ to an overall vision or world, the creation of a new set of rules and traditions to follow and break as they see fit. I think the ability to judge the intention & successful commitment to and execution of said intention comes into play when trying to separate my own subjective taste from my critique on the ‘objective’ quality of art.
rubric ideas : how beautiful is it ? does it move you ? harmony between the clothes, set design and music is there a story line how does it compare to Galliano for Christian Dior spring 2007 and Alexander Mcqueens hologram of Kate moss. how much fantasy is there does that runway show feel like theatre and has transported you in any way thank you for your videos !
Awesome 🦾 The next step is to always interrogate your own questions. Always look for ways to improve your own rubric. And the BEST part of that is when you meet someone else who does the same! You can talk about your different strategies for looking at art. Then you both benefit by hearing what the other has learned. Thanks so much for the comment :)
Yes the field is overly reactionary, and it undermines the value of truly great things that deserved attention, AND THATS WHY WE NEED YOU TO TELL US WHAT TO DO! you should praise them we are here to listen to you. We want your opinion. I understand wanting to be scientific and factor everything to find some truth in the situation but that is also overly reactionary. You know what it takes and you know what matters, and spelling it out for others who may or may not understand will just make you crazy. This is your time!!! You are the leader now!!! And if you would like a fashion committee or even a new patreon tier to talk fashion with others who care we’ll pay for that too.
I think clothes should be beautiful and wearable. Personally, I like the fabrics that feel good on the body, like cotton, linen, rayon, wool, and of course pure silk. I admire high quality in the sewing and the materials as I was trained in Couture sewing myself and appreciate the difference in how the garments look. Art pieces are fun, but I still feel they should be wearable. I am older, so I prefer classic, timeless styles.
I find the Avant-Garde couture fashion pieces to be less wearable art and more of a way for the designer to represent the concepts within the world they have created for the collection. Like if we inhabited that creative vision that is how we would ‘obviously’ dress lol, but with the recognition we don’t. It’s kinda almost transcendent in a way. I completely agree that high-quality fashion should include high-quality pieces of good materials that fit well to the body. The thing I find shocking even Morceau than some of the crazy Gordy outfits in some couture shows, is when you find out some of those pieces are actually for sale and there are some people out there that would actually wear it who aren’t actually performance themselves in anyway LOL
my opinion is often based on wether i find the show very commercial/market-oriented or if there is a sense of discovery that is just palpable, it can be a simple garment but a fashion ethusiast will always thrive when they get to feel inspired, and i guess as an alternative person i also get to experience fashion on many levels bc i get to appreciate a specific lifestyle and darker concepts, it’s easier to know if it fits into the alt spectrum too
Sometimes it feels a lot more market oriented these days. The gimmick designs just to make headlines. Such a huge difference from labels who stick to their essence like yohji, Rick, Rei.
@@CarlosLeFleur exactly, i just learned to ignore the mainstream because you just lose too much valuable time you could spend on discovering new designers
I haven’t quite yet written off mainstream shows and designers. The inspiration, art and concepts are more subtle and subdued but they are still there. Hidden within the show designed for corporate buyers. I don’t think designers lose that spark of creativity under the weight of the mainstream fashion machine, But it is a very different challenge trying to bring innovation and deeper concepts to a show where the majority of people in the audience to pay your rent just want to see a very large logo of your brand on the front of a Generic easily sellable item of clothing LOL
designers in the mainstream may produce that much, but the smaller the designer, the less time they have to design. most of the designers in alternative fashion either do their own production or have very small studios/manufacturers, so i am friends with plenty of designers that put out slow fashion with one or two runway collections with a dozen or so looks every year, plus a single dress or small batch accessory release every other month or so. the massive quantities of designs just add to the fast fashion problems, imo. we don't need thousands of barely distinguished variants that will be produced and dumped after a season is over, we need designers to consider clothes as an investment in a long-term portfolio and not just a season-by-season gimmick. if that makes it harder to find a perfect dream item, then people just need to put in that additional work or alter things to make themselves happier. slow fashion is the only way forward.
What an interesting question: How to judge the merit of a fashion show? For me a question like this finds it answers in the criteria it has chosen to be relevant. What is it that will be judged? And how can quality in fashion be defined? For that I see one option to go with classics like Georg Simmels: Philosophy of Fashion (1905) and judge fashion shows on for instance how unique a fashion show is in contrast to others - is it memorable, new, exceptional? Or how well it does in its social function like inclusion and exclusion. But that would be a scientific approach and has very little to do with the views of fashion in the field itself. I see another option to go purely with ones own understanding of fashion. I define it as an art form that wants to express a specific idea, thought or feeling. While fashion shows can be differentiated from for instance work wear by what ideas it wants to express (abstract idea vs. practicability), it still can be judged by how well the idea is expressed or realized. For me fashion is about how well the idea behind the clothes are visible and the intended effect is achieved. And with that it is something completely different in comparison of how much I liked it or how important or impactful it was for the industry. I would judge the *quality* of a fashion show by how well the intended expression was achieved. It feels to me like it is more important that the creation is exceptional than to create something exceptional. Instead of judging what impact the fashion show has on the industry (a later and ongoing judgement of the field with other factors like marketing and socio-historical context) I would look at the ability to make fashion. With this idea an old show would only be relevant for the judgement of a new one if it would be relevant in this show - is an old show referenced? And it could be the way how to praise past achievements: by how well an idea was expressed in that moment. And a designer wouldn't be judged by only the one good idea they had, but by the very idea we see manifested before us right now. Praise the sparks of creation, not the ashes of old. If it is the same thing as the last 10 shows than it can still be a high quality show and be well made. It just wouldn't stimulate new ideas or creativity. If that is relevant, than the definition of fashion would be needed to be different. Then fashion would not only express ideas but help to create new ones. Or the definition would entail to be financially successful, socially inclusive, environmentally friendly, ... Maybe the difficulty with defining a good show comes from looking at different aspects of fashion (industry). And the most important question to me seems to be: what is fashion in a fashion show? All of this fits quite well with your criteria regarding the goals of a designer. I agree with the point of whether the goal was accomplished. But I disagree regarding how hard the goal was, because I don't thing it is needed. And yes, in a culture that rewards performance and thinks that bigger challenges need better performances and thereby more praise, it is relevant how 'hard' a goal was. But that is a cultural thing and not a quality of fashion. Fashion doesn't need to be hard. Even the smallest detail can be important. An in the end a genius move is not hard, but obvious and easy in hindsight. I think I would just go with the first criteria of whether (meaning to me: how well) the goal was achieved. Everything else - how big the impact on the industry was, how much it was adopted, how much it sold or how new and unthinkable it was - would be irrelevant. If you share the understanding of fashion as an art that expresses an idea. --- I loved your video - gave me interesting questions to think about =) And I see this kind of videos (asking open questions) as a very needed reflection and exchange of thoughts and perspectives. And I found it very surprising how little time designers have for the creation of an outfit. I was not aware of that. Thank you for an interesting video!
Such a good topic and one that requires even more dialogue. Regarding how good a designer is I find it fascinating to watch some of the thresholds of some of the larger companies with some holding on to their creative directors for a while through numerous uneventful collections while others quickly pivot after one or a few shows. I definitely have empathy for the designers that join a big house with all of the internal and external pressure while adapting to the codes and adding their own touch as quickly as possible. As an onlooker I hope to have the patience and perspective to look at the majority of work to made a judgement versus one collection. That being said the internet has made us such an impatient species with a 30 second attention span. I like the idea of trying to view the collection through multiple lenses. I need to practice this. ‘You’re lucky if you like 20%’ - great reality check Knowing that you don’t watch all shows, how do you determine which new ones to check out? Also, besides show notes, what other sources do you use to confirm the designer’s goals?
I once put a Kanye vision 20/20 hoodie back on the rack knowing I was passing up an almost perfect hoodie. Even my friend could see the defeat in my face
Shows are always all about the art. That being said, wearable, technically superior clothing is the standard. Like they used to say in art school, just because it's a rotten egg doesn't mean it's not an egg. It should be art, and it should not be bad art. The designer is as good as the totality of the work. 15 years of great work and 5 years of mediocre work is a B-level.
I had to think of Caroll Christian Poell, when you started to talk about quantity over quality and filler looks. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, his intention was never really doing a collection and that's what I find absolutely amazing about him. Maybe we shouldn't settle for filler looks or the major part of a collection being mediocre. Why doing a collection than in the first place? Of course you are being forced to obey the parisian fashion calendar as a designer once you started participating in it. But maybe that's something we shouldn't want to achieve anymore. I would love for designers to actually putting the design part back into focus and I love when designers actually are capable of prioritizing that. Maybe it's time to think radically different about collections and presenting garments.
Carol is a great example of this. There’s actually an essay in the book “Fashion and Materialism” that discusses the weird economic place Carol finds himself in. Great point, homie 💫💫
The concept of a collection (shown on the runway or otherwise) is generally a merchandising trick to encourage viewers to look at the brand offering as a whole picture rather than solely as singular products, regardless of how simple or complex they are. Also lots of those "filler" looks are conceived to be the secure money makers of the season. If someone likes a simple top, they might buy a more complex item from the same collection. Of course, not every designer likes to follow that method, but it should still be a option they can choose if they want to.
I really felt what you said after 7:30. Looking at Demna Gvasalia, I feel like the fashion crown holds him at the highest standards possible each season and he's expected to "innovate" in every single collection - by the same people that simp over the tackiest and most boring Prada, Chanel or Valentino products right after posting their hate for Balenciaga.
I‘m going to have to „um actually“ you there Bliss. I’m thinking that Abloh was talking about a more comprehensive view of an oeuvre. If you look at a filmmaker like Christopher Nolan, his films hold each other up in that way, because after watching a few of his works, you can more easily get into the concepts Nolan is trying to explore (time, memory, truth, etc, etc.). Or back to fashion, if we look at Rei Kawakubo, we see the development of an aesthetic.
