I had a good, thorough flip though the September issue of US Vogue over the weekend, and I was surprised to see how boring the advertising campaigns were. Firstly, Louis Vuitton was noticeably absent, which was very strange. And the magazine was also lacking in nice-looking campaigns, which, let’s face it, is usually the main reason we buy the September issues. I know that desperate times call for desperate measures, but the second, third, and fourth quarters of the magazine were crammed with tasteless, ugly campaigns from brands that are not “worthy of Vogue.” I guess they have had to drop their standards in order to fill their pages.

Before I go through my Loves and Loathes for the ad campaigns from the brands we know, I should point out that there was a very good article in Vogue about mothers in the US Army. Not only was it a riveting read, but it made me 1-feel so sad for children whose parents are in the military, and 2-hate the US Army more than words can describe.

I Love…

how amazing Karen Elson looks in this Balenciaga campaign. And the shape of that white furry coat is INSANE.

the way this ad highlights the unusual shapes Bottega Veneta is known for.

Roberto Cavalli at his best: glamour, leopard print, and fur.

these simple Celine ads.

that these Chanel photos look pretty relaxed.

the best trousers of the season, by Chloe.

that despite the fact that Gucci has basically repeated their Spring Summer photos, it still very luxury and on-brand.

Autumn Winter with Michael Kors. Only Carmen Kass can make grey jogging pants look great with a fur coat.

alien eye makeup at Lanvin.

gorgeous contrasts and hardcore hardware at Miu Miu.

that Nicole Miller suddenly looks modern and slick.

Prada's choice of models, Miranda Kerr looks amazing.

that Tommy Hilfiger does the American preppy look better than anyone else.

this beautiful photo. This Valentino dress looks absolutely stunning.

Cleopatra hair and dramatic stairs at Yves Saint Laurent.

I loathe…

the whole concept of this Bulgari shoot, plus the style of the photography, which looks quite tacky.

a boring Burberry campaign. Time to try something new.

ditto at Dolce & Gabanna. They also need to try something new.

when Hermes looks too equestrian.

this Jimmy Choo campaign. It is such a predictable fashion photo set-up, and the shoes look like nothing special.

when a campaign gets done too many times. The cute young Lacoste models jumping up and down were nice for a few seasons, but now they look like silly ravers.

that Ralph Lauren has chosen some of his most boring product for the seasonal ad campaign.

Kate Moss naked in this David Yurman campaign. She doesn't look nice at all, in fact, she looks a bit yuck.

Vanity Fair has been publishing an International Best Dressed List for over 70 years now, and this week they released their 2010 List. I love Vanity Fair, it is a magazine that takes more than 15 minutes to read, cover to cover, and it contains interesting content, something that many magazines fail to deliver in this day and age. But the International Best Dressed List is lame, predictable, and boring.

I guess Vanity Fair isn’t about to include anyone who isn’t ultra rich and famous, but it would be far more interesting to see a list of people who manage to look incredibly stylish on a salary less than $50,000 a year. The people on this list should not be commended for dressing well, they should simply be shot down if they don’t. There’s no excuse, with massive amounts of money and style consultants at your disposal, not to look good.

Here are some of the “Best Dressed” individuals, and my comments.

I love…

the way Carey Mulligan dresses, although this photo, chosen by Vanity Fair, is definitely not one of the better ones I have seen.

Diane Kruger in this Calvin Klein dress. Even thought she's an A-lister and probably has a stylist, you rarely see actresses pulling off a simple dress like this. And well done to her for not being all about leg and cleavage.

Lady Gaga. No matter what people say, you can't deny she is a breath of fresh air with her crazy outfits.

Martin Scorsese's eyebrows, does that earn him a spot on the Best Dressed List? Maybe not, but out of all the boring suited-men on the list, he is definitely the one who comes closest to earning a spot.

that Michelle Obama has proved that First Ladies don't need to be all about Oscar de la Renta and conservative pastels.

