Chanel knows how to put on a fashion show, they are known for spending big bucks when it comes to the catwalks. The fall winter collection involved pieces of an iceberg brought in from Sweden (I’m wondering how it got here) and lots of fake fur. It is certainly not one of my favourite Chanel collections.

I Love…

a red dress with a sable fur trim.

a Chanel suit turned into a little day dress.

a beautifully detailed and embellished winter white dress.

I Loathe…

looking like a yeti. One in fake fur, at that.

when fake fur looks fake.

fur pants. These are horrible.

fur thigh-highs. Is this for real?

All images from Style.com.

The ballgowns were out in full force at the 82nd Annual Academy Awards. It was pretty boring, with no one trying to be adventurous in any way. I guess the best part was the fact that Avatar only won three awards. I am looking forward to seeing The Hurt Locker. Here are a couple of my Loves and Loathes.

I Love…

Carey Mulligan in Prada and Fred Leighton. The short front hem makes this otherwise traditional dress very interesting. And her hair and earrings and general sweetness make her look fantastic. She was certainly the star of the evening.

Charlize Theron in Dior and Harry Winston. The roses on the bust look a but strange, but in a good way. Possibly the most adventurous ballgown of the evening.

Miley Cyrus in Jenny Packham and Lorraine Schwartz. Although I am not a fan of Miley Cyrus, I like the way she dressed very young, instead of trying to look like an adult. This is a great example of properly dressing one's age.

Sarah Jessica Parker in Chanel couture and Fred Leighton. I hate her pose and she doesn'

**UPDATE** I just saw this photo of the Chanel dress, and I have changed my mind about it. It is definitely a loser.

Do I Love or Loathe?

Sandra Bullock in Marchesa. She is wearing way to much makeup, and the dress fabric looks cheap, but it does look pretty good on her.

I Loathe…

Amanda Seyfried in Armani Privé and Lorraine Schwartz. Is she going straight to her wedding afterwards?

Demi Moore in Atelier Versace and Van Cleef & Arpels. I loved the bodice, but the floaty layers of the skirt are just so predictable.

Kate Winslet in Yves Saint Laurent and Tiffany. Why would anyone wear a dress that makes them look twenty years older?

Mariah Carey in Valentino couture, Chopard and Piaget watch. This is a bad bridesmaid dress at its worst!

All images from WWD.

I have always wondered why the greatest fashion designer of the twentieth century (yes, I said it, Karl Lagerfeld) is the greatest fashion designer of the twentieth century) has been unable to apply his genius to his own name. It is not that this collection is terrible, far from it, but it is certainly not as fantastic as what he does for Chanel or Fendi. I know this is supposed to be a bit more “street” than the other collections, so in no way is it competitive, but it feels quite far behind his other work.

I Love…

this incredible jacket. The front tails, the narrow sleeves, the high yoke line, and the straight bodice. It is bizarre but beautiful.

a white dress paired with shiny black leggings and headband.

the softness of this pleated dress with the shiny black leggings.

I Loathe…

the sharp, shiny inserts on this jacket. They look a bit "young designer."

the "sporty" seams on this jacket.

All images from Style.com.

Can Balenciaga go wrong? Yes, but no one will admit to it. Brands like Balenciaga, Lanvin, Prada, and Chanel are untouchable, no one says a mean thing about them. Well, I am going to say I don’t really like this collection, its got all the elements of typical Balenciaga: sharp lines, structured clothing, odd geometric shapes, but somehow this doesn’t seem that interesting anymore. Also, this particular collection had some pretty garish prints, although I said that about the florals from Spring Summer 2008, and then grew to love those. Maybe I need to re-review this collection in three months.

(Please note that any comments on Balenciaga’s collection exclude the shoes. All of Balenciaga’s shoes are TO DIE FOR.)

I Love…

Nicholas Ghesquière's ability to make the ugliest colours in the world work well together.

this very modern, structural coat.

when retro becomes modern.

the highlight of every Balenciaga collection: the shoes.

everything about this shoe! But I hate that it will probably never arrive in Vancouver!

I Loathe…

the strange shape of the padding, and the general awkwardness of this coat.

overdoing the tacky colours thing.

that I don't understand what is going on here, and I don't want to.

All images from Style.com.

Fashion designer and photographer Hedi Slimane

I was reading an interview with Hedi Slimane (who used to be the designer for Dior Homme and who pretty much made the skinny pant trendy for men) and he got me thinking about the current fashion industry and the number of colelctions produced annually.