Hey Bliss(and everyone else)!! I’m so curious - what do you make of a brand like AMIRI? Especially the shows from the last year or two. It seems like a strange position in which some very very market friendly clothes are being sent down a runway but in such a way that is also earning critical praise? What is your take!?
The basis of judging runway shows is to examine how that designer is changing the cultural zeitgeist through silhouettes, prints, color palettes, and as well how they are innovating on their own design process. Rick isn’t looking at other designers, he is seeking to improve on his design aesthetic, however for example with minimalist houses, you shouldn’t expect maximalist collections, in fact for a house like Jil Sander it’s almost as if you’re choosing to design on a more challenging perspective, it’s all about details. In my opinion, there’s no way to know how to judge runway shows objectively, but laziness is always apparent (Louis Vuitton’s latest show), and it deserves to be called out.
Considering the questions and runway shows. I have given this some thought and there are multiple different things to consider. The discussion about art and runways and what makes a good show are really complicated. Quantity over quality depicts well the capitalistic market system that has driven art and design out of the window. You said ‘Even the established houses owned by LVMH etc..’ But I would rather see it as ‘especially the established houses’ as lvmh, kering and other conglomerates are more afraid of their bottom line than anything else. We need to remember that Arnauld is exceptionally good at making profit and that is his goal. But the profit making does not make runway a bad one. As shown in Paris by Pharrell. The clothes might not be so artistic or well made but Pharrell made a show with capital S. He combined a lot of things for one of a kind night and made it at least entertaining. This might be the criteria for someone to say that it was a good show. Then there is the other side - the art and the artistic shows. Some shows in this category are so called attention grabbers. Coperni and Hadid for an example or Mcqueen and his robots. There is the level of art, the beauty of the product but at the same time the shows use more and more of gimmicks to get the attention, especially in the modern internet society. This works as a double way street as some of the gimmicks might be seen as art and artistic but they tend to cater only towards the virality of the collection, which means more money in the end. I tend to think that Haute Couture shows are art. They are artistic. They depict the elevation of clothing and give the same heightened sense of spirit that I get from art. Haute couture can also be seen as gimmicky and viral, but I like to think that the mean behind the whole show changes that. I do also find something artistic in the works of Yohji as his shows tend to have quite a minimalistic feel so that the art and clothes can stand as they should. There is no one answer. I think that the art has diminished because of the need to gain more turnover and it is sad. But at the same time I think that there is still a lot of art to be made for runways.
I think besides asking “what were the goals, did they achieve them, is this new/challenging” etc, there’s also the simple, basic and absolutely visceral question of: did you enjoy it? Did it excite you? Did it set your curiosity alight? Do - you - want - more? And yes, for people who think about fashion and design a lot, that’s going to be a different benchmark than for someone who engages quite loosely with fashion. But ultimately - do these clothes, in some way, for obvious or perverse reasons, make you want to put them on your back, and before that, did the runway show even make you want to watch to the end?
runway shows should be judged via multiple metrics, and some metrics should be weighed more than others imo-- here are some... 1. execution of looks and show intention(do they look completed? Not like a project runway way, but in a Anna Wintour, does this all go together? and does this message make it across?) 2. brand dna - is this collection and are the individual looks identifiably this brand? 3.commercial value - are these pieces able to actually be fabricated, can the be made with current suppliers or can we find new suppliers to make this? do we have best sellers? did we financially plan for a balance between designing enough carryover pieces mixed with new? can we afford producing this collection?
So judgey, Bliss!😅 I love it!😂 But in reality you’ve hit the nail on the head. We can’t talk about things qualitatively if we don’t have some sort of measure. But we need to decide what we want to measure before we get into how we want to measure it. Are we measuring creative influence? I’m thinking these things can only be measured in hindsight…So, in the case of Giorgio Armani, if his work solved a challenge we didn’t know we needed fixed, then cool. But if the problem still exists, then why must his work change?
Good that you can drop a video and forget it/ that’s when the magick happens. I think that it’s important to have a multi layered “signature” and as you mentioned JPG has accomplished this- Chanel too. It’s important to establish a signature style but update it like Karl always did Chanel. Or how S. Burton at McQueen has managed to expand on the house code’s beauty of the strong and empowered shoulder and waist. Love your work. I have a question and potentially a video. Did you also grow up watching fashion file/VIDEO fashion and FT? I remember I was so excited to see vh1 embrace fashion- they obviously knew their audience- like these smart brands do.
Thanks for the great video, I especially like the 3 criterion that you gave at the end, I will keep them in mind also for other creations, in art, music, gastronomy, whatever... One question though: what is the position of the spectator/customer/fan/follower in this? All three questions are relating to the runway (and in general the art expression). But insofar as art is also communication with the audience, there's always the question of reception. The emission of the artist might be on a whole new level, but if the reception is not ready to be at that same level, we have an issue, and the creation is misunderstood. Of course, that doesn't mean that objectively the work is bad, but subjectively (considering the mistaken audience), it is. And even when after decades of perspective we realise this work was good or bad, how are we less subjective than the first audience, what says that we are now more qualified to judge its merits? Though I think my question only has a limited impact on the issue at hand, since again we're not talking anymore about the creation itself, but our position with respect to that creation.
I am passionate about listening to music, I am passionate about watching movies, I am passionate about owning my clothing store and I am passionate about my degree in fine arts. All of the aforementioned mediums arches culminate into one soul: Art. To take the statement of a successful fashion show, the first branch that came into mind is music. Their runway show is an album. Something that takes months to curate, and then presented to the world. Each track a look, set in an order and presented front to back. Some songs are bangers, some might be solemn, some dreamy, and some you just completely skip every time it’s in cue. Was it a great album (runway)? Was the artist bringing something new that you loved, or perhaps a direction you despise? If the album wasn’t what you were hoping for, do you now completely write them off? Was there that one song that you will only ever listen to, and never the other tracks? Did that solitary album change your mind about all their other albums? You could use this in the same respects to film with directors, writers and actors. Was their last film a success in your mind, and/or the larger audiences perspective. Like all the arts, when something new is put out into the world with a beloved artist, once it is out, we immediately want more; something to continue on this journey. We are consumers, and for those who are not artists, will NEVER understand the time it takes. You just ran your marathon you’ve trained forever to run, and it’s like the public gives you a tiny paper cup, gives you and high five, swings you back in the other direction, gives you a swift kick in the ass and says ‘ok, run it again’. Artist, of every single medium will agree on one thing, we want you to FEEL something. Whatever that feeling is, be is good or bad, contemplating or numb, we want you to feel. The one feeling that can be the hardest to ask from another is one thing: grace. Give grace to us artists, and will continue to make you feel. P.S Apologies for typos, as I’ve just been at a 12 hour market to buy clothing for my store for holiday 23 and spring 24 :)
Wow, I didn’t realize that! Sure enough, looks like he liscensed his name to L’Oréal and Luxottica. But for the mainline, Georgio owns Armani. Thanks for sharing your insight with us homie 💫💫
Once, you quoted a thinker friend of yours re: questioning the art showcased in a museum. Doesn't that apply here? I mean, as a curator, I cannot help but question the work, just as you, a critic, would. It's the default system of our machine
i'd definitely add the wearability of a collection to the equation. after all, it's clothes that a designer is making. the fact that we can wear clothes is what distinguishes fashion as an art form from the other arts
Oh wow! Good question. I feel like the fashion “show” is so separate from the actual design and eventual use of clothing that it’s somewhat laughable! It’s pure fantasy and frivolity which is what it should be, in my opinion . I judge the “show” for that, it’s entertainment factor! Take the most recent Jacquemus, so fun 🤩 do I think the clothing is wearable? As a 40 year old woman I am not going out in just my underwear, especially to a grocery store in Ohio. But I do purchase some of his dresses and blazers and enjoy them for their design. Because I think design, real craftsmanship and luxury fabrics can best be appreciated first hand. Not in a show.
hey bliss thank you for your thought-provoking questions. runways are an opportunity "for the elite" and most importantly the press to see a preview of the clothes... in my opinion, this is a saturated concept and should be really investing all that money time, and energy in more deep and radical changes in fashion.
It makes sense considering that most designer clothing is priced for the "elites". That said, in truth, most of the people who attend runway show are all regular people who work in the industry, working for magazines, retail stores or general press. Perhaps you might get a couple of celebrities here and there, depending on the size of the company. Most elites will generally get extremely private showing where they can see and touch the clothes up close without the noise of a runway.
I think something else super important when judging fashion and judging anything really is context. For example, I am a teacher grading a students exam paper. The student came to me saying they wanted to get 75% and I know that they are a strong student based on their exams in the past. However, after grading, they have gotten a 40%. And then this happens again in the next round of exams. Based on this you could say, oh no the student has really become a bad student, I know they're smart but they have now become lazy and sloppy. BUT what if we then find out that the student was going through a lot of mental and physical health issues? Problems managing at home led them to not be able to meet deadlines, overwhelming them and producing work that had no choice but to be bad in order to exist at all. That would change our perspectives a lot. Unfortunately fashion is not nearly as easy to grade as an exam, because fashion is art and an exam is a standardised test, and also it's especially difficult because it's totally reasonable for designers to not want to share with the public what they're privately struggling with, but I still think it's important to try and consider the human behind the art and what they're going through before judging the art itself.