I loathe…

that working at Vogue and not wearing makeup entitles you to a spot on the Best Dressed List (although perhaps Emmanuelle Alt, who has the same credentials, could have been on the list a few years ago.). This photo clearly demonstrates that Alexandra Kotur is not "Best Dressed" at all.

spoilt kids living in the shadow of their stylish Mom (Vogue Paris editor Carine Roitfeld.) Neither Julia nor Vladimir Restoin-Roitfeld are particularly well-dressed. I'd give them an award if they actually both managed to get a real job and prove their worth, rather than just doing "creative" things and getting credit because their Mom is famous.

that Carla Bruni Sarkozy is on this list. She is gorgeous, and super well-dressed, but she is an ex-supermodel and First Lady of France. She HAS to be well-dressed! And how can she not be, with all that Dior clothing?

fashion magazine editors on a Best Dressed List. Again, this is part of their job description. It is like congratulating an gardner for planting a flower. This is Cindi Leive, Editor in chief of Glamour.

that someone who dresses reasonably well, but is married to the worst-dressed woman in the world, is allowed to be on this list. Sorry David Beckham, but your wife brings you down.

that the three people who count Ralph Lauren as their father, are on this list. How hard can it be to dress well if you've got one of the world's most famous fashion designers as your father?

All images taken from the Vanity Fair website.

Roger Vivier: one of the few brands that makes couture shoes.

The term Generation Y scares me, not because it is the term that is used to describe my generation (I am on the cusp, but still considered Generation Y) but because people born in the 90’s are also considered Generation Y. Which puts me in the same generation as an 18 year old, and I DO NOT feel I have much in common with an 18 year old. I didn’t grow up with a computer instead of a pen, and I didn’t buy Marc by Marc Jacobs when I was 15. In fact, it would have been impossible to buy Marc Jacobs then, since he didn’t even have his own brand.

An $11 ring by Marc by Marc Jacobs. Cool, yes. Prestige, no.

So I am a bit confused when I see the brands in the first annual L2 Gen Y Prestige Brand Rankings, “the largest study-of-its-kind measuring the affinity for 105 iconic brands among the next generation of prestige consumers.”

Gen Y Females:
1. Chanel
2. Ritz-Carlton
3. Four Seasons
4. Marc Jacobs
5. Cartier
6. BMW
7. Mercedes-Benz
8. W Hotels
9. Prada
10. Audi

Bottega Veneta: known for creating high end luxury products without distinctive branding.

OK, I can get Chanel, Prada, and Marc Jacobs. They deserve to be on that list, so does Cartier. I can’t understand why Ritz Carton is on there, that’s an old money, old person’s luxury hotel. Four Seasons is nothing special either… although W Hotels makes sense. I can’t believe Hermès is not on the list, although maybe it is too exclusive for Generation Y (which is why I can’t possible be Generation Y.) Louis Vuitton must be very disappointed not to be on there, but I guess the over saturation of the LV monogram has destroyed their exclusivity.

Pierre Hermé macarons: the Caramel and Fleur de Sel macaron is TO DIE FOR.

Here’s what I would add to this list: Hermès, Bottega Veneta, Roger Vivier, Lanvin, Loro Piana, Pierre Hardy, Pierre Hermé, The Fat Duck (I don’t care what people say, it might be gimmicky, but I have been there, and it was one of the best experiences in my ENTIRE life), Piaget, Pétrus, Krug (rappers drink Cristal, so it has lost a lot of its prestige), Frette, etc.. I could go on for hours. But Audi is defiently not on there, nor is Marc Jacobs. If a brand sells rings for 11 dollars, it is not a prestige brand.

Prestige: A Piaget watch with over 500 diamonds. Price available upon request.

The males list just makes me laugh.

Gen Y Males:
1. BMW
2. Ferrari
3. Porsche
4. Lamborghini
5. Audi
6. Aston Martin
7. Four Seasons
8. Mercedes-Benz
9. Ralph Lauren
10. Ritz-Carlton

I could never take someone seriously if they owned a Ferrari, or a Lamborghini, unless they were more than 25 years old (the car, not the driver.) Old Ferraris are very cool, new ones are not. Ferraris and Lamborghinis are terrible cars, they aren’t made well, don’t last long, and need expensive repairs all the time. And they say one of three things: “I am new money, just got rich really quick, and this car is going to make me look cool”, “I am losing my hair and need a cool sports car to make me feel young”, or “I am a show off.” Aston Martin says “I want to be James Bond.” Basically this list sums up exactly why the word “douchebag” was coined to describe Generation Y guys. Guys, get some taste please!