Here’s a blurb from the Style.com interview:

Style.com: Between menswear and womenswear, resort, pre-fall, and ready-to-wear, some designers are designing eight or more collections a year. Is it possible for a designer to be creative under those circumstances?

Hedi Slimane: Designers end up needing a full-blast studio for this sort of thing, which is totally absurd. I also don’t understand what the hell people do with all those clothes. Less would be better, and shorter collections.

I have to agree with him, the fashion market is saturated, and there are so many of us that have way too many clothes, and still desire more. I recently read about a very interesting initiative called The Great American Apparel Diet, which is described on their website as “We are a group of women and two men who have decided to go on a diet of sorts. A fast really. We are completely eliminating “new apparel” from our diets for one year.” I read through this and started to think whether I could do something like that…

I don’t plan on it, simply because my blog would probably turn into some sort of depressing rant about my lack of new clothes, but I have toyed with the idea of limiting myself to a very strict fashion budget for one year, as an experiment, and an opportunity to save some money to buy a house in Lions Bay with an infinity pool. But that is something I can decide after I have done my (shopping) trip to London in March.

Dame Vivienne Westwood

And even if I don’t decide to give myself a “fashion budget,” I am definitely making an effort to to buy less, and focus on really good things. Despite a few things I may not quite like about Vivienne Westwood, one thing I respect her for is her campaign to encourage people to buy less clothing (which is quite brave, considering her business depends on people buying more clothes…) Just a few weeks ago she was quoted again, this time in The Times, telling people to buy less. “I’m saying to people as well, buy less clothes. Only buy things when you really need them and really like them. Wear them and wear them.”

I got thinking about my “dream shoe” or the “must have bag” or all the fashion items I covet, and then I asked myself, what is my perfect outfit? To have a perfect outfit, I would need a perfect scenario in which to wear it. And then I realised, it was all about the circumstances. My perfect outfit involves a pair of cut off jeans, a tank top, a big pair of sunglasses, and a comfy pair of cowboy boots. Preferably worn with a bikini underneath. Because when I think about myself being really happy, I imagine myself lying in a hammock, in my backyard, with the hot sun shining in my face, great classic rock on the radio, dogs and maybe kids running around, the husband cooking on the BBQ, and a ‘69 Ford Mustang parked in the garage. I am relaxed, it is warm, and I am not busy.

The coveted Chanel 2.55 bag, named after the date of its creation, February 1955.

Don’t worry, I am not suddenly going to stop coveting beautiful new clothes, and talking about the brands I love (and loathe) but it is good sometimes to reflect on the real picture. Will the Chanel handbag make our lives better? Or is it the circumstances we would be in, when we can afford that Chanel bag? I don’t think it is fashion brands or products that play with our emotions, rather the perception of what they will give us, or the circumstances surrounding them. So next time I think about when I am going to get my first Hermes bag, I am going to tell myself that I don’t need to run out and buy one to achieve perfect happiness. I should focus on the other things in my life that make me happy, and remain secure in the knowledge that eventually my Mom will get bored of hers and give it to me. Ok, just kidding (well Mom, actually I’m not kidding, I WANT THAT BAG) but seriously, I’m prioritising a happy life over a fantastic closet.

Alexander McQueen's legendary Plato's Atlantis Spring Summer 2010 show live streamed on Show Studio.

This very interesting post by the Sartorialist last week got me thinking about the future of fashion shows. He says that fashion shows are changing so much because nearly all of them are live streamed, and asks “Don’t you think it’s only a matter of time before these shows are open to the public? …I mean, let’s think about it, designers always say that one of their biggest expenses are fashion shows. It’s always one of the first things to get cut when times are hard. But, if they had the ability to sell tickets to these shows, it would actually become a profit maker instead of a necessary loss.”

The concept of paying for a fashion show in Europe is unheard of. Many people ask me how much it costs to get into a Chanel show, and I then have to explain that no one pays to get into a Chanel show, its free for the very limited list of people that are worthy of attending.

I don’t like the idea of paying for a fashion show, whether it is a designer fashion show in Paris, or a local fashion show. Actually, I wouldn’t pay for a fashion show, as attending fashion shows is work for me, and I don’t pay to go to work. And I certainly don’t like the idea of the general public being allowed to pay their way in to a fashion show, it would completely ruin the notion of exclusivity that the fashion industry has cultivated and is desperately trying to hold on to.