I look for what's new. I look for what's old. I look at color and proportion. I look at what the consultants say is in and what is not (applying blazer shoulder styles on everything else). I look at individuality (Walter Van Beirendonck, Dries Van Noten, Celine and Margeila). I look for what the street says is in fashion (the short shorts over a long sweater, blazer, shirt or what have you such as Prada/Raf). Take Hermes; your always going to see beige, tan and brown. That's just Hermes. Then i look for what's stale: Anthony Vaccarello, still trying to reinvent YSL. Some that just do them: CDG, Junya and Yohji. Along with the houses still trying to find their way: Gucci, Givenchy, McQueen and Dior Homme. There are plenty of designer shows i like, but i wouldn't wear. And there are some i don't bother to look at: Armani, Versace, Thom Brown. There are some i must see: Grace Wales Bonner, Martine Rose, Our Legacy and Undercover. There are some that just flounder and flop: Louis Vuitton.
Successful Fashion Shows can be categorized into two different kinds of success. Commercial and Artistic. Commercially Successful would be merely measured by how well the collection sells, which can, but doesnt have to be influenced by Artistic Success. Artistic success is harder to evaluate, because art is Subjective. I define good art as something that evokes emotion, the stronger, the better. That means something doesnt have to be aesthetically pleasing or beautiful to be considered good art. In conclusion the absolute worst thing would be if you didnt know how to feel about a collection. This matches with the natural spread of word before the age of the internet. If something was not remarkable, people wouldnt know about it, because no one talked about it. Nowadays even the most boring, irrelevant collections might end up in our feed because everything is an advertisement, which in turn could be the reason we struggle to identify a successful collection.
From someone who has a background of being heavily invested in other forms of art (music and film) I think we just need to be more understanding and give more room for designers. Musicians and Directors have so much time and support, and in comparison to fashion, such little demand. I think that because clothing is an everyday necessity, consumers of fashion disregard the effort designers want to put into their clothing but don’t have the ability to. So when you say that when houses have to put out collections with majority filler and that it’s “no one’s fault” I disagree. It’s the consumers fault. Capitalism pushes all art forms to be commodified, but fashion the most purely because of the demand. But there is room to dismantle this problem. 1. Let there be significantly less product. I like to think that in an ideal world, there should be as many looks in a show as there should be songs on an album’s tracklist. 2. Look closer at smaller designers. 3. Appreciate fashion at a slower rate. Anyone can agree that fashion is a fast moving industry. So you, Bliss, having the power, although miniscule, to slow it down to an extent. I know I am largely just rambling about my fashion industry critiques, but this is all to say, that as long as these problems are in place, we need to start giving room to fashion houses to make their clothes without being overly critical and/or quick to judge. Appreciate individual pieces. Take as much time possible to let collections sit and marinate with you. All other forms of art allow these things to happen. I think that the pace of fashion is derived from the consumers/enjoyers of fashion not taking it as seriously as an art form. This might not have been as profound or insightful as I thought, but I think it’s essential to consider this next time you are looking at a collection.
Ok so something I have when I listen to music is called the hair stand test. Does a song past the hair stand test? When I here a song do the hairs on my arms stand up? Do I feel a wave expand across my body. In other words am I having a viseral emotional reaction to the content in presented with? I think if u feel something like that when watching a runwayshow. If u laugh or cry or your are entertained in someway. Those immediate emotional responses can be good indicators of a shows value to you.
i think “good” and “bad” are impossible descriptors when experiencing and discussing any art. “bad” houses so many things: harmful, lacking technically, not in our personal taste. making art and experiencing art as a viewer is so personal that i think speaking in absolutes isn’t helpful regardless, and i think the best thing we can do is move away from the good/bad dichotomy and towards a place that just acknowledges the pros/cons/neutrals, as everything in life has.
Ultimately it is demand that informs the schedule and frequency of fashion shows. I agree with your idea from another video about how designers should be able to skip shows/show off schedule to be able to deliver their best work, however, that requires us, the consumers, to buy less frequently and demand change. Unfortunately, a lot of people who shop from large luxury brands do not ‘need’ to consider their purchase: it comes down to capitalism and the values society has created because of it. So is the fashion cycle a political issue?
It’s cool stuff! I interview Henri in my last Paris Fashion Week video (the 90 minute one), and we have an extended interview with him on the Patreon 💫💫
@@BlissFoster Thanks for the reply Bliss. Good to hear - I’ve enjoyed Henri’s work for a while now and have quite a few pieces. I really like his focus on material quality and hand printed / hand distressing that, in my opinion, goes well beyond most (if not all) current designers. He’s not using “off the shelf” textiles - most of his fleeces used in hoodies, etc. are super heavy felpa cotton, which, in most cases, I find superior to looped-back terry because of its density, hand-feel and comfort. I’ll have to check out your interview w/ him - I’m surprised I haven’t seen it. Anyway, love what you’re doing - you’re one of the few people I watch consistently on UA-cam and one of the even fewer who I truly respect your view and knowledge pertaining to fashion. Best of luck w/ everything that you do - I hope to see you keep growing both personally as a knowledge base, and professionally; getting the respect you duly deserve.
2:21 the bottle. I’m done Also, your calculations are a bit much. If u look at most fashion houses, with 40 looks let’s say, they actually designing only 15-20 looks because there will be a replications of one garment multiple times throughout the collection in various fabrics or colours. Also popular is to take garments from previous seasons (because housecode or bestseller) and rework, define or just copy them in another seasonal option. So the range is smaller. And on shirtlines like CdG shirt, it’s basics of Shirts, embellished… I’m not saying here it’s not work that is needed to be done, fabric research alone is intense and time consuming, but it’s just the reality
i like fashion but i never was invested in newer shows. i judge the work of a designer by looking at his clothing in store or seeing them on people on instagram or in the city. Its too easy in my opinion to make clothing look good on a runway where there are stylists and other people to make it look as good as possible.
Fashion wise -Two years after runway presentation, are what people wearing on the street inspired by the show? If yes then the show was a success. Art wise, were creative decisions evident? If yes, then the show was a success.
Maxims-de-Paris was once a great restaurant. Do restaurants have a lifespan? Probably. Should such a restaurant be in business today? Sure, why not. Do I want to eat there today? No, thank you. I remember when Armani was just amazing, the late 80s, early 90s. When I walk by one today I am happy to see it, but I don’t go inside.
Beauty is still in the eyes of the beholder and I think there's something for everyone and that's why fashion seems to be all over the place because it seems there are way more designers probably than consumers of the more crazy stuff. It's interesting to watch but hard to comprehend where I might need most of it. There used to be more occasions for getting dressed up years ago but we're living in the remote work era and comfy rules. The game has changed and it's kinda sad... For fashion at least
I pretty sure LVMH group was like “Oh another black man with a lot of Hollywood friends to replace Virgil? Say less”. No one’s wearing ice creams anymore. This isn’t 2014.
is a designer only as good as their last collection? id say it depends on their history with the brand usually when i see designers join a new house i dont hold them being safe against them, but if they are tenured designer at an established house YES. with all of their resources they absolutely should be putting out their best work. so i think that question is very subjective
Hi! I absolutely love your videos and you make me feel like the profession i’m in is something to be proud of. In week 28, Fashion week Berlin, i will showcase my designs together with other incredible deigners at JW Marriott Hotel 15th of July and it would mean the world if you came and had a look!
The designer is only as good as the sum-total of all of their work. People experiment and sometimes those fail. People go through low troughs in their creativity, often before making their next leap forward - so maybe not penalize them in the comment section? I realize that this is a business so there's a certain amount of Hollywood 'you're only as good as your last box-office success'. But there's more going on than the bottom line. Ideas can be a dime a dozen. Basing an entire designers career on a single idea they had in their 20's is limiting. People grow, they iterate, they improvise - where you start shouldn't be where you end your journey. Show me growth. Show me experimentation. Show me what feels new and exciting to that designer in that particular place and time. The quality of the final product created by a designer is everything. Why pay exorbitante prices for things with sloppily surged seams and no pressing between steps. I worship good tailoring - no exaggeration. If you sew really, really good work I will follow you through the proverbial dessert... If a designer is sloppy, then why not just by a tee from Walmart and have done with it? Sloppy is boring and there's too much of it in this late stage of capitalism we are living through. And, by-the-by, you ask some seriously good questions... well done. - Cathy (&, accidently, Steve), Ottawa/Bytown/Pimisi
The quality and depth of your content is insane. I am immensely thankful for it. You make me feel less lonely in the fashion lover world.
I love fashion, but designers (and makers) being forced to create so much can honestly make it so overwhelming even as an appreciator. I feel it would be super cool to see what other ways fashion could be shown, so it can best fit a collection, not necessarily just a traditional runway. Then perhaps it can mix with more traditional art as well.
Loved the video thanks.
You made such great points in this.
I judge runway shows the same way I judge performance art. Concept, relationship to and between the performers and audience, materials, the spaced or set, reaction it causes, beauty, mood, and timing.
I second this, also what a beautiful way to describe it :>
The models never smile. They all look sad and mad.
I think that the subjectivity flows both ways. The conversation around meeting art on its own terms is the same form of conversation as meeting a person on their own terms, and a piece of art, I'd argue, has a sort of personhood to it. For me this lens leads me to using terms like "that book was interesting but a really bad hang" or "that book was trying too hard" or "the vibes were good but i couldn't tell you what was going on, just left no impact."
I think statements like this are specific and helpful due to leaning into the subjectivity. We know how to work with someone who's just going through some stuff right now, and we can judge whether they're working their way through it or just digging themselves deeper into a rut that won't be healthy for them long-term, and i think seeing the art in this light makes it easier because it's more based on how humans process things, even if it does make it much much harder to hang any sort of objectivity in the conversation.
I like this idea of meeting artists on their own terms. Although, I do find the ability to debate the subjective/objective merits of art really hard - especially when I don’t know the rules of the world that designer/artist has created, it gets really hard to tell when an artistic decision was purposeful or just gauche.
