Wednesday, 15 September 2010

Marc Jacobs SS 2011: an angry rant

So I just watched the Marc Jacobs spring 2011 ready-to-wear live on his website and I'm pretty disappointed. Granted I missed the first quarter as "no live feed was available" but then I cried and promised to sacrifice my first born to my laptop and all was well. But as disappointed as I was, I'm really not that surprised (although I tried lying to myself that I was). As David is with Alexander McQueen, I am with Marc Jacobs. His Spring 2007 ready-to-wear collection opened me up to the world of fashion, I know that sounds cheesy but whatever. I'd always been somewhat interested in fashion, not in an intense way but just by keeping up with and loving fashion magazines, as well as being aware of who the designers were (even if not knowing their full collections). To be honest I found 'high fashion' somewhat intimidating and unrelatable (at least the runway shows). But this specific spring show was so wonderfully whimsical and soft with all its muted colours and layering that for the first time I felt something and appreciated a collections as a whole.

So why wasn't I completely surprised at my disappointment? I think it started with my last trip to the Marc Jacobs empire in Greenwich village, I swear there's a shop on every corner of every block along Bleecker. And I think what started my shall we say displeasure, was the way he loaned his name out, as if creativity wasn't a factor (which I'll forgive him him for from an economic viewpoint), some of the many examples include the Marc Jacob pencils, pens, keychains, condoms, umbrellas, beach towels and oh look a bookstore:

I get that these accessories are supposed to be 'fun' and 'quirky' but I just think it was taken to the point of overkill. Leading me to think less of the Marc Jacobs name. As David has said before about talking about weight and fashion, I won't dive into it deeply as it warrants its own post, but I just had such a problem with the vanity sizing at Marc by Marc Jacobs. The sizes have gone up so much that I actually noticed, which is something I don't usually pay attention to as I dress by how it looks not size. I swear the size 4 was a size 8. It was more annoying than a big problem but I just wanted to mention it.

Back to 2011, I tend to think that if a designers main inspiration for a collection comes from a past decade then they should only recreate either the styles or patterns of that time or have a lesser combination of the two. This is of course only my opinion, but I think that if both the cuts and patterns are taken and used in a new design it becomes more of a 'copy' then a 'reinterpretation'. Which is were I think this collection went wrong... also that purple sack of a skirt pulled up as a dress (lets pretend those puff things aren't there), also that ~bejeweled ~palm tree, too F@shAn for me. 

 What I did love from it was the pink and black flowers on top of sheer fabric and that weird bodysuit with the circle boob thing which reminds me of Mean Girls, which I think is a great way to use a hectic pattern in a new way. I also really want and love those sheer flower leggings.. or are they trousers? 

Anyways I just re-read this and realized it is really harsh but I was in a bad mood when I wrote it, and still agree with it.
p.s. what do you guys think?

1 comment:

Not.Gonna.Lie. said...

Totally agree. Always thought of Marc Jacobs as overrated. I know what he did to Louis Vuitton was equal to what Tom Ford did to Gucci but at the end of the day, both fashion houses are still associated with the monogram logo rather than the cool fashion that both houses sometimes (and I really mean sometimes.) have.