Pointless celebrities in the front row of a fashion show.

In the CNN documentary about her, Carine Roitfeld talks about how unusual it is that everyone wants to know about the fashion industry now, and that ten years ago, it wasn’t like this. She is right, when I started, the fashion industry was not full of celebrities, and therefore there weren’t millions of people who followed it closely, movies dedicated to the going ons of the industry, front rows full of pathetic reality TV stars, and thousands of fashion students trying to get into the industry. But now it is different, Anna Wintour  is a household name (how many of you can name a fashion editor from the 90s?) and the fashion industry is out in the public domain.

I know that fashion shows are very expensive, and it would be nice for brands to find a way to earn some money from them, but I don’t think they should do that by letting people buy tickets. At worst, they should stage two shows, one which is for industry, and then a public version afterwards (although even that sounds hideous to me, and probably not very cost effective.)

One thing that has really surprised me about Vancouver is that there are a lot of fashion shows on here, and people pay to go and see them. It is actually a business. Tomorrow night I am going to a fashion show that costs a lot of money (I’m not paying) and takes place at 10pm on a Friday night. That is like asking me to have a business meeting on a Friday night. I’d rather be with friends or family, relaxing and enjoying myself, rather than being “at work.” But I have realised that this is how things work here in Vancouver, and it is surprising.

Yves Saint Laurent's Spring Summer 1974 fashion show, with an informal catwalk, in the companies headquarters.

Image source.

For now the shows may be open to the public through a live streaming, but the invitations are still reserved for industry and celebrities (ugh.) As much as I love a big production fashion show, if the future of the shows require brands to tone them down a bit, I don’t think that would be such a bad thing. Let’s go back to the salon style shows from the 60s and 70s, intimate affairs for industry only (not celebrities please.) Its a nice idea isn’t it? But I doubt that will happen… For now the celebrities are adding to much value to the brands.

Here’s hoping that the fashion show I am going to tomorrow night, which is showcasing local ethically-friendly brands (which could go many ways…) is a fun Friday night out.

I don’t loathe the fact that this is a garbage bag turned into designer handbag, these days $2000 for a designer Louis Vuitton trash bag is not that big a deal, considering the inflated prices on some luxury products. It’s ridiculous, yes, but so are $2700 shoes and $43,000 suits. What I loathe is the fact that the design isn’t that great. It doesn’t look good, at all.

P.S. I dare you all to take a garbage bag, attach an old leather belt as a strap, and paint interlocking C’s on it. Just for fun…Le Sac Poubelle Chanel.

P.P.S. Louis Vuitton are bloody smart. I doubt they expect to sell many of these, but the amount of press they’ve gotten on them is worth way more than the profit they’ll have on the bags. I am sure store traffic will increase with one of these things in the window. Damn they’re good!

Yesterday we looked at one of the most influential shoe designers of the 20th century, and today I am going to introduce you to another shoe master. I am obsessed with shoes, and Roger Vivier is definitely one of my favourite footwear brands. He started off as a shoe designer in the 30’s, worked for Christian Dior in the 1950’s, and his signature shoe was a pump with a buckle on the front, called the Pilgrim. Roger Vivier is thought to have been the inventor of the stiletto, so ladies (and men, let’s face it, who doesn’t benefit from the stiletto,) lets take a moment to honour this VERY important man.

A signature Roger Vivier Pilgrim buckle shoe.

These are some more fabulous Roger Vivier for Christian Dior shoes from the 50s and 60s.

Image source.

When I was planning my wedding outfit, there was no question in my mind that the shoe was going to be the most important part of the outfit. I knew I was going to be wearing Valentino, because it was sort of a childhood dream, and it was the last season of ready-to-wear that Valentino was actually designing, so the collection had significance. (I wore a short, “Valentino red” knit dress, which was possibly the easiest shopping experience in my life. We happened to be in Sloane Street area, and I went into the Valentino store with my friend Nora, we tried on three red dresses, two made me look fat, so I bought the third. SO easy.)

Anyway, back to the shoe. The brand was just as important as the shoe itself, because I had to buy a fabulous shoe brand, not a WAG brand (Jimmy Choo or Christian Louboutin), not a predictable brand (Manolo Blahnik), and not just any clothing brand’s shoe (YSL or Chanel.) Pierre Hardy would have been an acceptable brand, but his stuff was too chunky.