@@slightlyrancidcheese it’s almost enough to reject objectivity, imo. There is a lot of people trying to figure out the same thing, and I think the trick is to just talk to people with different perspectives (or listen to their videos), rather than finding one unified “objective” perspective to hang your hat on. In art, objectivity is just subjectivity blinded to itself.
At the end of the day, dude, if you like it then that’s cool, if you don’t like it that’s also cool. The skill and joy of evaluation is to figure out where those feelings come from so that you can dig even deeper next time. It’s like wine tasting. The hope is that the practice of tasting all those notes means you enjoy wine even more than you initially did.
@@EmmisonMike tbh my background in the arts definitely tempers the urge to throw objectivity to the wind, and I do believe there is such thing as ‘objectively bad art’ beyond just art being made for the wrong reasons (ie consumerist bs). It’s why I try and separate my personal opinion from my critique, because I do think there are structures that we work within (and break) that maybe not define good art but certainly allow effective communication of ideas.
Unfortunately sometimes I might not like the ‘tools’ used and that that mean I might not personally like that piece or designer/artist and to a degree colours my opinions on their work but I definitely try not to let it stop me from acknowledging and appreciating good art. (Conversely I try to acknowledge that sometimes something is objectively bad, but I just like it) however, I definitely agree that being able to debate and take apart works that I might not even personally like (especially if the other people I’m discussing it with do enjoy it) definitely allows me to appreciate the artistry and appreciate the art that is to my own taste even more.
So many questions... When deciding whether it was a good collection or not I think it depends on what you're looking for (beautiful wearable garments, the color palette, the shapes, silhouette, lines of that designer, new developments in fabric, artistic pattern design, use of decoration etc) If you're looking for artistic genius (McQueen, early Marc Jacobs, Schiaparelli, Gianni Versace, Westwood etc) then I just sit back and enjoy the ride. It costs them so much emotionally, physically, artistically to create that I'm happy to enjoy their vision whether it's wearable or not. I can appreciate a show on so many levels
that covers it for me
What I most look for in a runway collection is how hard the designer has worked to uphold the identity of their brand vs how hard they’ve worked to try something new/reinvent. I watch a slew of runway shows expecting to be inspired by their core values individually I’d never hold a Rick show and a JIL show under the same microscope. If a brand can get away from items that sell really well and not just bring a new color-ways that always impresses me. Every label should have a creative universe it operates in so whatever label can bring new items into that universe and most seamlessly fit them in with the other established pieces - that’s what I deem as successful.
This video is one of the best 15 minutes you could spend to widen your perspective in fashion
First of all Bliss, love your Pants! I feel that what seems to be the divide is that there are two types of people, those who love Fashion and all the new things that it can evolve into and those who just want clothes to get dressed for their everyday life. For a lack of a better example not everyone is Daphne Guiness who loves Fashion and has an ample budget. And I agree Giorgio Armani was revolutionary for his times and also was Yves Saint Laurent, but as Karl Lagerfeld said many of us stay in the past at one point it takes a big effort to keep yourself current while letting go of who you were a decade ago. Cannot ignore since I am older that Social Media is a devouring machine wanting the next new thing at light speed and every hour on the hour, so we got to be cautious of how we consume information and visual stimulation. Thank you Bliss Foster for this great channel!
my philosophy on this is very simple: would i like the collection, had it been by a designer i dont know?
it doesn’t really determine objective quality, however i find it helpful to figure out whether i personally like it or just being apologist towards a designer i like.
as per objective quality, i find myself looking for a concept, innovation, styling, overall aesthetic and continuity throughout the collection including the setting of the runway show. the aesthetic of the show having a clear identity is important aswell, since sometimes it just really looks like she doesn’t know where she’s going.
having studied desing, a huge factor for me is the quality of patterns and sewing. it can be quite a simple garment, but i’ll find myself absolutely drooling over it whenever the craftsmanship is so good you can clearly see it through the screen.
Before I've watched the video, how I art should be evaluated is in two ways, the first is how well the designer shows their vision, of looking at the show you can tell right away what they are doing that is good, looking at the show notes really helps to understand this metric. The second evaluation is just if you like it, there is a lot of art that that is just cool to you because of what you like.
that title is a hell of a magnet to my eyes, strapped in and ready to listen.
To me ( a passionate follower of couture/ prêt à porter since I bought my first vogue magazine aged 13 in the 70’s 👵🏻) it’s not about just runway shows but it’s about ingenuity, cultural awareness and the perennial appeal and admiration of a designers work. The runway show is only important in that it transmits the story the designer is telling for that season… and if the clothes are continuing to be culturally relevant by stimulating the audience’s imagination with QUALITY items then that show is a hit in my opinion. The quantity issue has to be condemned and this is not just to save the sanity of those poor designers but to save the world from the threat the of the highly polluting fashion industry with its completely over the top totally unethical consumerism practices… 🙂🙃 bravo Bliss!
Sincerely, now that I'm studying my degree in fashion design, I must say that your videos have been a great source of imformation, I hope that soon I will be able to join yout patreon, LOVE YOUR WORK BLISS!
I’m so glad it’s been helpful! And thanks so much for the support, means a lot to me 🙏🙏
I haven't thought about this as much as others, but I tend to look for a quality of genuine-ness. If it feels forced or corporate, I don't lend it as much benefit of the doubt
imo, the best way to judge a designer’s work is to understand what they considered to make and what they really have made. This is an approach that secures you from judging kidsuper as if it was the row, because you could see that the final goals of these two brands are different. It is always about how the brand position itself in the industry and how it corresponds with the picture of this position or complement it every time new collection/photo shoot/pop up/collaboration is being released.
If I were to pick one crucial factor in judging a fashion collection, I would emphasize "Creativity and Originality." This is because creativity and original ideas are at the core of fashion design. They set designers apart, inspire trends, and capture the imagination of the fashion world and consumers. A truly creative and original collection can make a lasting impact. I think I see that more in street fashion today or maybe that is just my taste
Our family watched project runway for YEARS Together. We love to check out the shows here on YT and delight in all the different styles. I think for US as a family our first question is always, Did we have fun? Did we dream of adventures or stories while watching. Did I say OOH you would look AMAZING in that! Or this show is more for selling this show is more for advertising, this show is to sell shoes and earrings OR this is JUST OUTRAGEOUS!!! We do get disappointed when you can tell little effort in technique and styling but that's all apart of the fun too. . .
But mostly did we have fun
For me what made Alexander McQueen runway shows so amazing was the emotions you felt by watching the story being told before your eyes. He wasn’t just showcasing a collection of clothes, his shows had social commentary, his shows questioned it’s audience and allowed a full experience for anyone watching. No other designer has come close to the intelligence that Alex put into his shows.
To me Alexander McQueen made art and not just clothes. For the runways that come out now it’s hard to get that emotional impact. They are all basically the same cuz I mean how many ways can someone show a series of clothes and it not get repetitive. Unfortunately this was also Alexander McQueens downfall. The expectations are so high. The weight of the designer to out do themselves every time is not realistic and unfair.
When I think of if designers are only as good as their last collection, I personally think of Moschino. As a new fashion student in 2019, Moschino felt like a gateway drug into fashion, I could look at it and immediately understand what was being spoken to me, it felt like something I could see myself designing. Now 4 years down the line I find myself not looking forward to their next collections simply because I know it will just tarnish the mental reputation I have of their brand I’ve built up over the years. Part of me knows they will never achieve the perfection I saw back when Jungle Red had just released but I always cling onto some hope that maybe, just maybe they have something else up their sleeve to pull me back.
The sad reality is that usually they don’t. Maybe the brands we love just lose their spark, or perhaps once we find perfection in designers work, none of their subsequent work can compare so we redirect our love to other brands in favour of distaste for what used to be our favourite. For me that’s Schiaparelli, sorry Moschino. If it’s any consolation though, Jungle Red is still my favourite collection.
I would appreciate A LOT a video about fashion for petite women. We are always horribly overlooked, maybe you have something interesting to say about it.
Currently designers work to please CEOs and maintain a healthy bottom line. Their work is no longer about the silhouette, the lines, the cut, the context and conceptual design, the presentation, the thought process and inspiration… everything we’re seeing now is a repetition of what was. Only few few independent designers still put a lot of serious thought and a bit of their soul into their labels. A lot of designers (incl. some independent ones) are all hype and clout and seek attention for mediocre product in a fancy packaging. Others can go on and on about investing too much in the presentation and too little in the design itself. Dior men looks like gucci men looks like LV men and nothing is special, one Bermuda after the other and you cant tell which is which without the label
I do think a lot more goes on behind the scenes, but I do agree that a lot of designers work these days is pleasing CEOs. I feel a lot of good art n fashion is lost due to most things having to be RTW or practical.
The issue is that starting and running a fashion label, especially in the high fashion realm, is prohibitively expensive for most people.
Even with the most minimal of operations (samples made in house, small production runs, no runway shows, friends as models, social media marketing), producing a small collection can easily cost €10'000 to €25'000. Double that if you're following the industry standard of producing two collections a year and that's easily €50'000 a year, which is a steep investment for most people.
That number will only go upwards, the more established you get. Customers will start demanding better quality and wider size ranges. Buyers start asking for larger product ranges and gender-specific items. Fashion press will start expecting to actually see the clothes beyond a digital screen.
Running a small, but established label like Marine Serre or Ludovic de Saint Sernin can easily cost €100'000+ a year, if you include larger collections, secondary product lines, runway shows, campaigns, influencers, digital media. A medium sized brand like Jacquemus can go up to €500'000+ a year with their destination shows and numerous collaborations. A large, global brand like Lemaire or Isabel Marant demands €1'000'000+ to finance its operations. All of that money has to come from somewhere, especially if the designer wants to stay fully independent.
