« Adventures in Copyrights, The Foley Follies

Explain Jul 3, 2007 @ 9:20am

Explain: “Couture”

Yesterday, as we colored with Sharpies…

Intern Sabrina: Does anyone actually wear couture anymore?

Faran: Sure. A few hundred women. The wives of British hedge fund managers… Fabiola Beracasa… Eva Green, when she’s working.

Intern Sabrina: Only a few hundred? Then what’s the point?

Indeed. Couture happens twice a year, enlists about 20 designers and all of the magic they can muster, and costs millions.

Meanwhile, the number of couture buying women is equal to the number of women who can actually walk in Balenciaga’s new lego heels. It’s a tiny group.

So if none of the hand-sewn, highly conceptual collections are selling, why devote an entire week to the madly theatrical clothes?

In part it’s for PR. Naomi and Linda on the runway; Gwyneth and Liv in the audience; a fireworks display of fashion power where every flashbulb counts.

But couture is more meaningful than a page in US Weekly, a spread in Vogue, and a standing ovation from Carine (though we’d pay a lot for that).

This week is the time when designers convene to express their most extreme, most exuberant, most self-referencing visions. When Dior presented at Versailles last night, his smothering petticoats and crystal coated lashes weren’t saying, “Look at Kate Hudson in the front row.” They were saying, “Look at us! We are how we see our world, and this is what it looks like.”

The Olympics have their opening ceremony, fashion has couture. It’s the pageant that comes before the games of buying, selling, winning, losing, and gossiping that run during the ready-to-wear season.

Sometimes a Couture show can make you think you’ve found a soulmate in some fabric. Sometimes it’s hollow and draining, like a bag of candy you scarf for breakfast. But it’s always a chance for a label to reveal its own sort of patriotism, and for us to step back and see what a world looks like where clothes are the only language, the only currency, and the only love.

Speaking of love: Did anyone else catch how Galliano incorporated neon and graffiti into his gowns this season? The street and the catwalk are mashing again…

dior amazing.jpg

« Adventures in Copyrights, The Foley Follies

Fashionista Main

posted by Paola

Jul 03, 2007 9:47AM

Well said...couture is always interesting and it is like fashion for fashions sake!!

posted by a lady

Jul 03, 2007 9:47AM

couture's biggest clients are usually middle eastern royalty/ridiculously wealthy, aren't they? or is that no longer true, faran?

posted by Chi

Jul 03, 2007 9:50AM

Couture is art, it's not meant to be worn in everyday life. RTW is the stuff that's meant to be worn.

posted by guest

Jul 03, 2007 10:07AM

but couture also has a trickle down effect, no? certain colors and themes etc tend to show up a few years/seasons/whatever later in mainstream trends (in a basic or watered-down way)

posted by helen

Jul 03, 2007 10:16AM

"not meant to be worn in everyday life"? tell that to nan kempner, Chi.

the couture /shows/ are, for many houses, distinct from actual couture. when you're paying $10,000 for a blouse made to a form built specifically for you, it might not ever have walked down the runway, but it's still an extraordinary piece of craftsmanship that, for a skilled designer, can be a microcosmic showpiece of his abilities.

posted by Faran

Jul 03, 2007 10:18AM

It does have a trickle-down effect, notably at Dior, but I think that's part of the brand building that happens every season - if Dior is putting out a collection that's supposed to be a wearable crest of arms, then of course it will appear in different forms throughout their next fashion cycle. But it's birthed at couture.

posted by brendastarlet

Jul 03, 2007 11:03AM

Isn't red carpet a form of couture, except for the vintage dresses that are traded around like baseball cards? It strikes me that Armani Prive and some of the dresses Valentino does are a form of couture, only aimed at the cameras and not customers.

posted by Amy

Jul 03, 2007 11:04AM

And WWD reported yesterday that couture sales are up. Dior is quoted as saying they're up as much as 40%, so someone's buying.

posted by Miss Jeffrey

Jul 03, 2007 11:46AM

Great post Faran.

Couture surely has a trickle down effect. John Galliano/Dior does it best.

Valentino couture is best for women who look to buy suits more than gowns.

Armani Prive is meant for celebrities. Remember how Beyonce looked on the red carpet in that gown with all the wric-wrac opn the shoulder??

Although couture really isn't meant for everyday, there is the rare, excpetional woman (Diana Vreeland, Izabella Blow, Nan Kempner) that can pull it off on the street.

Vive Le Couture...creativity at it's highest form; it inspires dreams and fashions fantasies.

posted by Laia

Jul 03, 2007 12:37PM

Couture is Art.

It really bothers me when people say stuff like that... "Who wears that? OMG THATS SO CRAZY!! etc etc" and it's especially weird to hear that coming from someone who's "into fashion."

posted by Thalassa

Jul 03, 2007 12:38PM

I really like Chanel's commitment to couture work in taking over the Lesage atelier and employing shoemakers like Massaro. But apart from Anne Valerie Hash and Ralph Rucci , have there been any contemporary designers who've attempted couture?

posted by Faran

Jul 03, 2007 12:41PM

Laia, it's not at all unusual for fashion people to question couture's relevance - in his recent interview with Cathy Horyn, Nicolas Ghesquiere said he would never do it because he didn't think it was important to Balenciaga or his own vision.

posted by Eura Le

Jul 03, 2007 3:59PM

The best explanation is the speech given by the Meryl Streep's character Miranda Priestly on how a color like cerulean makes it onto the backs of the masses who just describe is as "blue". The drama invites us to the new season. Enjoy it.

posted by Keisha

Jul 03, 2007 4:21PM

That explanation is fiction. This explanation is just awesome.

posted by Erin

Jul 03, 2007 7:54PM

Fantastic explanation, and fitting too as his inspirations seemed to be art and painters. You could also ask what the point of painting is, especially as most artworks are never seen for their true beauty and wealth until after the painter has passed away.

It's about expression, and it's like a little invitation into the designer's minds. You know when you're a little kid and you imagine living in a world made of lollies and sugar (like willy wonka)? This collection was like that coming true!

I especially love the headpieces, the use of the masks as fascinators, and the jewels in Lily Cole's hair made her look like a mermaid! Stunning...

posted by casey

Jul 04, 2007 1:01AM

Don't forget that Paris Couture is also very regulated beacue it is subsadized by the government. There are very specific rules about how the garments are mande, by whom, and they much have a certain amount of gowns and a wedding dress.

I love couture!

posted by Anna

Jul 04, 2007 5:54PM

Thank you for this post! Some kids my age tell me what couture is, but they don't know what it exactly is! I'm like what the heck are you talking about?!

posted by Laia

Jul 08, 2007 12:22AM

Yeah Faran, I can definitely understand that point. But I guess I see it in the same way as a painting or a sculpture. Like, there's no NEED for it, but it's a beautiful expression of human thought. And I didn't mean to sound so sarcastic, I realize the quotation marks made it a little bitchy.

posted by KA

Jul 08, 2007 12:09PM

yes yes yes LOVE THIS!!
thank you faran!

couture is beautiful! These shows make you look at the clothing instead of who was modeling what and how many times they came down the runway.