I was training staff at Harrods about fashion trends one day (which is really good money, but pointless if you spend four times your wage as you walk through the footwear department on the way to your room) and I found these Roger Vivier shoes. Roger Vivier had recently been relaunched, with Bruno Frisoni as creative director, and it was the perfect footwear brand: luxury, respectable, a wonderful history, French, not over-exposed, and beautiful. Plus, these shoes were exclusive to Harrods, so there were a very limited number of pairs made. And, they were rock’n'roll.

It was love at first sight.

(I’ve condensed this into a collage for the benefit of my readers…but I could easily write about 15 blog posts about my wedding shoes and their significance, and my love for them and blah blah blah, but I’m afraid I might lose most of my readership. And don’t ask me about the story behind the D&G shoes, that’s another hour long tale of search, desperation, hunting, luck, and glory.)

So, the reason why this post came to be is because, after searching high and low, I finally managed to find a fairly complete selection of photos from the Roger Vivier Spring Summer 2010 Couture Collection. Here’s a blurb and some of the photos that I found from this article on Telegraph.co.uk.

“…brace yourself for fashion’s latest excess – the £30,000 pair of Roger Vivier heels.”

“They feature an assortment of life’s little luxuries such as 24 ct gold-coated mesh, semi-precious stones, jet, satin ribbons, silk chiffon, diamanté and crocodile skin fashioned into dainty rosettes.”

“The “Dovima”, an 11cm, spike-heeled confection of gilded silk mesh and jewels, is embellished with a pair of rose pink-dyed, taxidermy birds with gold and crystal heads.”

“The collection is called “One is Too”, for each pair can be inserted into and buckled onto matching crocodile or snakeskin protective “platforms”, based on the “pattens” of the Middle Ages. They add height and save the expensive, fragile works-of-art for the feet from actually making contact with anything as rugged, commonplace and downright dirty as the pavement.”

Read the rest of the article here. And the article tells you where to buy them, if you’re interested in remortgaging your house. These shoes certainly make yesterday’s $2700 pair a bargain.

Before I talk a little about my Vancouver dislikes, I need to say that when people say it is one of the best cities in the world to live in, trust them, because its true. Cheap sushi, nearby beach and mountain, and an excellent standard of living are only some of the reasons. People are nice, genuinely nice. You can drink tap water. The views are phenomenal. Education and public services are great. You can buy Chanel and Louis Vuitton, but in two hours by car you can be in the middle of nowhere. So generally, Vancouver=good. But there are a lot of crappy things about this town, and one of them is the way its residents perceive it.

Some people say you’re as old as you feel. How about, you’re as cool as you feel. So many people here say “Vancouver is casual” or “Vancouver is laid back” or “we just wear casual clothes here, we don’t care about fashion”. Well, Vancouver, if you keep thinking like that you will perpetually be the town “where people are healthy and dress badly.”

I moved here and I want it to become more hip and interesting, so we can have the best of both worlds. This ridiculous “The World Needs More Canada” display at Chapters book store doesn’t help us one bit. In preparation for the Olympics, we are promoting ourselves and Canada as a great place. People know that Canada is a great place, but they might change their mind when they see idiotic displays like this one.

It basically sums up every Vancouver stereotype I hate, all nicely put together in a dsiplay in a store on our busiest shopping street.

1. Hockey. I have no problem with hockey or sports, but I have a problem with this cities obsession with hockey. I lived in Engand for 10 years, and aside from during the World Cup and Euro Cup tournaments, I could always escape football (soccer) beacuse the Brits understood that not everyone wants to watch a match or a game when they are eating or drinking. But not in Vancouver. Here, every single restaurant and bar has a hockey match playing on a TV.I was in a greek restaurant, watching a belly dancing performance, and they still had the hockey on.



2. Umbrellas. Yup, it rains here, non stop, so I guess the tourists will want to be buying these umbrellas for their stay here, or maybe take them back to their home country as a souvenir of the town that always rained. (Brits, you think england rains? It doenst rain half as much as rains here.)



3. Reusable water bottles. This is for use during exercise and yoga, and that is important because that is how we spend 90 percent of our free time here in Vancouver (the other spare time is spent watching sport, ie. Hockey). I am against disposable waterbottles because I hate the idea of all the waste, but I can’t bring myself to buy one of these reusable ones because A-it means I have officially moved back to Vancouver, and I’m not ready to admit that, and B- I won’t get the thrill of having everyone in my bikram yoga class give me dirty looks because I’m using a disposable water bottle, instead of a reusable one.