Then you have the corporate houses which are a completely different beast altogether. Running Courrèges probably requires €10'000'000+. A house like Loewe or Céline? €100'000'000+. The "top of the food chain" houses like Gucci? €1'000'000'000+ and the chances are all of these numbers are a gross underestimations. That is a lot of money, even for a billionaire. How are they making it back?
What about the houses that deal with a Haute Couture operation like Dior? What about houses that are corporate, but standalone like Hermès and Chanel? What about similar houses that are significantly smaller like Alexandre Vauthier and Iris Van Herpen?
Fashion, like every business, needs a bottom line to support itself and this isn't a newfangled millennial concept either. Numerous of reputable couturiers that were popular in the early 20th century had to close in the 50s and 60s, because they refused to appeal to the changing markets and therefore couldn't support themselves anymore. It's unrealistic and somewhat ignorant to expect designers to ignore business to solely focus on creating "art". The "art" needs to funded by something, if not by itself. Otherwise, it's just an obscenely expensive hobby.
I feel like they took too much from the realm of software product design. Only improving on things that sell and dropping anything that doesn’t. Leaving very little room for experimentation and exploration of the artful side of fashion.
At the end of the day it is a business and if they can’t sell then they can’t hire designer or artists.
Who are the independent designers you are talking about then?
LGN, chopova lowena, thebe magugu, ahluwalia, Conner Ives There’s a lot.
I feel like the criteria that the success of a runway show is determined by whether it accomplishes the goals it set out to achieve is diminished when you take true camp into the equation; is it "good" art? It doesn't achieve its goal, however that is really what makes camp art so impactful.
Great point
If u try on a piece and have that aha moment that's kinda the same thing. It's almost this instant feeling of "oh yeah this is it"
Speaking personally as an artist who has supported themselves in fashion retail for 12 years or so, I think you pose some really solid questions. I think there is however a slight false dichotomy within the question of “should this piece of clothing be judged as art or as commodity in a part of business? I know that’s not exactly the question you asked but forgive my paraphrasing. I would argue that “design” is where those things meet; art can serve society and become a product, such as a Tshirt or other item of clothing, when it is made available for a price. My partner is a painter, and whilst I don’t think her income is large by anyone’s standards (she is just beginning to make money from painting at age 33), her paintings are most certainly a luxury and out of the price point of 99% of consumers. This is why I love fashion. Because business and art find a really beautiful middle in clothing. The ugly side is fast and goes to landfill; the ‘high art’ side only reaches the eyes of a select few within the industry, as you’ve mentioned in previous videos.
For me, i mostly just look at Rick collections, and the way i determine what's a good rick collection is: consistency, how well does each look compliment each other, one look alone may be weird, but if that look in contribution to the show is purposeful, it makes it good. Like, consistency as in how each look contributes to the show in whole.
Another thing i look for is material, i love the way rick slowly gets more in detail as to what kind of fabric he uses, what certifications do the fabrics have and what processes are involved in the clothing making process.
And last is just wearability, can i see myself wearing any of the items, if i have the money for it.
That's why i thought Strobe was rly good, edfu was ok, luxor was pretty bad and the most recent, Lido was rly rly good.
But this is just my perspective on rick, i'm not well researched enough in other designers' works.
I would love a video on different work approaches of designers and comparing their approaches.
I find my own process follows this rough outline (get ready for a long brain dump):
Purpose/intention - what is it? Can you actually identify what the designer was trying to do? (If you can’t even identify the purpose of the collection, I’d argue that would be a massive failure upfront). Were they trying to produce art? Was it a critique? Was it an ode to a previous designer/collection? Was it an attempt to keep stakeholders happy?
Was the goal a good one? - Was the intention uninteresting or a rehash of something already done? Was the idea really basic? Were they reaching way too far? Was it just a cash grab/ attempt to appease financial stakeholders? Was it in poor taste? Was it actually a really nuanced idea? Was it a great conversation starter?
Effective communication of idea - once you know the intention, did the designer actually do a good job of it? Did they reach for the stars and fall short? Was there an insufficient commitment to the bit for it to actually do a good job of communicating the designer’s intention? Was it intentional or did they stumble into it? Were there outside factors that may have influenced the collection? This is often the most subjective part of the process and I’d say the best point for discussing the merits of the collection.
Use of techniques/ tradition - I’m all for breaking tradition but I think there is something to be said for a respect and understanding of the ‘rules’ and techniques of fashion and sufficient skill so that you know the ‘rules’ you are breaking. even deconstructive ideas are just that - a deconstruction of tradition. This is definitely included to a degree in the effectiveness part, but I like to separate it as this tends to be slightly more of an objective critique and effective communication is definitively highly subjective.
Do I like it? - just as you can dislike good art you can like bad art, but try to identify why you like a collection/ piece beyond the scope of trying to identify what makes a collection ‘good’.
Debate! People have different opinions, go out and search for others. Let your own opinions shift with new ideas and time
This isn’t a firm process, and it definitely comes from my background as an artist but everyone does things differently. I find it very hard to broach the tension between subjective and objective taste but I enjoy the thought process involved in taking apart a collection. I’m aware that this doesn’t even come close to touching on all the aspects involved in how collections are produced ( like needing to stay afloat in an ever-more competitive industry, the need to include ‘bits’ to keep attention, trying to fight against investors/financial stakeholders, etc ) and there are so many interesting things to discuss.
Man, so much good stuff in here. I've been into fashion for a long time but I've only been interested in watching runway shows for the past year or so, and for me the process is very much asking myself if I liked it first, then building context (so be subjective and then looking for objectivity.) I think because there now exists such quantities, if your curation doesn't start with what genuinely appeals to you, it can quickly feel either like a waste of time or very shallow, like when you interact with anything you have no true interest in because it's popularity. The mainstream conversation can be important because it furthers context, but at some point people have to realize that even if you can access everything, it's not all for you.
I think when we're deciding if something is good or bad in fashion in general, we're trying to guess if it'll reach a level of recognition that means it'll endure, and and there are so many ways that that can come about. It could be through popularity, consistency (even if it's consistently terrible,) innovation, or how wearable it is, but things like novelty, aesthetics, or even the following/community, can be equally important, which kind of does make that case for quantity- the more stuff you release, the more likely you are to hit on something. I don't know that a designer's specific goal matters so much as the effects of those goals, i.e. where it pushes them and how it appeals to their audience, if only because I don't know that there are enough people judging them by that metric to make it seem so.
Personally though, I'm someone to whom the end result does make or break whether or not I think something is good. It doesn't have to be super wearable, but if it looks good on my little screen and the end result is cheap materials and sus construction, that's the kind of lack of intention that's going to make me disappointed (which I think is why I'll never be that invested in runways.)
i think the story of the creation of the collection is also incredibly important. what were the inspirations, what techniques were used, what did you experiment with?
I don’t think it’s possible to develop a rubric to judge runway shows, but it may be possible to apply the same principle that is often used in creative athletic performance. Unless it’s something absolutely brand-new, like a new fabric, most concepts have been used before so there is a standard to benchmark against it. For a show to be good it has to meet that pre-existing benchmark but then just slightly go beyond that level of perfection already in place. It’s hard because it involves risk, the designer can fail here. It’s why we think it gets dull if it doesn’t change up. The reason we noticed in the first place was that creative risk. It’s about retaining what works but bringing in something risky. I think that’s what people mean when they say they like that the brand has kept up, but still stay true to its roots
Everyone you are missing out if you don’t join the Patreon! This channel is truly unique, highly education due to its meticulous research and penetrating thought provoking culturally significant content! BRAVO BLISS 🙌🏼👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🤩
Ohh Bliss….you make my day a bit of in a bliss….another witty and entertaining feature here!..thankenness
Junya show was fire. Def in a good Junya era right now
i work for Stephan schneider in the atelier and that was an EXACT reanactment of how it is to be the lead designer for a namesake brand
Your hair looks incredible this video!
Personally, I believe that a good fashion show is one that strikes a balance between "fashion" and "show". There must be a coherence between both elements, a narrative. But I also believe that if there is a "measure" to evaluate it, it should always be the "fashion" element.
Yesssss! The internet is very reactionary, but that’s because we can be rude behind our electronic devices. It’s almost like asking…”What is ART!” This question and more will be asked; probably until the end of time. One of the reasons I’m even watching this today is because you quietly crept into my feed, and totally agreed with my insane love for Margiela and Rick Owens. Art makes you feel! I know this isn’t a mind blowing check, but I appreciate you.
Carry On Dude!
Bliss, wonderful video. I think the answer to your question about what makes a good show is “Believability”
Believability allows the space for each designer to be judged in their own lane, but hold them accountable for the work they are putting out. If the fantasy they sell seamlessly blends with the presentation they give then I believe in them and trust what I’m seeing is good. But if silhouettes are off, or fabrics are strange we start to doubt what we are seeing and we cannot suspend our disbelief.
Furthermore, a brand can have a poorly reviewed show in the present but upon retrospection that same show may be celebrated. Think early Alexander McQueen. It is a shame that we have to focus on sales and profits because if you take away commercialization and focus on new creative ways to deliver fashion, even poor performing pieces can still inspire the brand to something better that happened elsewhere in the collection or future collections because of it.
I love this immediately. Believability seems like a great metric.
I have a question tho. What do we do about inherant bias? For example: I love fashion but I really dislike camp. With your system, I feel that I’d still roll my eyes and say “this is super tacky, I don’t believe it”.
Maybe I just need to gauge believability but do so in good faith? I’d love to hear your thoughts 💫💫
I love this idea of believability (or to be fancy verisimilitude). The idea that something doesn’t necessarily have to make sense in the ‘real world’ but only within the world the designer has created/ is creating is fascinating, and I think a great way to attempt to remove your own subjective opinion from how you look at a collection/designer. It also feels like a great way for a designer to create unique collections that all ‘add up’ to an overall vision or world, the creation of a new set of rules and traditions to follow and break as they see fit.
