On the heels of yet another fashion month, my lack of prestige affords me a privilege that my idols at 24/7 publications don’t often get: a little time to think.
As someone whose documented archive would reveal her to be something of a hater of this industry, the one she admittedly has a love-hate relationship with, you’ll probably be surprised to learn that I actually loved this month. Across cities and brands, I saw clothes that really made me believe in the unique opportunity clothing affords us in examining the intersection between beauty and utility.
In the last year and a half, or however long ago the pandemic started, it’s been interesting to see the ways in which the industry has tried to justify its mandate: the pursuit of beauty and commerce. Sometimes it’s found in vague claims of sustainability or other social benefits, sometimes it’s in collaborations that are so clear in their desperation to be relevant, but are marketed as transgressive or, worse, significant.
I will say that I do think something significant happened this season. Throughout the month, the shows that stood out the most to me are united by a singular idea: the examination of femininity.
Here are the reasons why I think this:
Firstly, there’s Elena Velez, who, in her eponymous line, has been considering a version of femininity that isn’t concerned with trying to hide the seams. Instead, her pieces flaunt their rough edges and explore a WIP, industrial mentality—inspired by her upbringing in Milwaukee—through delicate fabrics. Her take on the post-apocalyptic, Rick Owens-esque aesthetic, which has become a staple in fashion since Kanye West’s Yeezy line, aligns with a shift in womenswear that is concerned with finding toughness in traditionally feminine fabrics, techniques and silhouettes.
Similarly
Row 1: Badian Kouyaté for Xuly.Bët, Nensi Dojaka for Nensi Dojaka (L to R)
Row 2: Cecile Bahnsen for Cecile Bahnsen
Jonathan Anderson at Loewe played with a futuristic, Greco-Roman aesthetic that succeeded in it’s exploration of women being weird and completely indifferent to how they’re perceived. In that is a particular kind of freedom, one rooted in joy and curiosity and confidence. The palpable desire to really experiment—a concept that goes largely untouched by the conglomerate brands—superceded the lack of aesthetic cohesion. Throughout the pandemic I have admired Anderson’s desire to treat his collections and presentations like he’s working in a test kitchen. Even the ugly things are charming, and evidence his dissection of beauty as we know it. In many ways we’re seeing the creative process happen in real time, something that rarely happens in an industry that subsists on 10 minute presentations and is almost entirely concerned with perfection. The clothes reflect the subversion of these norms, offering the people who wear them a chance to do the same.
Similarly
Row 1: Patric DiCaprio and Bryn Taubensee for Vaquera, Francesco Risso for Marni, Daniel Roseberry for Schiaparelli (L to R)
Row 2: Demna Gvasalia for Balenciaga, Thom Browne for Thom Browne (L to R)
I’m not kidding, my eyes teared up as I scrolled though Lucie and and Luke Meier’s collection for Jil Sander. This collection delivered on what I have loved about their work for many seasons—the kind of clothes that explore the grey area between binaries. Where there are usually or’s—feminine or masculine, classic or modern, minimalist or maximalist, casual or formal—they precisely put and's. Though they’re not the first or only designers investigating this grey area (I can argue that everyone is, or at least trying to) their commitment to these ideas season after season strengthen the arguments they’re making about how the modern woman wants to dress.
On a separate note, I would love to know why the person who wrote the Runway article spent half of it talking about them having a baby this year? It’s the kind of filler material in fashion journalism I can’t stand. This collection wasn’t about that.
Similarly
Row 1: Miuccia Prada for Miu Miu, Daniel Lee for Bottega Veneta (L to R)
Row 2: Rushemy Botter for Botter, Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson for The Row (L to R)
There was also an exploration of an almost saccharine understanding of femininity that didn’t collapse into cliches, and instead sneered at the dogmas of it. Collina Strada explored what are conventionally known as very feminine silhouettes and very feminine fabrics. Hillary Taymour used bright colors and kitschy patterns with hints of Y2K fashion and a carefree attitude to make comfortable-looking gowns and two-piece sets. And the joy of it was that these pieces weren’t precious or suffocating. I think what has traditionally been under the surface of beauty, particularly as it relates to women, is fragility and a crippling expectation of etherealness. Wearing clothes that should be worn carefully lest they wrinkle, or look better with heels, or won’t fit “right” after a meal is the mentality that has previously restricted feminine extravagance to rigid formalwear for a certain group of women. Designers challenging the line between formalwear and casual clothing are also finding power in aesthetics that once undermined women, exploring the stuffiness of sumptuous beauty barefoot and challenging the exclusivity of it by offering it to anyone who (can afford it) wants it.
This collection said Marie Antoinette, but make it fun and fixed-gear friendly.
Similarly
Row 1: Simone Rocha for Simone Rocha, Molly Goddard for Molly Goddard, Batsheva Hay for Batsheva (L to R)
Row 2: Maryam Nassir Zadeh for Maryam Nassir Zadeh, Nicolas Ghesquière for Louis Vuitton (L to R)
It’s interesting to see how different designers, with different approaches, reexamined the wheel. What distinguished this season’s interpretations of femininity compared to others in recent years was that designers seemed to consider this idea with less limitations. When we consider that it’s becoming increasingly common for brands to show mens and womenswear in a single collection, along with more nonbinary designs, gendered aesthetics are becoming less prescriptive and more conceptual. And it would appear that the industry as a whole is finally starting to become interested in women as they want to be, not as they’ve been expected to be.
Generally speaking, I think this fashion month saw brands looking inwards. Instead of being beholden to trends, and trying to emulate the most successful version of it, brands with successful collections picked and chose which ones actually made sense for them. Maybe the excitement of in-person shows inspired designers (it’s weird those are back already, an essay for another day) or perhaps a brief taste of carefree fun this past summer, (before things became Corona-freaky again) reminded them of what clothes in the world can do and be. Whatever the reason, designers were prioritizing their own conceptual and aesthetic codes, which made for exciting viewing. For the first time in a while I didn’t feel like I was seeing the same clothes over and over again, and it was really nice. The risks paid off.