4. Reusable shopping bag: Vancouverites like to think they are super environmental, and I am very pleased that I use cotton bags when I grocery shop. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves, this is a town where people buy gas guzzling SUVs to drive from their middle class neighbourhoods, 20 blocks east to the mall and then home. Oh yeah, they also drive 15 minutes to get to an area where they are going to go running for an hour. And the best part is, everyone is coming from the same neighbourhood, driving to the same running path, running together, and driving back again. In seperate cars. I am not exactly the most environmentally conscious person in the world, so I won’t criticize that sort of behaviour, but please don’t tell me you are environmental Vancouver, because you aren’t.

Ok, I am being critical, but what’s the solution. Well, if I was going to make a little display of things I love about Vancouver, here is what I would put in there. This is what the Vancouver area means to me.

1. Some aboriginal clothing, like these amazing moccasin boots, which I spotted on one of my students. They are made from local moose leather and rabbit fur, and cost less than $200!!!!
   
2. Smoked salmon: yum. It is bloody good here. Get it in a nicely painted box too. Image source.



3. BC bud: There is no denying that this is what Vancouver is famous for, even Tommy Lee was talking about it on stage Sunday night at GM Place. Of course I don’t endorse this sort of thing, but I have HEARD its really good. Here’s a picture of the Olympic torch, which is said to resemble a joint. Was that an accident, or a reflection of the culture here in Vancouver? Image source.



4. California rolls: Vancouver’s local dish is sushi. Ask anyone. And we do it super well. Tojo’s has been named the best Japanese restaurant in the world, outside of Japan. In the world!



5. A Douglas Coupland Book. We are proud of him!



6. Some local artwork. Something totally unappreciated by Vancouverites, so get it while it isn’t too expensive. Here are two of my favourites, Roselina Hung (top) and Dougal Graham (bottom.)



7. A tree. Can you sell small ones? I guess tourists can’t bring it home on the plane, so experience a tree. See a really big one on the way to Tofino, sit on a log on English bay beach, hike through them in Squamish, or burn some in a campfire on long beach. Be sure to bring a dog along.



8. Vintage clothes. The secret is, everyone here is two years behind the rest of the world when it comes to fashion, so they vintage stores are full of good stuff because the Vancouver people haven’t figured out its cool yet. Image of True Value Vintage, source.

I didn’t know whether to laugh or cringe at this WWD daily Fashion Scoop, which reported that Pharell loves Lanvin so much that he would like to work for the brand. WWD went on to report that “he approached artistic director Alber Elbaz to offer his services. ‘It would be an honor,’ he told the designer. Earlier, Williams told WWD he would be interested in fronting a Lanvin campaign or designing a luggage line for the brand. ”

Pharell (left) is not cool enough for Lanvin (right.)

Funny that, because I too love Lanvin, and would love to work for them too, but I am hoping I have a much better chance of working for Lanvin than Pharell has, SINCE I AM TRAINED AS A FASHION DESIGNER. And I don’t wear plaid shirts and truckers caps and baggy jeans. I am going to presume that Alber Elbaz, Creative Director at Lanvin, will think this is a farce, and not take his offer seriously at all. I am also going to pray that celebrities will start to learn their place, and realize that they can’t design clothes just because they can act/sing/dance/go out without underwear on.

When I was a fashion student, you learned that to be a fashion designer, you had to know fashion, learn about it, and learn the technical skills. Now it seems that anyone who has fallen out of a taxi drunk, or been on a reality TV show, can have their own collection. I say let them have their collection, and leave the real designer brands out of it.

I just can't see Pharell working as a model for Lanvin.

Don’t get me wrong, the big brands are all using celebrities to promote themselves, but the ones with integrity use celebs as clothes horses, not as designers. Karl Lagerfeld may have Lily Allen in the Chanel ad campaigns, but he certainly doesn’t let her design (in fact, he lets no one design. He is notorious for designing everything by himself, for all of the collections he works on.)

I am pretty disgusted that Pharell thinks that because he “likes” Lanvin, and he is famous, the offer of his services should be taken seriously. Its a joke, and Pharell, you are a joke if you think you are worthy of Lanvin.

Pharell, you are not worthy of Lanvin.

Note: In the unlikely event that Alber Elbaz loses his mind and accepts any part of Pharell’s offer, I shall have to disassociate myself from the Lanvin brand permanently. Which would be very upsetting.

All Pharell images from People.com and all Lanvin images from Lanvin.com, except catwalk images from GQ.com.