I think the ability to judge the intention & successful commitment to and execution of said intention comes into play when trying to separate my own subjective taste from my critique on the ‘objective’ quality of art.
rubric ideas :
how beautiful is it ?
does it move you ?
harmony between the clothes, set design and music
is there a story line
how does it compare to Galliano for Christian Dior spring 2007 and Alexander Mcqueens hologram of Kate moss.
how much fantasy is there
does that runway show feel like theatre and has transported you in any way
thank you for your videos !
Awesome 🦾
The next step is to always interrogate your own questions. Always look for ways to improve your own rubric.
And the BEST part of that is when you meet someone else who does the same! You can talk about your different strategies for looking at art. Then you both benefit by hearing what the other has learned. Thanks so much for the comment :)
Really enjoyed this one ! Really got me thinking
Yes the field is overly reactionary, and it undermines the value of truly great things that deserved attention, AND THATS WHY WE NEED YOU TO TELL US WHAT TO DO! you should praise them we are here to listen to you. We want your opinion. I understand wanting to be scientific and factor everything to find some truth in the situation but that is also overly reactionary. You know what it takes and you know what matters, and spelling it out for others who may or may not understand will just make you crazy. This is your time!!! You are the leader now!!! And if you would like a fashion committee or even a new patreon tier to talk fashion with others who care we’ll pay for that too.
I think clothes should be beautiful and wearable. Personally, I like the fabrics that feel good on the body, like cotton, linen, rayon, wool, and of course pure silk. I admire high quality in the sewing and the materials as I was trained in Couture sewing myself and appreciate the difference in how the garments look. Art pieces are fun, but I still feel they should be wearable. I am older, so I prefer classic, timeless styles.
I find the Avant-Garde couture fashion pieces to be less wearable art and more of a way for the designer to represent the concepts within the world they have created for the collection. Like if we inhabited that creative vision that is how we would ‘obviously’ dress lol, but with the recognition we don’t. It’s kinda almost transcendent in a way. I completely agree that high-quality fashion should include high-quality pieces of good materials that fit well to the body. The thing I find shocking even Morceau than some of the crazy Gordy outfits in some couture shows, is when you find out some of those pieces are actually for sale and there are some people out there that would actually wear it who aren’t actually performance themselves in anyway LOL
my opinion is often based on wether i find the show very commercial/market-oriented or if there is a sense of discovery that is just palpable, it can be a simple garment but a fashion ethusiast will always thrive when they get to feel inspired, and i guess as an alternative person i also get to experience fashion on many levels bc i get to appreciate a specific lifestyle and darker concepts, it’s easier to know if it fits into the alt spectrum too
Sometimes it feels a lot more market oriented these days. The gimmick designs just to make headlines.
Such a huge difference from labels who stick to their essence like yohji, Rick, Rei.
@@CarlosLeFleur exactly, i just learned to ignore the mainstream because you just lose too much valuable time you could spend on discovering new designers
I haven’t quite yet written off mainstream shows and designers. The inspiration, art and concepts are more subtle and subdued but they are still there. Hidden within the show designed for corporate buyers. I don’t think designers lose that spark of creativity under the weight of the mainstream fashion machine, But it is a very different challenge trying to bring innovation and deeper concepts to a show where the majority of people in the audience to pay your rent just want to see a very large logo of your brand on the front of a Generic easily sellable item of clothing LOL
designers in the mainstream may produce that much, but the smaller the designer, the less time they have to design. most of the designers in alternative fashion either do their own production or have very small studios/manufacturers, so i am friends with plenty of designers that put out slow fashion with one or two runway collections with a dozen or so looks every year, plus a single dress or small batch accessory release every other month or so.
the massive quantities of designs just add to the fast fashion problems, imo. we don't need thousands of barely distinguished variants that will be produced and dumped after a season is over, we need designers to consider clothes as an investment in a long-term portfolio and not just a season-by-season gimmick. if that makes it harder to find a perfect dream item, then people just need to put in that additional work or alter things to make themselves happier. slow fashion is the only way forward.
What an interesting question: How to judge the merit of a fashion show?
For me a question like this finds it answers in the criteria it has chosen to be relevant. What is it that will be judged? And how can quality in fashion be defined?
For that I see one option to go with classics like Georg Simmels: Philosophy of Fashion (1905) and judge fashion shows on for instance how unique a fashion show is in contrast to others - is it memorable, new, exceptional? Or how well it does in its social function like inclusion and exclusion. But that would be a scientific approach and has very little to do with the views of fashion in the field itself.
I see another option to go purely with ones own understanding of fashion. I define it as an art form that wants to express a specific idea, thought or feeling. While fashion shows can be differentiated from for instance work wear by what ideas it wants to express (abstract idea vs. practicability), it still can be judged by how well the idea is expressed or realized. For me fashion is about how well the idea behind the clothes are visible and the intended effect is achieved.
And with that it is something completely different in comparison of how much I liked it or how important or impactful it was for the industry.
I would judge the *quality* of a fashion show by how well the intended expression was achieved. It feels to me like it is more important that the creation is exceptional than to create something exceptional. Instead of judging what impact the fashion show has on the industry (a later and ongoing judgement of the field with other factors like marketing and socio-historical context) I would look at the ability to make fashion.
With this idea an old show would only be relevant for the judgement of a new one if it would be relevant in this show - is an old show referenced? And it could be the way how to praise past achievements: by how well an idea was expressed in that moment. And a designer wouldn't be judged by only the one good idea they had, but by the very idea we see manifested before us right now. Praise the sparks of creation, not the ashes of old.
If it is the same thing as the last 10 shows than it can still be a high quality show and be well made. It just wouldn't stimulate new ideas or creativity. If that is relevant, than the definition of fashion would be needed to be different. Then fashion would not only express ideas but help to create new ones. Or the definition would entail to be financially successful, socially inclusive, environmentally friendly, ... Maybe the difficulty with defining a good show comes from looking at different aspects of fashion (industry). And the most important question to me seems to be: what is fashion in a fashion show?
All of this fits quite well with your criteria regarding the goals of a designer. I agree with the point of whether the goal was accomplished. But I disagree regarding how hard the goal was, because I don't thing it is needed. And yes, in a culture that rewards performance and thinks that bigger challenges need better performances and thereby more praise, it is relevant how 'hard' a goal was. But that is a cultural thing and not a quality of fashion. Fashion doesn't need to be hard. Even the smallest detail can be important. An in the end a genius move is not hard, but obvious and easy in hindsight. I think I would just go with the first criteria of whether (meaning to me: how well) the goal was achieved.
Everything else - how big the impact on the industry was, how much it was adopted, how much it sold or how new and unthinkable it was - would be irrelevant.
If you share the understanding of fashion as an art that expresses an idea.
---
I loved your video - gave me interesting questions to think about =) And I see this kind of videos (asking open questions) as a very needed reflection and exchange of thoughts and perspectives.
And I found it very surprising how little time designers have for the creation of an outfit. I was not aware of that.
Thank you for an interesting video!
Such a good topic and one that requires even more dialogue. Regarding how good a designer is I find it fascinating to watch some of the thresholds of some of the larger companies with some holding on to their creative directors for a while through numerous uneventful collections while others quickly pivot after one or a few shows. I definitely have empathy for the designers that join a big house with all of the internal and external pressure while adapting to the codes and adding their own touch as quickly as possible. As an onlooker I hope to have the patience and perspective to look at the majority of work to made a judgement versus one collection. That being said the internet has made us such an impatient species with a 30 second attention span.
I like the idea of trying to view the collection through multiple lenses. I need to practice this.
‘You’re lucky if you like 20%’ - great reality check
Knowing that you don’t watch all shows, how do you determine which new ones to check out?
Also, besides show notes, what other sources do you use to confirm the designer’s goals?
I once put a Kanye vision 20/20 hoodie back on the rack knowing I was passing up an almost perfect hoodie. Even my friend could see the defeat in my face
Shows are always all about the art. That being said, wearable, technically superior clothing is the standard. Like they used to say in art school, just because it's a rotten egg doesn't mean it's not an egg. It should be art, and it should not be bad art.
The designer is as good as the totality of the work. 15 years of great work and 5 years of mediocre work is a B-level.
I had to think of Caroll Christian Poell, when you started to talk about quantity over quality and filler looks. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, his intention was never really doing a collection and that's what I find absolutely amazing about him. Maybe we shouldn't settle for filler looks or the major part of a collection being mediocre. Why doing a collection than in the first place? Of course you are being forced to obey the parisian fashion calendar as a designer once you started participating in it. But maybe that's something we shouldn't want to achieve anymore. I would love for designers to actually putting the design part back into focus and I love when designers actually are capable of prioritizing that. Maybe it's time to think radically different about collections and presenting garments.
Carol is a great example of this. There’s actually an essay in the book “Fashion and Materialism” that discusses the weird economic place Carol finds himself in.
Great point, homie 💫💫
The concept of a collection (shown on the runway or otherwise) is generally a merchandising trick to encourage viewers to look at the brand offering as a whole picture rather than solely as singular products, regardless of how simple or complex they are.
Also lots of those "filler" looks are conceived to be the secure money makers of the season. If someone likes a simple top, they might buy a more complex item from the same collection.
Of course, not every designer likes to follow that method, but it should still be a option they can choose if they want to.
I really felt what you said after 7:30. Looking at Demna Gvasalia, I feel like the fashion crown holds him at the highest standards possible each season and he's expected to "innovate" in every single collection - by the same people that simp over the tackiest and most boring Prada, Chanel or Valentino products right after posting their hate for Balenciaga.
This video is outstanding
I‘m going to have to „um actually“ you there Bliss. I’m thinking that Abloh was talking about a more comprehensive view of an oeuvre. If you look at a filmmaker like Christopher Nolan, his films hold each other up in that way, because after watching a few of his works, you can more easily get into the concepts Nolan is trying to explore (time, memory, truth, etc, etc.).
