Gareth Pugh F/W09

[why]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

I'd see these movies as part of the inspiration but I certainly wouldn't go that far. Is there a designer you like?
Most of these looks are one step away from casting Level 1 Curse on the audience. As far as what I like: read the other designer threads. I don't like everything but I don't dislike everything either.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by why

Most of these looks are one step away from casting Level 1 Curse on the audience. As far as what I like -- read the other designer threads. I don't like everything but I don't dislike everything either.
I don't understand your first sentence aside from it being a reference to games or magic or whatever. Name the designers you like here. Like a top 5 or something. I'm just curious where you're coming from, I'm not waiting to pounce you or anything.

 

[Brian SD]

It's not intended to look completely wearable in the show, and very few people will be wearing head to toe Gareth Pugh when it hits the stores - and if they do, they'll probably look fine because the pieces will change on the way to the showrooms, and only the more accessible ones will get produced.

 

[mainy]

Who pays for this stuff to get made? It's kind of mindblowing

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by Brian SD

It's not intended to look completely wearable in the show, and very few people will be wearing head to toe Gareth Pugh when it hits the stores - and if they do, they'll probably look fine because the pieces will change on the way to the showrooms, and only the more accessible ones will get produced.

Naaa, people will still look crazy, those are flashy pieces for flamboyant fashion **** or the equivalent. It's fine like that.

 

[PG2G]

I gotta agree with why on this one. These are just runway pieces though, or is that typically all you get from these smaller designers?

 

[Lel]

I'm surprised that more movies don't employ fashion designer for costume designs, especially in more creative movies.

 

[Brian SD]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Naaa, people will still look crazy, those are flashy pieces for flamboyant fashion **** or the equivalent. It's fine like that.

True - my point is that even someone who isn't a flamboyant fashion *** could still wear a couple of these pieces without looking like they just walked off the mothership (lol sci fi joke).

 

[why]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

I don't understand your first sentence aside from it being a reference to games or magic or whatever. Name the designers you like here. Like a top 5 or something. I'm just curious where you're coming from, I'm not waiting to pounce you or anything.
For FW '09? In no order: Gianfranco Ferre Moschino Dries Van Noten Richard Chai Paul Smith

Originally Posted by Brian SD

It's not intended to look completely wearable in the show, and very few people will be wearing head to toe Gareth Pugh when it hits the stores - and if they do, they'll probably look fine because the pieces will change on the way to the showrooms, and only the more accessible ones will get produced.
I guess that's my main gripe about it. There's nothing spectacular about the clothes themselves -- the only thing the looks have going for them is the eerieness of being clad head to toe in black. To me, the clothes themselves are nothing spectacular and taken apart from each other that same eerieness only makes them more odd. Alexander McQueen and Rick Owens have that same feel while still making very nice clothes. Heck, there's a ton of head-to-toe colorlessness for FW09 (Jil, Raf, Costume National, et al.) but those clothes seem a heck of a lot better designed and certainly more wearable. Pugh needs to clean up a lot of the frayed edges and extra buttons and buckles and stuff.

 

[LabelKing]

My favorite Pugh designs are the things he did for Roisin Murphy.

 

[XenoX101]

Hope to see more from him, while it may be unwearable to the general public and the more conservative folk, the young folk will love it and are willing to experiment and try something different. It won't be easy making these pieces work, I think you really need the right attitude/look. Also why, I don't think its fair to call so many collections 'costumey' (as in, with a negative connotation) for the reason that they are extravagant or potentially overdone, some of the best dressed people out there look as if they're 'in costume' simply because of how consistent they dress. Besides, isn't work wear essentially a costume? Most people who wear it here aren't doing it for the utilitarian sake, so you could say it is a rather simple costume of a working man, still a costume.

Oh and I'd love to see what people pair this up with, best one imo would be Rad Hourani.

