CENTRAL SAINT MARTINS: THE 800 WORDS THAT GOT ME A PLACE

With London's Central Saint Martins being the top university in the world for fashion, I was thrilled even to know I had made it through the first of three application hurdles. My personal statement had passed the CSM test and I received an email that gave me five days to produce an 800 word article; 'A modern viewpoint on today's fashion'. A few weeks later I was informed that I had made it to the third stage of application, the dreaded and infamous Saint Martins interview - renown for being particularly tough. Questions such as 'what is your preferred type of stitch?'; 'If you were a dead fashion journalist which would you be?'; and 'recite a famous quote from Diana Vreeland', caused me to lose the little hope I had of obtaining a place at the prestigious art school. However, yesterday morning, I awoke to that heart-stopping 'track@ucas.ac.uk' notification, and I am so pleased to say that I have been offered a place to study fashion journalism at Central Saint Martins. I can smugly say that I am one of 20 they chose from 400 applicants! (And apologies to Kanye West who was turned away last year). I am ecstatic to have the opportunity to study at the university that produced the likes of Alexander McQueen, Phoebe Philo, John Galliano, Riccardo Tisci and Stella McCartney. And so I have decided to share with you the 800 words that got me my interview. 

Is Fashion Insignificant?

Last November witnessed Paris suffer a destabilising horror. Still raw, the shock of the attacks spun the world into mourning. A city rich with passion and culture, run with panic and grief. An evening embedded into history; we shall never forget the blanket of fear that fell upon the world, we shall never forget those whose lives were taken from them. 

On that day, the city we know as the beating heart of high fashion reengaged us with its vulnerability. More than a skyline, we were reminded that Paris is a home, a culture, and is alive - but for a bleak moment, was silenced. 

As in many aspects of our lives, this silence is remembered on the catwalk. Haute couture speaks softly this season, yet the elephant in the room continues to grow: fashion needs indulgence. An unsteady foundation in today’s society. 

During July last year, Karl Lagerfeld introduced us to the Chanel gamblers. An elite band of Hollywood’s most treasured misfits; they came dressed in velvet and gold, poker chips to hand. Superfluous wealth was not only projected from clothing of the highest prestige, but inferred inevitably from Lagerfeld’s casino vision. Couture is not known for its subtlety, and so Chanel did not hesitate to parade a scene of lavish nonchalance. 

From one height to the other, an absence of eccentricity during couture, spring 16, pays respect to its host city. Attesting that these sufferings do not go unnoticed. Karl’s direction this season contrasted his last, opposing the affluence of gambling with nature - a theme implying realism. It is easy to conclude that fashion is a reflection of our times, the more difficult task is being conscious to when and why it is so. 

Fashion needs society to be self-indulgent because ultimately, it must be bought. Although a narrow way to view an art form, brands unfortunately would not survive without consumerism. This being said, it is many people’s opinion that couture is becoming exceedingly inappropriate. Ever worsening global crises have rendered the fashion industry insignificant when compared to our daily headlines. The distress of middle-eastern communities amongst issues such as radicalisation, climate change and refugees, leads to fashion being branded with a new perspective. Understandably, it is this that weaves the finest of embroidery with threads of guilt. 

However, the relevance of clothing surpasses the law of indecent exposure. Suggesting that apparel is required only to cover-up is a flawed statement. Fashion, necessary for more than the function of keeping warm, is needed to challenge. It has no fear, and in particular, likes to challenge ideals of beauty. The industry likes to comment on preconceptions by undermining them and gnawing at the base foundations of stereotypes. Vivienne Westwood’s fall 16 menswear collection, not only embraced bright makeup, but men in floor length gowns. Or for that matter, Yves Saint Laurent’s 1966 ‘Le Smoking’, notorious as the movement that introduced women to suits. We need fashion, because by challenging the system, it is slowly evolving society.  

We need fashion because of the light it sheds on our history, because of how it enriches and brings together cultures, and because of the confidence that accompanies a striking outfit. It is a text that goes beyond aesthetic surfaces.