Or back to fashion, if we look at Rei Kawakubo, we see the development of an aesthetic.
Hey Bliss(and everyone else)!! I’m so curious - what do you make of a brand like AMIRI? Especially the shows from the last year or two. It seems like a strange position in which some very very market friendly clothes are being sent down a runway but in such a way that is also earning critical praise? What is your take!?
The basis of judging runway shows is to examine how that designer is changing the cultural zeitgeist through silhouettes, prints, color palettes, and as well how they are innovating on their own design process.
Rick isn’t looking at other designers, he is seeking to improve on his design aesthetic, however for example with minimalist houses, you shouldn’t expect maximalist collections, in fact for a house like Jil Sander it’s almost as if you’re choosing to design on a more challenging perspective, it’s all about details.
In my opinion, there’s no way to know how to judge runway shows objectively, but laziness is always apparent (Louis Vuitton’s latest show), and it deserves to be called out.
Considering the questions and runway shows. I have given this some thought and there are multiple different things to consider. The discussion about art and runways and what makes a good show are really complicated.
Quantity over quality depicts well the capitalistic market system that has driven art and design out of the window. You said ‘Even the established houses owned by LVMH etc..’ But I would rather see it as ‘especially the established houses’ as lvmh, kering and other conglomerates are more afraid of their bottom line than anything else. We need to remember that Arnauld is exceptionally good at making profit and that is his goal.
But the profit making does not make runway a bad one. As shown in Paris by Pharrell. The clothes might not be so artistic or well made but Pharrell made a show with capital S. He combined a lot of things for one of a kind night and made it at least entertaining. This might be the criteria for someone to say that it was a good show.
Then there is the other side - the art and the artistic shows. Some shows in this category are so called attention grabbers. Coperni and Hadid for an example or Mcqueen and his robots. There is the level of art, the beauty of the product but at the same time the shows use more and more of gimmicks to get the attention, especially in the modern internet society. This works as a double way street as some of the gimmicks might be seen as art and artistic but they tend to cater only towards the virality of the collection, which means more money in the end.
I tend to think that Haute Couture shows are art. They are artistic. They depict the elevation of clothing and give the same heightened sense of spirit that I get from art. Haute couture can also be seen as gimmicky and viral, but I like to think that the mean behind the whole show changes that. I do also find something artistic in the works of Yohji as his shows tend to have quite a minimalistic feel so that the art and clothes can stand as they should.
There is no one answer. I think that the art has diminished because of the need to gain more turnover and it is sad. But at the same time I think that there is still a lot of art to be made for runways.
im here once again to say that you look great
I think besides asking “what were the goals, did they achieve them, is this new/challenging” etc, there’s also the simple, basic and absolutely visceral question of: did you enjoy it? Did it excite you? Did it set your curiosity alight? Do - you - want - more? And yes, for people who think about fashion and design a lot, that’s going to be a different benchmark than for someone who engages quite loosely with fashion. But ultimately - do these clothes, in some way, for obvious or perverse reasons, make you want to put them on your back, and before that, did the runway show even make you want to watch to the end?
runway shows should be judged via multiple metrics, and some metrics should be weighed more than others imo--
here are some...
1. execution of looks and show intention(do they look completed? Not like a project runway way, but in a Anna Wintour, does this all go together? and does this message make it across?)
2. brand dna - is this collection and are the individual looks identifiably this brand?
3.commercial value - are these pieces able to actually be fabricated, can the be made with current suppliers or can we find new suppliers to make this? do we have best sellers? did we financially plan for a balance between designing enough carryover pieces mixed with new? can we afford producing this collection?
I am obsessed from lemaire lately and unfortunately I’d like to have 80% of the clothes. I refuse to accept there are fillers 😅
If it makes you want to know more it's good. If it makes you want to know less it's bad
So judgey, Bliss!😅 I love it!😂
But in reality you’ve hit the nail on the head. We can’t talk about things qualitatively if we don’t have some sort of measure. But we need to decide what we want to measure before we get into how we want to measure it.
Are we measuring creative influence? I’m thinking these things can only be measured in hindsight…So, in the case of Giorgio Armani, if his work solved a challenge we didn’t know we needed fixed, then cool. But if the problem still exists, then why must his work change?
Good that you can drop a video and forget it/ that’s when the magick happens. I think that it’s important to have a multi layered “signature” and as you mentioned JPG has accomplished this- Chanel too. It’s important to establish a signature style but update it like Karl always did Chanel. Or how S. Burton at McQueen has managed to expand on the house code’s beauty of the strong and empowered shoulder and waist. Love your work.
I have a question and potentially a video. Did you also grow up watching fashion file/VIDEO fashion and FT? I remember I was so excited to see vh1 embrace fashion- they obviously knew their audience- like these smart brands do.
Thanks for the great video, I especially like the 3 criterion that you gave at the end, I will keep them in mind also for other creations, in art, music, gastronomy, whatever...
One question though: what is the position of the spectator/customer/fan/follower in this? All three questions are relating to the runway (and in general the art expression). But insofar as art is also communication with the audience, there's always the question of reception. The emission of the artist might be on a whole new level, but if the reception is not ready to be at that same level, we have an issue, and the creation is misunderstood. Of course, that doesn't mean that objectively the work is bad, but subjectively (considering the mistaken audience), it is. And even when after decades of perspective we realise this work was good or bad, how are we less subjective than the first audience, what says that we are now more qualified to judge its merits?
Though I think my question only has a limited impact on the issue at hand, since again we're not talking anymore about the creation itself, but our position with respect to that creation.
I did actually see the Armani F/W 2023-24 women's collection and I loved it. But I'm very nostalgic in my taste, I get it's not fashion forward.
I am passionate about listening to music, I am passionate about watching movies, I am passionate about owning my clothing store and I am passionate about my degree in fine arts. All of the aforementioned mediums arches culminate into one soul: Art. To take the statement of a successful fashion show, the first branch that came into mind is music. Their runway show is an album. Something that takes months to curate, and then presented to the world. Each track a look, set in an order and presented front to back. Some songs are bangers, some might be solemn, some dreamy, and some you just completely skip every time it’s in cue. Was it a great album (runway)? Was the artist bringing something new that you loved, or perhaps a direction you despise? If the album wasn’t what you were hoping for, do you now completely write them off? Was there that one song that you will only ever listen to, and never the other tracks? Did that solitary album change your mind about all their other albums?
You could use this in the same respects to film with directors, writers and actors. Was their last film a success in your mind, and/or the larger audiences perspective.
Like all the arts, when something new is put out into the world with a beloved artist, once it is out, we immediately want more; something to continue on this journey. We are consumers, and for those who are not artists, will NEVER understand the time it takes. You just ran your marathon you’ve trained forever to run, and it’s like the public gives you a tiny paper cup, gives you and high five, swings you back in the other direction, gives you a swift kick in the ass and says ‘ok, run it again’.
Artist, of every single medium will agree on one thing, we want you to FEEL something. Whatever that feeling is, be is good or bad, contemplating or numb, we want you to feel. The one feeling that can be the hardest to ask from another is one thing: grace. Give grace to us artists, and will continue to make you feel.
P.S Apologies for typos, as I’ve just been at a 12 hour market to buy clothing for my store for holiday 23 and spring 24 :)
Armani is in the fortunate position of owning his own company...that is the reason he is still there.
Wow, I didn’t realize that! Sure enough, looks like he liscensed his name to L’Oréal and Luxottica. But for the mainline, Georgio owns Armani.
Thanks for sharing your insight with us homie 💫💫
Isn’t that the case with Prada too?
Once, you quoted a thinker friend of yours re: questioning the art showcased in a museum. Doesn't that apply here? I mean, as a curator, I cannot help but question the work, just as you, a critic, would. It's the default system of our machine
i'd definitely add the wearability of a collection to the equation. after all, it's clothes that a designer is making. the fact that we can wear clothes is what distinguishes fashion as an art form from the other arts
Once again Blissy you did yo shit 🎉 you put my subconscious feelings into words. 🙏
Oh wow! Good question. I feel like the fashion “show” is so separate from the actual design and eventual use of clothing that it’s somewhat laughable! It’s pure fantasy and frivolity which is what it should be, in my opinion . I judge the “show” for that, it’s entertainment factor! Take the most recent Jacquemus, so fun 🤩 do I think the clothing is wearable? As a 40 year old woman I am not going out in just my underwear, especially to a grocery store in Ohio. But I do purchase some of his dresses and blazers and enjoy them for their design. Because I think design, real craftsmanship and luxury fabrics can best be appreciated first hand. Not in a show.
hey bliss thank you for your thought-provoking questions. runways are an opportunity "for the elite" and most importantly the press to see a preview of the clothes... in my opinion, this is a saturated concept and should be really investing all that money time, and energy in more deep and radical changes in fashion.
It makes sense considering that most designer clothing is priced for the "elites". That said, in truth, most of the people who attend runway show are all regular people who work in the industry, working for magazines, retail stores or general press. Perhaps you might get a couple of celebrities here and there, depending on the size of the company. Most elites will generally get extremely private showing where they can see and touch the clothes up close without the noise of a runway.
i've watched all the recent armani shows because I love it, even if it is somewhat the same. I wish designers didn't have to do so many looks & shows.
I think something else super important when judging fashion and judging anything really is context. For example, I am a teacher grading a students exam paper. The student came to me saying they wanted to get 75% and I know that they are a strong student based on their exams in the past. However, after grading, they have gotten a 40%. And then this happens again in the next round of exams. Based on this you could say, oh no the student has really become a bad student, I know they're smart but they have now become lazy and sloppy. BUT what if we then find out that the student was going through a lot of mental and physical health issues? Problems managing at home led them to not be able to meet deadlines, overwhelming them and producing work that had no choice but to be bad in order to exist at all. That would change our perspectives a lot.
