Portfolio - Jem Leslie-24

Paris show review
Nicholas Ghesquiere?s AW16 collection
for Louis Vuitton was an exercise on
perspective. And more than that, it
was an exploration of the subjects of
cultural permanence and prominence
and which of these pervade in the
assessment of cultures, eras and
design that we make from a distance of time or
space.
In other words, Ghesquiere asked his
audience, when we think of other societies or
decades past, what are their key defining
characteristics ? and what are our own? What
makes its way into collective consciousness, and
what is filtered out and forgotten? Let's not
forget that Louis Vuitton is a long-established
global brand with travel at its epicentre. The
interplay between different cultures and its own
legacy lies close to its heart.
The set of the Louis Vuitton show laid the
foundations. It was futuristic, yet firmly rooted in
the past: 57 concrete columns covered with
shattered glass resembled an ominously
postmodern, space-age metropolis that drew
parallels with ancient archaeological digs. The
effect gave a sense of timelessness, while the
many-mirrored surfaces played with the physical
proportions of the room to alter perspectives on
space.
So far, so arty. But the clothes made a strong
case for the academism. As a whole, the
collection had an overarching sense of
completeness ? the work of a storyteller who is
able to neatly recount beginning, middle and
end, and a tastemaker who can step back and
deftly address the balance between the different
inferences of his designs? cuts and styles.
Perspective clearly was at work here on a holistic
scale, but up close, the theme was more
progressive.
Influences came from all over: a navy
suit-come-corset hinted at Gaultier; white slits in
navy fabric recalled Tron and the military; Refat
Oxbek?s American Indian bone jacket was
replicated in uniform-esque colour blocking;
flowing silks with rope patterns echoed of
Hermes. Bondage was explored through
Courreges-inspired patent leather harnesses that
wiped away any smutty overtones to become
assertive, the leather becoming supportive (even
comfortable?) rather than repressive.
Subverting expectation ? changing our
perspective ? was evidently something
Ghesquiere was keen to explore.
The skeletal patterning in his
body suits turned out, on close
inspection, to be cashmere. He
treats traditional luxury fabric
with a method linked with
synthetic sportswear. On a
superficial level, Ghesquiere also
built perspective into the
clothing, altering and
readdressing proportions to
emulate the change in shape we
see as we move around an
object, changing our material
viewpoint.
But it was Ghesquiere?s
eclectic range of influences and
ideas, and how these were combined
intelligently with his own developing signature
of pajama prints, Motocross-like trousers and
modern sports-luxe aesthetic, that was the real
talking point. Ghesquiere showed how he can
skillfully call to mind a design influence though
recreating a cut or print or texture. From his
all-seeing viewpoint, he isolates the essential,
and moves these into modernity by infusing each
with his own design blueprint.
The idea of using fashion's ?greatest hits?
wasn?t just an exercise on succinct emulation,
however. It?s experimentation on a pattern.
Throughout history, inventions of style have
come and gone, but those elements that remain
culturally and practically relevant remain.
Ghesquiere is looking to the landscape of
modern fashion and is examining what is
essential to it: what sticks when everything else
has faded away with the changing trends. And
he?s also attempting to forge and predict the
new classics by invoking these sticky styles and
updating them; looking at how
women wear clothes, and
reinterpreting the construction
to fit in with this.
This is, of course, what all
designers must do to some
degree. They have to be able to
envision how their designs would work on a
practical level, and where they will harmonize
with progressions in culture and society. The
question is, has Ghesquiere come up with a new
classic? Has he correctly guessed just what the
modern woman wants to wear? The answer will
present itself in due course - because (and but) it
is, as always, a matter of perspective.