Vetements, formerly of Margiela

[Faust]

New one that just came out on Fashion Law

Vetements and the Cult of the Fashion Victim

http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/vetements-and-the-cult-of-the-fashion-victim

[Law]

classic case of too much too son (see: Gareth Pugh).

Would you mind expanding a little on that please, curious on your thoughts.

[aussy]

I'd be less annoyed by Vetements if their rise hadn't further exaggerated the cost of old Raf

Revisiting BOF's spotlight piece on their first collection shows how much Vetements has changed over such a short period of time. The brand used to be more subtle in its attempts to re-contextualize clothing but now it just reeks of lazy irony or self indulgent ideas of invention. The founding concepts are still there but they've been simplified and sometimes even contradicted rather than developed. An 'anti fashion' sweatshirt that appears backwards when worn because why? fashion! Maybe I'm just too focused on the growing share of streetwear pieces in Vetements collections.

The 'collective' method of designing could have something to do with the shift towards incohesive collections and a typically goofy focus on image and fashiony proportions above clothes. Or maybe the designers have been too influenced by the hype and resulting market demand they've garnered.

Hey, I'm sure buyers are at least happy they can pick up a graphic Vetements hoodie and guarantee it sells out at full retail.

[newp]

I guess it's time to sell my MMM post envelope t-shirt, haha.

[Law]

A different kind of criticism. Valid point? Or unnecessarily inflammatory/baiting?

Whites-Only Policy at Vetements and Balenciaga:

http://www.businessoffashion.com/community/voices/discussions/why-isnt-the-fashion-industry-more-diverse/op-ed-whites-only-policy-at-vetements-and-balenciaga

[PurpleJesuss]

In reference to the article you linked Law, i deem it unnecessarily provocative.

Vetements’ Americana-themed collection of reworked street wear, leather city coats and knee high boots worn exclusively by wan, Eastern-bloc looking models does not reflect the racial diversity seen on New York City streets

.

Is the runway actually supposed to depict the final consumer? I'm confused by this statement, to say the least. A brand should be able to convey the image they want on the runway without giving into a "culturally diverse" cast because it bodes well in terms of "PCness".

[Faust]

Alright, no offense.
Speaking of "lost in the hype" – do you think we'd perceive and judge Vêtements and Balenciaga differently if it wasn't for the hype? Do you think Gvasalia would design differently? Is he trying to appeal to the hipster consumer crowd?

All you have to do is compare the first collection to the last. Look at all that logoed shit.

[voltbird]

A brand should be able to convey the image they want on the runway without giving into a "culturally diverse" cast because it bodes well in terms of "PCness".

In what way does diverse casting impede conveyance of a brand's image? Is there an answer to this question that isn't summarily vile?

This is a systemic problem in the industry that deserves intense and continued scrutiny.

[yubbermax]

In what way does diverse casting impede conveyance of a brand's image? Is there an answer to this question that isn't summarily vile?

This is a systemic problem in the industry that deserves intense and continued scrutiny.

Which country should they base their diversity on? The country the company is based in? Where they're showing? Where they sell most? Is it wrong for a Japanese company to use entirely Japanese models?

[voltbird]

This convoluted set of hypotheticals is irrelevant to the reality of the situation. Runways are overwhelmingly and deliberately white. What I asked PurpleJesuss, because his comment naturally provokes the question, and what I am now asking you, is how an imperative to diverse casting somehow damages a brand's image. Is there an answer to that question that isn't completely fucked up?

[yubbermax]

This convoluted set of hypotheticals is irrelevant to the reality of the situation. Runways are overwhelmingly and deliberately white. What I asked Law, because his comment naturally provokes the question, and what I am now asking you, is how an imperative to diverse casting somehow damages a brand's image. Is there an answer to that question that isn't completely fucked up?

I don't think it is harmful to a brands image I just disagree with the notion that brands should have to fill a racial diversity quota. They have every right to choose white people for their shows and you have every right to disagree and not buy their products.

[voltbird]

I don't think it is harmful to a brands image I just disagree with the notion that brands should have to fill a racial diversity quota. They have every right to choose white people for their shows and you have every right to disagree and not buy their products.

What I'm trying to get at here are the obvious implications of neglecting to cast models of color (at least beyond tokenism). What do brands think diversity is going to do to their image? Why are they actively resisting a moral responsibility toward equal representation?

[PurpleJesuss]

ok voltbird i feel like you are just blowing things out of proportion so i will just say this:

Yes, i agree that the cast of runway models is not culturally diverse nowadays but i never mentioned that such a cast would be HARMFUL to the brand. I mentioned that it would not align with the IMAGE the brand wants to convey. There is a big difference.

Let's just take an example to illustrate this. Gosha Rubchinskiy's "art project" revolves around the depiction of Russian youth. As such, the cast of models he uses is predominantly white. No wonder, there's not much cultural diversity in the milieu he draws his inspiration from. It would make no sense for him to cast a very "multicultural group" for one of his runway shows because it just wouldn't represent Russian youth at all. He's not casting models of all skin tones because he would deem it harmful to his image, but because it would just not make any fucking sense.

You mention "Why are they actively resisting a moral responsibility toward equal representation?" and to be perfectly honest, i really don't think that's what crosses his mind when he or whomever picks his cast.

I don't think this whole "We need cultural diversity on the runway" way of thinking about fashion has much ground because as yubbermax mentioned, creative directors should be able to do whatever they want without feeling pressured to cast a "multicultural" group. Don't you think an artist should have complete freedom in the way he/she portrays his/her work?

[voltbird]

Don't you think an artist should have complete freedom in the way he/she portrays his/her work?

Sure, the same way I have the complete freedom to insist that the industry and those working within it deserve every ounce of criticism in this vein, without said criticism being labeled "unnecessarily provocative," or "blown out of proportion."

You can't have your cake and eat it too. They are inviting this response, and finally, the response is loud.

Lastly... maybe it's time to think a little harder about what whites-only casting, even under the excuse of serving "accuracy," perpetuates. Whiteness under the pretense of sensibility! Yikes, is that really a concept we want to hold paramount?

[newp]

In order to present color diversity with new collection, designer should pay any attention to this diversity first. When designer doesn't feel any difference between, let's say, black and white models he has no way to have a thought "huh, I have a lot of white models, I have to add some black models too". There are no white and black models to a designer, only models without any meaning behind their race or color.