Unfortunately fashion is not nearly as easy to grade as an exam, because fashion is art and an exam is a standardised test, and also it's especially difficult because it's totally reasonable for designers to not want to share with the public what they're privately struggling with, but I still think it's important to try and consider the human behind the art and what they're going through before judging the art itself.
I look for what's new. I look for what's old. I look at color and proportion. I look at what the consultants say is in and what is not (applying blazer shoulder styles on everything else). I look at individuality (Walter Van Beirendonck, Dries Van Noten, Celine and Margeila). I look for what the street says is in fashion (the short shorts over a long sweater, blazer, shirt or what have you such as Prada/Raf). Take Hermes; your always going to see beige, tan and brown. That's just Hermes. Then i look for what's stale: Anthony Vaccarello, still trying to reinvent YSL. Some that just do them: CDG, Junya and Yohji. Along with the houses still trying to find their way: Gucci, Givenchy, McQueen and Dior Homme. There are plenty of designer shows i like, but i wouldn't wear. And there are some i don't bother to look at: Armani, Versace, Thom Brown. There are some i must see: Grace Wales Bonner, Martine Rose, Our Legacy and Undercover. There are some that just flounder and flop: Louis Vuitton.
Successful Fashion Shows can be categorized into two different kinds of success. Commercial and Artistic.
Commercially Successful would be merely measured by how well the collection sells, which can, but doesnt have to be influenced by Artistic Success.
Artistic success is harder to evaluate, because art is Subjective.
I define good art as something that evokes emotion, the stronger, the better. That means something doesnt have to be aesthetically pleasing or beautiful to be considered good art.
In conclusion the absolute worst thing would be if you didnt know how to feel about a collection.
This matches with the natural spread of word before the age of the internet. If something was not remarkable, people wouldnt know about it, because no one talked about it. Nowadays even the most boring, irrelevant collections might end up in our feed because everything is an advertisement, which in turn could be the reason we struggle to identify a successful collection.
I think past Bliss kind of already answers this question 2 years ago, with the video about Hedi Slimane
From someone who has a background of being heavily invested in other forms of art (music and film) I think we just need to be more understanding and give more room for designers. Musicians and Directors have so much time and support, and in comparison to fashion, such little demand. I think that because clothing is an everyday necessity, consumers of fashion disregard the effort designers want to put into their clothing but don’t have the ability to. So when you say that when houses have to put out collections with majority filler and that it’s “no one’s fault” I disagree. It’s the consumers fault. Capitalism pushes all art forms to be commodified, but fashion the most purely because of the demand. But there is room to dismantle this problem. 1. Let there be significantly less product. I like to think that in an ideal world, there should be as many looks in a show as there should be songs on an album’s tracklist. 2. Look closer at smaller designers. 3. Appreciate fashion at a slower rate. Anyone can agree that fashion is a fast moving industry. So you, Bliss, having the power, although miniscule, to slow it down to an extent. I know I am largely just rambling about my fashion industry critiques, but this is all to say, that as long as these problems are in place, we need to start giving room to fashion houses to make their clothes without being overly critical and/or quick to judge. Appreciate individual pieces. Take as much time possible to let collections sit and marinate with you. All other forms of art allow these things to happen. I think that the pace of fashion is derived from the consumers/enjoyers of fashion not taking it as seriously as an art form. This might not have been as profound or insightful as I thought, but I think it’s essential to consider this next time you are looking at a collection.
Ok so something I have when I listen to music is called the hair stand test. Does a song past the hair stand test? When I here a song do the hairs on my arms stand up? Do I feel a wave expand across my body. In other words am I having a viseral emotional reaction to the content in presented with? I think if u feel something like that when watching a runwayshow. If u laugh or cry or your are entertained in someway. Those immediate emotional responses can be good indicators of a shows value to you.
you know what...i'm going to go watch an armani show right now
Hi Bliss.
i think “good” and “bad” are impossible descriptors when experiencing and discussing any art. “bad” houses so many things: harmful, lacking technically, not in our personal taste.
making art and experiencing art as a viewer is so personal that i think speaking in absolutes isn’t helpful regardless, and i think the best thing we can do is move away from the good/bad dichotomy and towards a place that just acknowledges the pros/cons/neutrals, as everything in life has.
Ultimately it is demand that informs the schedule and frequency of fashion shows. I agree with your idea from another video about how designers should be able to skip shows/show off schedule to be able to deliver their best work, however, that requires us, the consumers, to buy less frequently and demand change. Unfortunately, a lot of people who shop from large luxury brands do not ‘need’ to consider their purchase: it comes down to capitalism and the values society has created because of it. So is the fashion cycle a political issue?
i don’t comment a lot but man that’s a nice shirt
Thanks! That was my wife’s honeymoon gift to me. I’m still kinda beside myself when I wear it 😌
Hey Bliss, what do you think of ERD?
It’s cool stuff! I interview Henri in my last Paris Fashion Week video (the 90 minute one), and we have an extended interview with him on the Patreon 💫💫
@@BlissFoster Thanks for the reply Bliss. Good to hear - I’ve enjoyed Henri’s work for a while now and have quite a few pieces. I really like his focus on material quality and hand printed / hand distressing that, in my opinion, goes well beyond most (if not all) current designers. He’s not using “off the shelf” textiles - most of his fleeces used in hoodies, etc. are super heavy felpa cotton, which, in most cases, I find superior to looped-back terry because of its density, hand-feel and comfort.
I’ll have to check out your interview w/ him - I’m surprised I haven’t seen it.
Anyway, love what you’re doing - you’re one of the few people I watch consistently on UA-cam and one of the even fewer who I truly respect your view and knowledge pertaining to fashion. Best of luck w/ everything that you do - I hope to see you keep growing both personally as a knowledge base, and professionally; getting the respect you duly deserve.
2:21 the bottle. I’m done
Also, your calculations are a bit much. If u look at most fashion houses, with 40 looks let’s say, they actually designing only 15-20 looks because there will be a replications of one garment multiple times throughout the collection in various fabrics or colours. Also popular is to take garments from previous seasons (because housecode or bestseller) and rework, define or just copy them in another seasonal option. So the range is smaller. And on shirtlines like CdG shirt, it’s basics of Shirts, embellished… I’m not saying here it’s not work that is needed to be done, fabric research alone is intense and time consuming, but it’s just the reality
Hey Bliss could you speak in the new brand Casablanca??
I interviewed the designer from Casablanca in my first Paris fashion week video 💫💫
i like fashion but i never was invested in newer shows. i judge the work of a designer by looking at his clothing in store or seeing them on people on instagram or in the city. Its too easy in my opinion to make clothing look good on a runway where there are stylists and other people to make it look as good as possible.
Fashion wise -Two years after runway presentation, are what people wearing on the street inspired by the show? If yes then the show was a success. Art wise, were creative decisions evident? If yes, then the show was a success.
💙 💙 💙
Maxims-de-Paris was once a great restaurant. Do restaurants have a lifespan? Probably. Should such a restaurant be in business today? Sure, why not. Do I want to eat there today? No, thank you. I remember when Armani was just amazing, the late 80s, early 90s. When I walk by one today I am happy to see it, but I don’t go inside.
Beauty is still in the eyes of the beholder and I think there's something for everyone and that's why fashion seems to be all over the place because it seems there are way more designers probably than consumers of the more crazy stuff. It's interesting to watch but hard to comprehend where I might need most of it. There used to be more occasions for getting dressed up years ago but we're living in the remote work era and comfy rules. The game has changed and it's kinda sad... For fashion at least
Would love to hear your take on Pharrell’s LV…
It was literally his closet. Every model was just wearing a Pharrell silhouette. 😏
I pretty sure LVMH group was like “Oh another black man with a lot of Hollywood friends to replace Virgil? Say less”.
No one’s wearing ice creams anymore. This isn’t 2014.
is a designer only as good as their last collection? id say it depends on their history with the brand usually when i see designers join a new house i dont hold them being safe against them, but if they are tenured designer at an established house YES. with all of their resources they absolutely should be putting out their best work. so i think that question is very subjective
❤❤
no LV analysis today (((((
We won’t be doing one. I’m not sure there’s much more I can add to the conversation about that one 💫💫
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🥰🥰🥰❤️❤️❤️
If a fashion show is so esoteric that its meaning has to be explained to the public at large, then chances are its message was pointless.
Hi! I absolutely love your videos and you make me feel like the profession i’m in is something to be proud of. In week 28, Fashion week Berlin, i will showcase my designs together with other incredible deigners at JW Marriott Hotel 15th of July and it would mean the world if you came and had a look!
The designer is only as good as the sum-total of all of their work. People experiment and sometimes those fail. People go through low troughs in their creativity, often before making their next leap forward - so maybe not penalize them in the comment section? I realize that this is a business so there's a certain amount of Hollywood 'you're only as good as your last box-office success'. But there's more going on than the bottom line.
Ideas can be a dime a dozen. Basing an entire designers career on a single idea they had in their 20's is limiting. People grow, they iterate, they improvise - where you start shouldn't be where you end your journey. Show me growth. Show me experimentation. Show me what feels new and exciting to that designer in that particular place and time.
The quality of the final product created by a designer is everything. Why pay exorbitante prices for things with sloppily surged seams and no pressing between steps. I worship good tailoring - no exaggeration. If you sew really, really good work I will follow you through the proverbial dessert... If a designer is sloppy, then why not just by a tee from Walmart and have done with it? Sloppy is boring and there's too much of it in this late stage of capitalism we are living through.
And, by-the-by, you ask some seriously good questions... well done.
- Cathy (&, accidently, Steve), Ottawa/Bytown/Pimisi