 

[rach2jlc]

Originally Posted by XenoX101

Hope to see more from him, while it may be unwearable to the general public and the more conservative folk, the young folk will love it and are willing to experiment and try something different. It won't be easy making these pieces work, I think you really need the right attitude/look. Also why, I don't think its fair to call so many collections 'costumey' (as in, with a negative connotation) for the reason that they are extravagant or potentially overdone, some of the best dressed people out there look as if they're 'in costume' simply because of how consistent they dress. Besides, isn't work wear essentially a costume? Most people who wear it here aren't doing it for the utilitarian sake, so you could say it is a rather simple costume of a working man, still a costume.

Oh and I'd love to see what people pair this up with, best one imo would be Rad Hourani.

1) Young people will be all over this? I don't see them buying a $7000 Planet of the Apes suit. They might like to try and approximate some of the stuff through thrifted versions or things they find/assemble themselves.
2) "Costume" implies a lack of reality or something worn for purposes other than ones they might actually encounter. It implies that the garment wears the wearer, not vice versa. I think you are thinking of "uniform."

Pugh's stuff is fun in a "visionary" sort of way, but it is a costume. It is like something you'd see in a sci-fi film. These looks won't... and don't... translate into reality, which is one reason Pugh has been notoriously on the brink of financial failure from the beginning.

I think this stuff is neat, but there are lots of neat costume designers out there. In this kind of economy, "vision" and playfulness have to be dropped in favor of tempered, smart design that works.

 

[davo10375]

This is one reason I'm for designers doing both a runway show and a lookbook. The runway is often best used to show an aesthetic or vision (hence why people are calling it costumey) so some designers often go over the top to make the overall aesthetic more obvious. The lookbook makes it easier to identify individual pieces and to show their wearability. Though upon further thought I don't think a lookbook for a designer like Pugh would be that good idea... As I think Fuuma mentioned in another thread this looks like next-level 2080 dior. In a kinda good way but I don't see the menswear getting anywhere near the success or positive reactions as the womenswear does.

 

[XenoX101]

Originally Posted by rach2jlc

1) Young people will be all over this? I don't see them buying a $7000 Planet of the Apes suit. They might like to try and approximate some of the stuff through thrifted versions or things they find/assemble themselves.
2) "Costume" implies a lack of reality or something worn for purposes other than ones they might actually encounter. It implies that the garment wears the wearer, not vice versa. I think you are thinking of "uniform."

Pugh's stuff is fun in a "visionary" sort of way, but it is a costume. It is like something you'd see in a sci-fi film. These looks won't... and don't... translate into reality, which is one reason Pugh has been notoriously on the brink of financial failure from the beginning.

I think this stuff is neat, but there are lots of neat costume designers out there. In this kind of economy, "vision" and playfulness have to be dropped in favor of tempered, smart design that works.

Sorry, I meant young people with rich parents/sufu kids/style zeitgeist/etc. and creative early 20's kids who just got a job and don't know how to spend their money (or just really love fashion).

Good point about the difference between costume and uniform, I was thinking it but wasn't sure. Still, I must disagree from experience about it 'not translating into reality', I see too many people wearing out-there clothing casually in the streets of melbourne, hanging with their friends, going out to alternative places, in some cases you'd look more out of place wearing a suit than you would something from gareth pugh. Maybe thats just the alternative cooky melbourne culture, but its a significant example of such lines meshing with modern society.

I'm not sure about the "something worn for purposes other than ones they might actually encounter" comment, I think clothes in everyday wear require a purpose other than the utilitarian one of keeping you warm, conforming is not a requirement (going into the overdressing thread territory). I can understand why this collection would be having trouble in the market though, those who love the collection won't be able to afford it, some of the pieces may be that little bit too alternative, though I haven't seen this marketed in melbourne, so my presumptions could be wrong (being from england, we should see it here in the future).

 

[why]

Originally Posted by davo10375

In a kinda good way but I don't see the menswear getting anywhere near the success or positive reactions as the womenswear does.

Did it ever really get positive reactions? I always thought it was seen as 'neat' with a whole lot of apathy.