This image, from Dave WIlliams' Blog, was entitled "King of All Douchebags."

Image credits: Roger Vivier shoe, Marc by Marc Jacobs ring, Bottega Veneta bag, Pierre Hermé macarons, Piaget watch, and Douchebag with Ferrari.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art Costume Institute Benefit took place last night. You would think that in this day and age, there would be someone, at least ONE person, who was actually wearing something dramatically interesting on the red carpet, rather than boring evening wear. (I am not a big fan of evening wear, its the most overrated fashion product.) I am not saying there wasn’t anything nice on the red carpet, there was, but it’s all the same repetive, boring tat.

I Love…

Anne Hathaway's fairytale Valentino dress. Yes, she looks a bit psychotic in this photo, and possibly too thin, but if you are going to wear a puffy, strapless, shiny evening dress, this is the way to do it.

Bee Shaffer in this Balenciaga dress. It is classic and flattering. But who the hell is Bee Shaffer? Has she done anything other than BE Anna Wintour's daughter?

Blake Lively in Marchesa. I was a bit torn on this one, but she looks great tanned with her hair slicked back, and she can get away with crazy dresses like this.

Carey Mulligan in Miu Miu. She always looks good, and it is really nice to see a young actress dressing appropriately young.

Chloe Sevigny in Proenza Schouler. It's a bit stuffy, and a bit weird, but at least she is making a statement that is not just "boring evening gown."

Diane Kruger in Calvin Klein. Fantastic, beautiful, and she is the best dressed of the evening.

January Jones in Yves Saint Laurent. OK, her hair and makeup look weird, and why is she standing like a robot? But at least the dress is beautiful

Jessica Alba in Sophie Theallet for Gap. I don't understand how this is very Sophie Theallet, or Gap, but it is a beautiful evening gown.

Jessica Biel in Ralph Lauren. Another classic one that looks good.

Oprah Winfrey in Oscar de la Renta. Only Oprah and her bust can get away with this OTT dress.

Sarah Jessica Parker in Halston. I am not a fan of SJP, but she looks naturally beautiful in this dress, with her lovely tan and the flower in her hair.

I Loathe…

Andre Leon Talley and Whoopi Goldberg. This is just bad, and are those women's shoes he is wearing?

Anna Wintour in Chanel Haute Couture. This looks a bit trashy, but also too "mature" (in this case, "mature" is a bad word.)

Coco Rocha in Zac Posen. A hideous gown, and as a model, shouldn't she know how to pose nicely for the camera?

Donatella Versace in Versace. Predictable. Wouldn't it be amazing one day if she wore Prada?

Emma Roberts in Burberry. The slit is WAY too high.

Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen in Alexander Wang. Even though she is back in shape, it just seems a bit trashy that she is wearing this tight, fringed dress.

Karolina Kurkova in Altuzarra. An apron dress gone wrong.

Kirsten Dunst in Rodarte for Gap. How is this Rodarte, or Gap? And it makes her look 20 years older.

Kristen Stewart in Chanel. Gosh, it's Chanel does goth, really badly.

Maggie Gyllenhaal in Louis Vuitton. Meringue dresses are evil unless you are acting in The Wedding Singer.

All images from Coutorture.

When I heard that Anna Wintour tried to have Milan Fashion Week cut down to three days so that it wouldn’t interfere with her Oscar plans, I wasn’t surprised. The fashion world seems to behave as though Anna Wintour is the queen of the world, so why not act like it? What shocked me is that Milan Fashion Week actually considered her request, and shifted the show schedule so that she would see as many as possible during her short trip there. I don’t understand why one person can command this.

US Vogue needs the advertising revenue from Armani, Prada, and co. more than the brands needs to woo her for magazine coverage. US Vogue has no choice but to feature Prada in their magazine, not because of the advertising revenue the brand brings to the magazine, but simply because what sort of fashion magazine can be credible without talking about Prada? Or Armani?

Anyway, I read this New York Times article this morning about how Milan’s “Fashion Weekend” is unjust, and that the industry should pay more attention to the city. I agree with the article, and I am disgusted how the designers have had to bow down to the requests of the media and buyers in the past few years.