We need fashion because it is an expression; a glint of who we are as individuals; and above all, art. Just as our survival is dependent on food and water, life would prove insufferable without art’s demand to exceed limitations. A life without art would be a life confined. The same is applied to fashion. Those who hold fashion dear to them feel the same intensity as other artists might. Like the industry’s children, we feel protective of this which has given us life and liberty. Lee McQueen said, ‘fashion should be a form of escapism, and not a form of imprisonment’, a quote fulfilled when a person ignores societal wishes, focusing independently on the desires of oneself. When reliant on the views of others we are only able to progress as a follower. Fashion is not following, but appreciating, whilst simultaneously being aware of your own palate. There is no higher freedom than being able to express opinion. And to me, there is no better voice than that of clothes. 

Fashion is significant now more than ever, and just like Paris, it is alive, and will continue to thrive even when threatened. We remember those lost to the attacks in the flowers that line the city; in the red, white and blue that united continents; and in the work of artists, paying their respects with what they do best. 

Image: central saint martins aw16 collection

ALEXANDER WANG - REVIEW

This collection cannot go unnoticed. Taking place in a church, Alexander Wang will have prepared himself for controversy. After Alessandro Michele announced that his Gucci, 17, cruise show is to be held in Westminster Abbey in June, the church spoke up in opposition. The concept of mixing fashion and religion was thought inappropriate and out of place to reverend Peter Owen-Jones who spoke to the Independent about his strong concerns - valid since this ultimately is using a place of worship for predominantly commercial purpose. However, this didn't stop Alexander Wang from mixing the two. And for that matter, almost insulting the church in the process. 

Rebellion seemed the theme of this body of work. Stereotypical teenage revolt portrayed through parents' worst nightmares: harsh pointed studs, chain chokers, pole-dancers on jumpers and marijuana printed jackets created what seemed a punk take on Chanel. Yet Wang may have intended an ulterior motive. 

Although a youthful take of rebellion, we sense a more mature political statement - the historic battle against religion. The main source of global conflict, Wang may have been addressing this with his insulting of traditional views. Promoting marijuana printed clothing in the house of God is certainly a controversial move to make. 

This collection may have focused more on the message than the clothing since the apparel was nothing much out of the ordinary. However the outspokenness could be read clearly, and for that, Alexander Wang, we salute you. 

FENTY X PUMA - REVIEW

Rihanna's debut collection for Puma did not disappoint. No need for months of promotion, no purposefully controversial stunts to gain attention; yet a pristine line of clothing, quietly reminding us of its presence without full scale publicity. Rihanna left the clothes to speak for themselves, which they did, and further caused ripples of respect throughout the industry. Puma's new creative director took the subtle, professional root. Or at least it seemed that way in comparison to Yeezy season 3. It is possible that the success of this collection is down to good timing. The overpowering nature of Kanye's show, paired with his shouting social media persona, rendered the Puma show less publicly anticipated and therefor made more of an impact when released to the world.

However, regardless of good timing, it's obvious that this was a collection Rihanna had thoroughly considered. It's a difficult thing to make sportswear chic, although Rihanna achieved it with occasional tastes of fur and lace. Referencing the Addam's family - 'if the Addam's family went to the gym, this is what they would wear' - allowed for a gothic take on sportswear, with the relentless attitude of Wednesday echoed throughout.

This collection has become the epitome of street style and will be the benchmark for those whose designs embrace a similar mood. Fenty X Puma has brought us a clean and polished collection that we respect. There was substance to the clothing, and by that I mean a certain richness. Even if not to our personal tastes, it is undeniable that these clothes will have a knock-on effect, influencing much of what we see on the high street.

Rihanna has gelled beautifully with Puma; tailoring her creativity to suit the brand whilst bringing with her an attitude that puts Puma back on the map.

YEEZY SEASON 3 - REVIEW

Shakespeare’s, The Tempest, is thought of by many critics as a clear example of style over substance. This was his last solo play and he wanted to exit with spectacle; paying little attention to the storyline that was thus left dry.

