WTF, Browne?

Originally Posted by FlaneurNYC

Click to expand...

Precisely why bothering to do it at all is boring.

I am an ex-punk that ran around in the most outlandish clothing you could imagine -- in the '80s and '90s. At this point it's all been said. It's all been done. Really, what can you do to shock anyone?

Elsa Schiaparelli was shocking. Seventy-five years later, TB is a bore.
That's probably a good question and one that I'll leave to those interested in fashion.

I just take it as granted that that is what designers do.

I don't mind the out there stuff. The wearable stuff I could buy at GAP tommorrow. If you want to buy it, feel free.

I think I despise the stuff SoCal posted even more than the "out there" stuff. Both exhibit a glaring lack of taste and canned creativity though. I've seen many runway shows with lots of "out there" pieces, some designers actually have taste even in their eccentricity.

Proves again that talent and success are often not correlated. TB is the 1980's one-hit wonder of mens fashion

In all ernestness, guys, we have just done exactly what Browne wanted in the first place: give him more attention! There's no way in Hell this guy was serious about any of these pieces...he just wanted the publicity, and he has succeeded.

But isn't it weird that there's an industry where, in order to be successful with one's serious* work, one must first produce work that would have made Wendy O. Williams wretch? Generally -- and particularly in creative industries -- it is the other way around. Go figure.


*Remember: serious is a relative term.

Acknowledging that outfits at a fashion show must be viewed separately, as individual pieces of clothing and not as a whole, one has to admit that the individual pieces of clothing in this collection are really odd, and border (pass?) on brink of insanity.

Granted, some of the "˜more normal' pieces are interesting, but they are few and far between. The bulk of the collection is basically not wearable in polite public and shouldn't have seen the light of day in the first place.

I think TB has gone from shocking to insanity in a span shorter than anyone would have imagined. He is trying to bring his fetish to mainstream fashion, he failed miserably.

Jon.

Originally Posted by Teacher

Click to expand...

In all ernestness, guys, we have just done exactly what Browne wanted in the first place: give him more attention! There's no way in Hell this guy was serious about any of these pieces...he just wanted the publicity, and he has succeeded.

Yes, but one goes into business to make money, if one does not sells one's goods, what is the point?

Jon.

Originally Posted by imageWIS

Click to expand...

Acknowledging that outfits at a fashion show must be viewed separately, as individual pieces of clothing and not as a whole, one has to admit that the individual pieces of clothing in this collection are really odd, and border (pass?) on brink of insanity.

Granted, some of the "˜more normal' pieces are interesting, but they are few and far between. The bulk of the collection is basically not wearable in polite public and shouldn't have seen the light of day in the first place.

I think TB has gone from shocking to insanity in a span shorter than anyone would have imagined. He is trying to bring his fetish to mainstream fashion, he failed miserably.

Jon.

Just because you want something to be true does not mean that it is. His gear is sold worldwide in just about every good mens fashion store. He is designing a line for Brooks Brothers that, although it will be a guest designer program, was likely developed because of him. People talk about him and some of his look has filtered into other major designers' lines.

You might hate him and think his things suck, but he has not failed in any way by any legitimate measure.

Originally Posted by CTGuy

Click to expand...

I don't mind the out there stuff. The wearable stuff I could buy at GAP tommorrow. If you want to buy it, feel free.
The Gap makes inexpensive, utilitarian clothing. There is a place for that. Any number of small firms quietly pursue their craft with beautiful fabrics and exemplary construction. Oftentimes creating something unique in the process. If only because "cool" has become the norm. A norm that one can purchase at H&M and toss the next season. In a world of silk-screened button-front shirts, jeans companies too numerous to mention and a glutted "fashion" scene -- replete with a bevy of actors, musicians, and socialites-turned designer -- I guess there must still be a place for the "enfant terriblà ." For me personally, my new criteria is an old one. That the clothing be impeccably made and actually make me look attractive -- instead of merely different for the sake of being different. Difference for that reason, IMO, is very 20th century.

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

Just because you want something to be true does not mean that it is. His gear is sold worldwide in just about every good mens fashion store. He is designing a line for Brooks Brothers that, although it will be a guest designer program, was likely developed because of him. People talk about him and some of his look has filtered into other major designers' lines.

You might hate him and think his things suck, but he has not failed in any way by any legitimate measure.

Sigh...must you always nitpick what I write without looking at overall context?

All I said was that he failed to bring his fetish to mainstream fashion, and by his fetish I mean in its truest form, showing ankles is obviously not even close to scratching the surface of TB's fetish. If this collection has shown us anything, it's this:

He obviously is more twisted than we thought and even the industry is directly making fun of him now.

As well, I didn't say everything he made was bad, I did mention that some pieces were wearable. Please read what I write, not what you assume I write.

Jon.

He only got the BB account thanks to a certain Vogue editor...luckily for him; she has just a bit of clout.

Originally Posted by imageWIS

Click to expand...

He only got the BB account thanks to a certain Vogue editor…luckily for him; she has just a bit of clout.

You are so argumentative about everything; why is that?

