Whilst laboriously translating a French CV into English for a friend, I felt impelled to look up old Style.com pictures to find Olivier Theyskens last SS02 collection for his own label. The rest of the story of course you know as without sufficient financial backing, the label went bust and he then took up the position of creative director at Rochas and now he is currently at Nina Ricci. Whislt 2002 was not so long ago, in Theysken years, it must seem like an age away. It is his later work at Rocha and Nina Ricci which most people will know him from.
However, as I look back at this collection which I thought was beautiful only in a way that could have been appreciated by a few, it makes me wonder whether designers like Theyskens would flourish more creatively without the reins of a house. The Victorian periodic features jarring with bright neons, leather manipulation, the dead canaries floating above shoes and disclocated high necked shirts on the dresses might not all equate to commercial success but I find this sort of collection far more intriguing than what he is currently producing at Nina Ricci which isn’t to diminish what he is doing for the house as I still feel we get a Theyskens ‘signature’ at Nina Ricci, and this is especially so when you look at his work for Richas. However, I get the feeling there is a restraint imposed by working at a house. For instance, I doubt Theysken’s love of taxidermy is going to result in stuffed owls on shoulders of Nina Ricci gowns, tailored for Oscar dress moments.
Imagine if Nicholas Ghesquiere or Riccardo Tisci suddenly had their own labels and their house forefathers of Cristobal Balenciaga and Hubert de Givenchy would not have any bearings on their designs (and also the resulting reviews)? It’s a topic that I have discussed at length with my aforementioned friend who holds the opinion that he would much rather design for a house and have that house to protect him financially and commercially than to go it alone with all that risk. A valid point indeed. Perhaps Ghesquiere and Tisci both feel the same way that their Parisian fashion house acts as a design guidance and a cocoon.
I’m just imagining a ‘What if…’ situation that would perhaps produce a collection that would allow each designer to go completely mad all by themselves. But of course, once again, my head is up in the clouds…
Hmm, this one isn’t for me.
I think that the houses they are in give them a lot of freedom, at least for Olivier since Rochas and Nina Ricci were dead and/or not popular. He gets to create the signature styles and develop the house as well as himself at the same time. Nicholas probably had more historic weight on his shoulders, so I definitely agree that he is using it as guidance.
However, I don’t think that designing for a house is any safer, look at Givenchy itself and how for a while they just kept hiring and firing designers, at an established house they have much more to live up to, and people are more willing to rip them apart because they have all the history to compare it to.
One of the best and strong collection he made .. and the shoes are amazing !!
I’m sure Nina Ricci will grow in the future if Olivier let his belgium soul speak by itself . That’s what he is doing now for Nina Ricci . I think I find the right house for what he is . Not having a lot of archive allow him to be more creative . The only thing he have to do is to be sourounded by the right person 😉
Ohhhh, I remember those shoes! Thanks for the reminder, Suzie.
It seems Hedi Slimane left Dior for these very reasons (albeit also heavily financial ones); still waiting on that one.
I think, to a large extent, that Rochas and Nina Ricci were houses that didn’t really have as strong a signature ‘look’ as, say, Chanel or Dior- which subsequently means a lot of freedom given to the designers. But with a house that had a very defined sort of look- like, say, Balenciaga- it must be tougher, though I must say both Ghesquiere and Theyksens do a great job- in different ways of course.
Those shoes are appalling.
oh wow… dead birds disturb me a little… but they are beautiful in a creepy taxidermy way.
to be or not to be… that’s the question Susie?
Yes, I think you guys bring up some good points about Rochas and Nina Ricci being much more free than other houses…
Though I do wonder about what these designers would REALLY like to do… like if they just want to go completely mental and whether we actually know the REAL Ghesquiere or the REAL Tisci….
Thom: Exactly…a house can be stifling..
A friend: Hmmm…who might that person be I wonder!
Nathalie: Indeed…that is the question… ; )
Happy un-birthday from San Francisco…
hello friends I really liked this information, a few days ago I read something similar, I would like to receive updates on this issue, as it is very interesting,