Kanye West’s, Yeezy season 3, was certainly a spectacle. An audience of 18,000 piled into Madison Square Garden for the reveal of not just season 3, but for the unveiling of Kanye’s new album.

‘Happy Kanye West Day’ was the greeting attendees were using as they entered the building, soon to be fixated by the self-indulgent world of West that waited inside the arena. Spectacle after spectacle was unleashed on Madison Square Garden; a white, fur cloud of Kardashian / Jenner’s exhibiting the Yeezy X Balmain, surprise collaboration; the announcement of Kanye’s new video game ‘Only One’; and of course, shocking misogynistic lyrics thrown at Taylor Swift.

Such drama however, has distracted from the clothes - which aside from being slightly different in shade, were almost replicas of what we have already seen in season 1 and 2. It's proven that Kanye likes to think himself an innovator –“I’m a creative genius and there’s no other way to word it” – yet his designs are stuck echoing that of season 1. It’s understandable a new creative director wanting to put his stamp on the brand image, however Yeezy collections are becoming increasingly bland. We cannot help but feel Kanye has a lot going on right now, he has fully expressed it in his tweets, leading us to believe that the lack of dazzle from this collection is most likely due to him being busy with a thousand other projects. So why not focus all his efforts on one project and create a true spectacle? Because he’s Kanye West. And this event was ultimately about nothing other than Kanye himself.

Just as Shakespeare wanted to be remembered with his extravagant display of The Tempest, West’s blur of events could be seen as being for the sole purpose of self-promotion.

Some dedication to fashion was communicated through his worshipping Anna Wintour – the vogue editor-in-chief renown for pairing brands with creative directors – after earlier telling her that he would love to be made the creative director of Hermès. A tactic if ever we saw one, yet also a stunt that allowed him further publicity.

With there being no such thing as bad publicity, this blog post in itself is giving Kanye the attention he craves. The dig at Taylor, the argument with Wiz Khalifa, the 3x album name change, all working in his favour and further selling himself to the world. His attempt at a political message, having models stood atop refugee tents, seems to have been already dismissed. Although I’m not sure it should’ve been since is it really ok to promote oneself through global crises?

Who knows what the next few days will bring as we await Kanye’s ‘best album of all time’. There is no doubt he is a showman, but whether he’s the creative genius he believes, that’s a different story.

HAUTE COUTURE: A GUILTY PLEASURE

In the opinion of many, the glow of couture week is becoming exceedingly inappropriate. Three days dedicated to the parading of glitz and wealth seems obtrusive amongst today's crippling economies. The juxtaposition of haute couture and the current middle-eastern crisis renders fashion insignificant; an unnecessary opportunity to smear money across the screens of millions. Untouchable riches. 

This being said, the bi-annual event remains a personal guilty pleasure. Although a sinful presence underlies my indulgence, laced between my mixed emotions lingers waves of thrill. We cannot explain the excitement that is tickled by Maria Grazia Chiuri and Pier Paolo Piccioli. Or for that matter, justify our needs for the silks of Saint Laurent. Perhaps our desires are set alight from the knowing that these objects are out of our reach; like a forbidden love - forget Romeo, we'll take Elie Saab. 

As ridiculous as the need for the Chambre Syndicale de la Haute Couture may be in comparison to the shocking societal crises of today, I find the coming days to be the most thrilling of the industry calendar. We may well be dancing with the devil, for the temptation of couture is often too otherworldly for us to ignore. Angelic creative direction, embroidery and detail, cohesively blossoming in each individual piece. This is Haute Couture. An incomparable luxury. Often inappropriate.. never overlooked. 

IVD 

A GUCCI TIMELINE: 1995 - 2016

In 1995 Tom Ford resurrected a label once buried by the media’s fixation with scandal. Defining 90s fashion, Ford re-established Gucci’s name; bringing to the table sensuous designs that whispered seduction to audiences. Think Destiny’s Child music video, tight fitting female empowerment that set the scene for wardrobes of the decade.