And then I got to think about Anna Wintour…and I realised I didn’t really have an opinion about her, until now. (I am embarrassed to say I haven’t seen The September Issue yet.) Yes, she is the editor of one of the most-read fashion magazines in the world, but really, she is under the thumb of the advertisers who pay her (high) salary. What has she actually done for the fashion industry that merits her position today? Is she really worthy of this fame? I don’t think so. I am not saying Anna doesn’t deserve any of the attention, she does have a tough job and she does it well, but really, when was the last time you read an issue of US Vogue and got excited about some of the content? She is not a stylist, she is not a great writer, she is certainly not a visionary, so I am guessing she must be a good manager, because you have to be good at something to be in a position like that.

I get bored about these untouchable, terrifying fashion stars that put on a pedestal by the fashion industry and fans of the world. Anna Wintour is boring, yes, we would all love for her to endorse us in some way, but would you want to sit down and have dinner with her? I wouldn’t. I’d prefer to have a meal with someone that would have some incredible stories to tell, and someone who has achieved great things in their life. Give me Karl Lagerfeld, Anna Piaggi, Suzy Menkes, or Mario Testino. Even Ralph Lauren would be more fun, at least he could tell you how he came to build an empire off a collection of ties. What does Anna Wintour have to say? Her fame is dependent on the fame of the designers and image makers that make the fashion industry what it is.

I think I need to write more about this subject sometime in the near future, perhaps a “Fashion Heroes” column about the people behind the scenes that really make the difference. Not the tight-assed, bob-haired, sunglasses-wearing, tennis-playing, fashion bully, meanies who earn 2 million dollars a year just for being a bitchy manager. Oops, sorry Anna. (If you are reading this I guess you deserve the last laugh, because at the end of the day, you dropped out of high school and you have a nice big bank account and a closet full of Chanel suits, and that’s more than most of us have.)

Ralph Lauren’s show had lot of looks, and a lot of repetition. There was soft floral dresses, equestrian references, and lots of velvet. Not the most ground breaking of collections, but we never expect that from Ralph lauren.

I Love…

the lightness of this dress, which is very summery, but works for winter with the heavy tights, knitwear, and a jacket for winter. Its almost classy grunge.

the leather belt, the fur bag, the brown buttoned cardigan. A bit boring, but this is classic defined.

any evening wear that involves hands in pockets. And these cool gloves. Its all about the gloves!

that there's way too much going on here: full length velvet, a puffy sleeve head, mesh arms, a long necklace, and then a casual leather bag. But it sort of works.

I Loathe…

this blouse. It is absolutely horrible.

this overdone outfit. Jodhpurs, sparkly top, fur boots... This is countryside OTT.

All images from Style.com.

I have been meaning to comment on this for some time, but I have quite a big pile of blog drafts piling up, which I am hoping to clear by the end of the holidays.

So, Martin Margiela has left the house he founded. Maison Martin Margiela was founded in 1988, and since 2002 it has been majority owned by Diesel, the Italian group which also owns Viktor & Rolf, and of course the denim brand Diesel. I won’t go on too much about the history and the acquisition, and if you are interested you can read all about it in this great article from the New York Times, but I will say that in the time that Diesel took part ownership of Maison Martin Margiela, their sales went from €15 million to €70 million.

Maison Martin Margiela has been quite an important brand for me, particularly when I am lecturing to fashion students (one of my many fashion-related jobs.) This was the brand that helped me define the level of my students. If they all knew the brand, I knew it was going to be a good group. If 30% knew the brand, I knew there would be a few strong ones leading the rest. If 10% or less had heard of Margiela, I knew I was in trouble.

Anyway, I am sure not all of my readers are familiar with Maison Martin Margiela, so I am going to do a little facts list. It is by no means exhaustive, I am going by memory (so feel free to correct any mistakes people) and I am not a Margiela expert, but here we go.