Anyways, surely BB would not make a business decision to capture a new customer and reach a new audience solely based on the whims of a Vogue editor. Though I'm not a TB fan (I like some of his stuff), there are not many people doing what he's doing, at the level which he's doing it. Michael Bastian, BoO, Timothy Hamilton.. who else has mainstream acceptance/saturation? It was a good decision, on their part; hopefully in 2 years, they go with someone else.

While I feel that most of his runway show is hideous, I also realize that "wearability" was probably not at the forefront of his design.

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

Just because you want something to be true does not mean that it is. His gear is sold worldwide in just about every good mens fashion store. He is designing a line for Brooks Brothers that, although it will be a guest designer program, was likely developed because of him. People talk about him and some of his look has filtered into other major designers' lines.

You might hate him and think his things suck, but he has not failed in any way by any legitimate measure.

I had a pair of TB tuxedo pants form Fall 05 that I thought I would have to give away in order to sell (who the hell wears odd tuxedo trousers?), put them on ebay at a fairly high price and a guy in Canada almost shot his load once he purchased them telling me how happy he was to have bought those pants. The guy definitely has a client base and there are definitely wearable pieces in the collection, there are also marsupialed runway pieces and I will never understand why anyone would wear his stuff head to toe as it looks very gimmicky that way. His women's gowns for BB are awesome. There is an "Ivy" clothing spread in this months Forbes, I'll post pics as I think that it is both a tribute to TB in terms of "the good" has bought to the table (RL is almost copying his looks down to a T) but also a rebuke of the nonsense that he has bought (short sleeve sport jackets and tuxedo shorts are stupid, period.)

Originally Posted by iammatt

Click to expand...

You might hate him and think his things suck, but he has not failed in any way by any legitimate measure.
I agree - he's very successfull by all measures. My worst-dressed friends all know Thom Browne and they lust after his suits. The same people who used to only know Armani and Brioni as high-end menswear brands.

I don't think he'll be doing runway shows for more than another season or two and will revert back to having a presentation with a band, a short fil, an ice skating rink, etc. The runway shows are allowing him to get some more exposure/media attention (really the basic point of a fashion show) and he still doesn't have to rely on advertising.
Let's look at the T's...Thom and Tom (Ford).
Tom's new fragrance campagin has a woman bright red lipstick, mouth agape and holding the bottle between her HUGE pressed together **** that is going to run in every magazing and cost a **** ton of $.
Thom does 2 small runway shows that don't have a huge production value and just cut up some strips of cheap fabric, put it over the suit and you get coverage in every major fashion outlet and internet forum/blog.
Thom gains market exposure, media attention, broadens those who know about him, is able to add a few more customers and still doesn't have to advertise in magazines to sell his $5,000 suits.

People say he lacks creativity or any design talent (I guess when he was the creative director of Club Monaco they just randomly plucked him off the street?) and I really don't think he is going for that. Look at the heart of what his business is...the grey suit, white oxford and matching grey tie. That's his Tribeca store, that's his philosophy, that's HIM. Like I said above the fashion and crazy stuff is him able to have fun in fashion, push people's buttons, sell a few of those things to a crazy Japanese kid, gain lots of editorial coverage and things like that.

Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC

Click to expand...

I'm really glad that a bunch of guys who typically prefer men's classic tailored clothing are looking at a runway show that has the sole purpose of gaining editorial attention and in turn pick out the few "way out there pieces" and read it as though it will be TB's design doctrine for next Spring.

SoCal, your TB apologism is increasing developing this illogical character- you can't simply brush aside every runway design that people criticize as something just for the runway or just to get attention, and then shift the focus to other runway pieces that somehow count more. Last time I checked, runway show weren't supposed to be totally divorced from the collections themselves. Ostensibly, everything he shows, on the runway or in the store, should somehow reflect some facet of the aesthetic of his collection. You can't just designate everything he makes that's ****** as being a stunt for attention and not really "counting" towards the aesthetic merit of the collection.

Also, the fact that he sells a lot of **** and has a collection in BB doesn't mean that he's succeeded at anything other than the business of selling clothes.

Originally Posted by FlaneurNYC

Click to expand...

The Gap makes inexpensive, utilitarian clothing. There is a place for that.

Any number of small firms quietly pursue their craft with beautiful fabrics and exemplary construction. Oftentimes creating something unique in the process. If only because "cool" has become the norm. A norm that one can purchase at H&M and toss the next season.

In a world of silk-screened button-front shirts, jeans companies too numerous to mention and a glutted "fashion" scene -- replete with a bevy of actors, musicians, and socialites-turned designer -- I guess there must still be a place for the "enfant terriblÃ

."

For me personally, my new criteria is an old one. That the clothing be impeccably made and actually make me look attractive -- instead of merely different for the sake of being different. Difference for that reason, IMO, is very 20th century.

Not sure if you actually disagree with me.

I'll be honest-- I don't get Thom Browne. I do like that he at least is moving people back towards a more formal fashion, which I like, but I would probably never buy anything made by him I'm not sure I am supposed to though. As others have said- Browne seems to appeal to the same people who wore Armani in the 90s, whatever in the 80s (I was too young honestly to remember).