At LV, The Young Will Change The World

Nicolas Ghesquière pins his hope on youths

Louis Vuitton showed its womenswear outside the Louvre for the first time since 2017. The presentation this season took place at the Musee D’Orsay, situated roughly 800m diagonally opposite the Louvre, on the left bank of the Seine. As it turns out, the museum, a former railway station (Gare D’Orsay), is host to a fashion show for the first time. It is not known why the change in venue (the previous show was still at the Louvre, also a nascent fashion show venue with LV five years ago), but going from one museum to another may not be that much of a difference for Nicolas Ghesquière. The models (still) parade among the exhibits—sculptures, this time from the 1800s—under the watchful gaze of the musee’s famous 1900 clock on one side and Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux’s The Four Parts of the World Holding the Celestial Sphere from 1872 on another. The clothes, typical of Mr Ghesquière’s output for LV, are, however, much more multifarious.

This is the mix and match that he does so well. Perhaps, more the mix than the match. And what has been described, as far back as his Balenciaga days (who even remembers that now, given how different the brand looks today?), a reflection of how the young, unconcerned with perfect pairing, dress—a mediation that never quite left him. Only now, the youths are not togged in the same devil-may-care disregard to styling as those of some twenty odd years earlier. Now, it’s still lacking the match, but with a heap of the mis. In addition, there’s the cradling of gender-neutrality. And a love of exaggerated shapes. The massive jacket, for one (the doing of a certain Demna Gvasalia?). And, to join that hulk, those oversized polos and rugby shirts. Just as clothes no longer stick to either function or occasion, could the last look—a Ralph Lauren-ish polo beefed up by IOC-frowned substances over an airy date dress—be an undergrad recovering from a night of partying in her boyfriend’s dorm room and leaving in the morning with his sports shirt?

The boyfriend’s polo aside (a natural progression from the boyfriend’s jeans?), Mr Ghesquière is partial to a more masculine aesthetic. We are not referring to the mannish blazers, sized to fit those with way broader shoulders; we are referring to shirts and trousers, and the overcoats that would just as easily fit a beau’s wardrobe. This androgyny has been rather consistent in Mr Ghesquière’s collections for LV, and they could be a deliberate consideration. We have been told on more than one occasion at LV stores that guys are buying from the women’s section, even when, a staffer once informed us firmly, “Nicolas Ghesquière does not design for men. But guys can buy”. Could it be because LV Men is too gender neutral? The women’ clothes do not, however, bank on masculine appeal. There are clearly feminine tropes—some previously explored, such as this season’s flaccid panniers (as opposed to the last’s more rigid and bouncier ones) and those vague mini-crinis with tails. A school-going lass with caparison in her mind than scholarship?

The general cheerfulness of the collection and the collegiate leaning, shown in a beautiful Beaux-Arts former train station, say almost nothing about the ongoing conflict in Eastern Europe. Not that it has to. LVMH has already announced a €5 million donation to the International Committee of the Red Cross. Perhaps that is enough for LV to stay mum about how it feels. Or perhaps, the choice of venue speaks adequately. Its own history as a railway station is connected to World War II. A plaque, hung on the side of the building, commemorates its role in the war years. It was used to collect parcels that were sent to prisoners of war, and when the conflict ended, it served as a reception centre for freed prisoners during their return. That perhaps is the message: the present war will end.

Screen grab (top): Louis Vuitton/YouTube. Photos: gorunway.com

In Russia They’ll Stay

Uniqlo has no intention of halting their operation in the land with a leader that would not cease the war he started against Ukraine

Uniqlo in Harajuku. File photo: Jiro Shiratori for SOTD

Unlike many fashion brands, including H&M, Zara, and Levi’s, Uniqlo won’t budge. The company will keep their stores open in Russia, as the country’s president continues to order military attacks and airstrikes on Ukraine (including civilian targets). Nikkei reported that the Japanese retailer won’t be quitting Russia, even temporarily. There, they operate 49 stores (the first opened in 2010), believed to be the most among countries of the European continent (but small, compared to the 800 in China). With unrelenting international pressure to isolate Russia and the attendant restrictions to trade and finance, many fashion companies have opted to halt their operations, at least for the time being. The Japanese government’s reaction is largely in tandem with the US and Europe: sanctions have been imposed, including the freezing of assets of oligarchs and officials, and the halting of dealings with financial institutions, including Russia’s central bank.

