I like style.com, I really do, but sometimes their catwalk reviews just seem very off. Take for example, their rather cold reception of Wolfgang Joop's Wunderkind collection for fall 2009. The standout collection, inspired by Suprematism, an early 20th century Russian art movement, and German artist Gregor Törzs, is definitely one of my favourites of the season.
Joop pasted a colourful array of squares all over the body: arms, legs, torso, feet, you name it. I think the mix is very tastefully done; the colours are vibrant but still pared down enough to give off a relaxed casual feel. The tights, of course, are extremely covetable, and I would love to see variations of them in stores. For some strange reason, I don't think this is too much at all! I find it all quite inspiring, since I tend to get very excited when I see artistic elements translated into clothes. Nicole Phelps, on the other hand, doesn't seem to share the love, and claims that "the results are a strong argument that art is often better left on walls." Aww. Common. Don't be such a party pooper.
My second favourite part of the collection (well, actually they are pretty on-par) has to be the animal printed coats and dresses, which Phelps says "detracted from the garments." Are you kidding me? These prints are gorgeous! It's like wearing a lovely set of hazy vintage safari photographs! I especially like how Joop chose grey space in the prints over white space, which would look too contrasty and clichéd. I'm noticing a lot of garments inspired by animals these days that don't incorporate any fur element. Susie Bubble has already mentioned Yuchi's amazing fall collection and Christopher Kane's gorilla prints. I also very much enjoyed Manish Aurora's colorful circus of crazy critters (first alliteration hah!).
photos via style.com
2009-03-13
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
I get a stuffy vibe from those style.com writers anyway, I think that these looks are cool! I saw a video on the Masai Mara today, and the dresses reminded me of it the second I saw them. I think the idea is well executed, but to each their own I suppose.
that is quite gorgeous, i love the second last ddress and the random prints, lovely:)
i kind of hate style.com in general, they update soo slowly.
alicexinwonderland.blogspot.com
Oftentimes I find my own reactions at odds with the reviews on style.com (hence one of the reasons I've stopped reading most of them). The review of Phillip Lim's Spring 2009 was more critical than it needed to be.
I loved the graphic nature of the Wunderkind line, specifically the black and white striped pieces. I know they were inspired by Russian Suprematism, but I felt they also reminded me of the 1920 German film, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.
onthefringewithlinda.blogspot.com
God, I love how insightful you review collections.
Whoahh, I love this!
love those dresses
http://balmainbazaar.blogspot.com/
style.com and also the german vogue don't like wunderkind.... don't know why.
but the collection is really great!
I really love these. Admittedly, they're not easily translatable to everyday, but that shouldn't matter. I would definitely wear the coat on the top middle left, anyway.
i really love the print on the second set of photos...
!
- Karen
These are wondous!
love it! i agree with all that you had to say. Those style.com writers are all wrapped up with all the fashions and their high end fierce world that i bet they cant even decipher what grounded people see. Their point of views just dont meet eye to eye at all with everyday fashion enthusiasts i dont think.
I adore your blog, you have such an eye for detail. We should exchange links. Let me know.
with love,
rachel lynne
love this collection
http://www.paperfashion.wordpress.com/
wolfgang joop a few years back made some pro nazi or anti jewish comments so i wouldn't be surprised if there is still a bad aftertaste due to this, if i am remembering correctly..there are so many politics in fashion
I'd say *most* fashion writers are pretty stuffy. I don't know if that comes with years of writing up fashion shows, or what, but I am often left scratching my head at their comments.
In the Washington Post, a recent article said that Alexander McQueen comes off as a designer eager to make women look like fools. This was because of his recent collection, where all the looks were a rehashing of his old stuff and the models had lipstick that made them look like they had huge clown-like lips.
Personally, I don't think that McQueen wants women to look like fools, and I found it strange that they felt that a woman would wear something that she felt a fool in. Granted, it does happen, but I don't think anyone decides to feel uncomfortable in their clothes. That is, if you wear something and someone *else* thinks you're foolish, what does it matter? If someone decided to wear something from McQueen's AW09 collection, indeed they'd look funny, but as long as they don't feel like they look stupid, what's the difference?
And that, I think, is what style editors don't understand.
(Sorry for the essay! :P)
yeah that writer drives me nuts. When I did that post complaining about how every review seemed to mention the recession in some stupidly witty way I think they were all from reviews she'd written. I love giant prints of animals! I just bought a huge 80's cat face tshirt...
Rachel: Oh wow, thanks for informing me of that. I didn't know he made such remarks in the past.
Post a Comment