FACT 1: He is from Belgium, and considered to be the “seventh” member of the Antwerp Six. The Antwerp Six were six Belgium fashion designers that graduated from Antwerp’s Royal Academy of Fine Arts (a super prestigious fashion design school) in the 80s, and then proceeded to drive to London in a van to show off their wares. That was their big breakthrough.  The Antwerp Six is Walter Van Beirendonck, Ann Demeulemeester, Dries van Noten, Dirk Van Saene, Dirk Bikkembergs, and Marina Yee. Thanks to them, and Margiela, the Belgian fashion designers got a reputation for being quite avant-garde, a reputation they still have.

Some cool Maison Martin Margiela sandal boots.

Toys by Maison Martin Margiela. They love white.

FACT 2: No one sees him. He doesn’t do personal appearances, and he never meets journalists. Even Carine Roitfeld, editor of French Vogue, has never seen him. I thought it was very funny the other day when someone said that he was spotted looking for a house in West Hollywood. That would imply someone has seen him…

Some menswear. I sort of imagine he looks something like the guy in the centre.

FACT 3: He never referred to himself as “I”. It was always “Maison Martin Margiela is doing this…” or “We are doing this…” instead of “I am doing this…”

This was a really famous Aids t-shirt they did. The text was printed straight onto the shirt, so some was on the front, and some was on the inside of the back.

The Aids t-shirt hanging.

FACT 4: His clothes don’t have the brand name on the label, and his shops don’t have the name on the outside (aside from the one in LA.)

Maison Martin Margiela clothing label.

The Hong Kong store.

The Paris store.

The sign above the London store.

FACT 5: He is known for recycling garments.

An outfit made from lots of old pairs of jeans.

FACT 6: He only communicates by fax (although I am not sure if this is still the case, since hardly anyone has a fax machine anymore. Except for my Mom.)

Another couture outfit.

FACT 7: His fashion shows involve a running commentary about the clothing, and all of his staff wear white lab coats.

One of the staff showing a men's vest.

FACT 8: He often costs his garments based on the number of hours spent making them. Which makes a €5000 jacket actually seem reasonably priced. It is really interesting to see the time involved in making a couture garment. Yes, it is expensive, but at least you know that it is because the garment actually takes a lot of time to make.

This picture came from Diane Pernet's A Shaded View On Fashion (another one of my favorite blogs.) She included the following caption: "Travel Jacket: 53 hours to construct/5330 Euros The jacket is cut from a zipped nylon travel garment bag. What I loved was the breakdown: 'The hours of work necessary for the creation in question includes: the preparation, the finishing and the quality control but exclude the research of raw material, technical control, necessary treatment (cleaning, softening, dying, etc.) and the fittings. Travel Jacket - February. ' "

Here are a few more of his garments.

Great Shoulders.

The famous wig jacket.

Some of the store's shelving.

And look at how cool his landing page is.

Anyway, he has left the company, and Renzo Rosso, the creator of Diesel, has decided not to replace him. Apparently the creative team of 20 something people are strong enough to continue designing without the need of a creative director. This is a very interesting move, and I think it is the right idea.

Replacing a Creative Director, especially the founder of the brand, is very difficult. There have been a lot of problems with Gianfranco Ferre, Emanuel Ungaro, and Versace, all of which have suffered as brands since their namesake founder has left. There has been a lot of speculation in the news lately about what will happen with Chanel, Ralph Lauren, Giorgio Armani, and Oscar de la Renta, because they all have creative directors in their seventies. Chanel has been quoted as saying “Karl Lagerfeld is the creative director of Chanel and enjoys a long-term contract which is absolutely not put into question. His succession is not on the agenda,” but that is just not credible, they must have some sort of plan in place, because lets face it, at 76, chances are he won’t be able to continue in his role for much longer. I won’t even begin to express the fear in my heart about the succession of Karl Lagerfeld, there is simply no one who can replace him.

With regards to Maison Martin Margiela, we can now only wait to see what happens. Critics have complained that the collections have been lacking for several seasons, apparently since he unofficially left the brand. But I agree that a replacement may only make things worse. I also believe that if this does work, Renzo Rosso will be setting a precedent, and many others will follow. If you can’t replace a great Creative Director, then don’t.

Sorry to anyone whose photo I didn’t credit. Most images came from www.martinmargiela.com and www.style.com but if I used your image without proper credit, please get in touch and I will remove it or credit it.