Tadashi Yanai, CEO of Uniqlo’s parent company Fast Retailing, rather put his massive business on a different track, and sticking to his outlier reputation. Known to prefer staying politically neutral (even avoiding commenting on the company’s acquiring of cotton from China’s Xinjiang), he said, “clothing is a necessity of life. The people of Russia have the same right to live as we do.” And the people of Ukraine, many are now asking? Do they not have the right to live peacefully as we do? He did not say. Or, is Uniqlo succumbing to fashion’s preference for the default stance on not having a take-a-side view, even if politics is inherently divisive?

Mr Yanai, dubbed the “man who clothes Asia”, added that he is against the war in Ukraine and exhorted countries to oppose it (Fast Retailing announced that a donation of USD10 million and 200,000 items of clothing would be given to the UN refugee agency). Yet, his urging and staying put in Russia are disparate. Last year, Nikkei announced that Uniqlo “outstrips Zara as most valuable clothier at USD103 billion”. It is possible that Fast Retailing needs to remain in Russia to keep that position, even if it means embracing reputational risks. The man could clothe Europe next! It is not, however, clear if there would be repercussions to Mr Yanai’s questionable decision, even when #boycottuniqlo is beginning to trend on social media. But Russia must be told to get out of Ukraine, and one of the best ways is to hit it where it could be severe: the supply of clothing deemed a necessity.

Updated: 8 March 2022, 9am

Two Of A Kind: Caution Tapes

Kim Kardashian was all wrapped up, in Balenciaga tape no less

Which is a crime scene? Left: Kim Kardashian. Photo: Backgrid, Right: tree. Photo: Getty Images

Why would anyone want to look like a walking crime scene or a strutting barricaded site? Sure, we are seeing less of these yellow and black strips now, especially those used as barrier tapes, since massing and mingling are allowed and, if you are masked, social distancing is not required(!). Could this be why desperate-to-be-single-again Kim Kardashian wished to make a fashion statement—no matter how uncomfortable the binding would be—since the polyethylene tape is now not often used in public? Or did she, being pandemic smart, want to catch the attention of onlookers so that her outfit could be impediment to anyone going near her, and, therefore, had the added effect of enhancing the general safety of the front row?

She may have smiled, but the body covering looks to us uncomfortable, like a kind of modern mummification. Except that this mummified being kept her face and hair—and hands—unwrapped. And from the waist down, the wrapping was thoughtfully bifurcated! Even her shoes and handbag were mummified (is that the right word to use when the process is applied to things you can’t call dead, or alive?). According to eager media reports, it was not tear-proof plastic tape (believed to be Balenciaga packing tape) on bare skin. Ms Kardashian wore something underneath that Vogue described as “an athletic top and leggings”, not underwear. We assume they were Skims. It reportedly took thirty minutes to get Ms Kardashian bandaged—all by hand, according to Balenciaga. Would that actually be faster than sewing a bodysuit and letting her wear it herself?

All photographs of her in the shiny, stuck-on, second-skin getup showed no opening on the chest or the crotch, in the rear, or on the sides. How does she relieve herself when answering nature’s inevitable call? NYT’s Vanessa Freedman helpfully informed us on Twitter that a squeaky—or “sticky tape-y”—sound was heard when she walked. Where was Kanye West? She was also heard saying, “I’m scared it’s going to rip when I sit down. Should I just let it rip?” And this is emancipation, with International Women’s Day round the corner?