This theme, in its prime, had significant impact on fashion’s culture. However, 10 years later, with new creative direction from Frida Giannini, Gucci was stuck on repeat. Giannini, in ode to Tom Ford, continued the sexy luxury image of the brand - failing to explore new angles. During the 90s sexy was highly desired, however, almost two decades later it's no surprise that fashion was ready for something new. Giannini’s perpetual recycling of Ford’s original visions left Gucci stuck in 1995, unable to move with fellow designers into the 21st century. By 2014 Gucci sales had substantially declined: eventually causing Giannini – and husband / CEO of the company, Patrizio di Marco – to step down from their positions at the label.

Gucci had been forgotten. Lost amongst contemporary fashion houses of whom were opposing ideals of sexuality. Alexander McQueen and Pam Hogg for example, warping perceptions of ‘beautiful’ with their every new collection.

Previously unbeknown to the industry, early this year Alessandro Michele took his place as Gucci’s radical new creative director. Taking influence from the Sicilian culture of Dolce and Gabbana plus the fresh palettes of Valentino, Michele has successfully launched Gucci into the new millennium. His most recent pre fall 16 collection involving bouncing pussy-bows and sheer blue gowns, displays what I believe to be Michele’s best work yet. With each new collection he has showed this year, the following has reshaped any imperfections. Each season has witnessed a further refined body of work to its prior. Michele’s designs are only improving and we may see great things born from new direction of the label.

The associations of Gucci are shifting once again; from murder, to sex, to a freshness sprung from retro reshaping, Alessandro Michele has energised the company’s name with positive symbolism as it fights its way back to the heights of Prada and Dior.

MADEMOISELLE PRIVÉ

There is so much more to exhibitions than what is on show. A good exhibition plays with all the senses. Visually, the setting and arrangement of each room has to be unexpected. Each room should offer a new experience regarding the theme of the work.

Designed by Karl Lagerfeld himself, Mademoiselle Privé indulged us in previously hushed dimensions of Gabrielle's life. Her 'codes' for example: the colour red, black and white, totems, pearls. Each with their own significance. The exhibition felt as if it had been deliberately concocted to highlight Karl's relationship with the late mind of Chanel. As if his intentions were to prove his depth of knowledge within the thought process of Mademoiselle Privé herself. He wished to prove, through revealing secrets oblivious to fans before now, that he has a supernatural link with Coco and his embodiment of her work is unquestionable.

Yet, typical of the Chanel attitude, this theory was quickly contrasted with the screening of a short Lagerfeld production. The film portrayed Geraldine Chaplin as Gabrielle Chanel, returned from the grave to witness how her legacy has been continued. And, in fact, disgusted with the modern label. This confused me, if Karl was so keen to express his sincere knowledge of Chanel's wishes, why then show a film implying that he got it all wrong?

Aside from this, the most part of the exhibition consisted of Karl taking us back to the roots of Gabrielle. How she began, and most significantly, her inspirations - one of which was an 18th century garden, interlocking hedges apparently becoming the story behind the two Cs Chanel logo.

The history and inspiration took over so much of the exhibition that only one room was left to display the clothes. A long, rectangular space on the third floor of the Saatchi gallery, presenting at one end the 19th century wonders by Gabrielle Chanel, and the other, the outfits of the Chanel gamblers - as presented at Paris haute couture A/W 15. Here stood the dresses of Julianne Moore, Vanessa Paradis, Lily-Rose Depp, and Kristen Stewart (Rita Ora also although out of place as ever).

On leaving the exhibition we were directed to the final room, a bubbling bright space resembling a scene from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Large brass cauldrons of multi-coloured Chanel No5 opened their lids to engulf the room of the scent. Here we were reminded of the significance of the fragrance, and that Chanel was the first designer to develop an eu de parfum containing her own name.

Sharing a glimmer of who Gabrielle was left us wanting more. However perhaps a glimmer was just enough to remind us that Chanel was – and is – much more than the clothes. Chanel is an attitude and an image, founded to fulfil the needs of and empower women. It is utterly timeless and does not create trends, Chanel creates history.