The curious cycle of the fashion catwalk

It has been one week since the news broke that Frida Giannini, Gucci’s designer of the past 10 years, would leave the brand after her next womenswear show in February, and the speculation about who should take her place has only become more heated.

What’s interesting, however, is that in all the who-ing and fro-ing, what hasn’t come up is just how pointedly Giannini’s departure reflects on current fashion industry wisdom and the idea that what is needed right now are “clothes for real life”.

(In the context of a runway, that means less “made for marketing” �" that is, eye-catching photo shoots �" than “made for customers” �" the sort of clothes you might wear every day without thinking.)

This approach, championed by Nicolas Ghesquiere at Louis Vuitton and Hedi Slimane at Saint Laurent (and, to a certain extent, by Raf Simons at Christian Dior), places an emphasis on wardrobe �" dresses, knits, slick jeans �" and values relatively straightforward clothes over theme and narrative. It has been so apparently successful, both critically and commercially, that it was part of the stated reason for Marco Zanini’s recent departure from Schiaparelli, where, in obliquely discussing what was needed, the house said it was looking for a “contemporary spirit” �" not a full-on ode to Elsa Schiaparelli’s Surrealist past.

GraziaProm short prom dresses

Yet in many ways the whole “wardrobing” thing was actually pioneered by Giannini years ago during her debut women’s wear show at Gucci, when she executed an about-face from former creative director Tom Ford’s steamy sex-and-hedonism styles and opted for flirty floral tea dresses, easy blouses, Bermuda shorts, striped polo shirts and skinny cropped trousers. Yes, you read that right: Bermuda shorts. At Gucci.

Everyone cheered and not long after, Giannini told People magazine: “My woman likes to party but also likes to work. She’s more balanced. She has a real life, with family and maybe children.”

The fashion industry has a notoriously short memory and there is truth to the adage “you are only as good as your last show”. And, yes, every brand and every designer is different. But before everyone jumps on the wardrobing bandwagon, it might behoove the whole industry to take a step back and cast a wide eye on the arc of Giannini’s Gucci career.

It has interesting implications for everyone �" including the consumer. Because the thing is, after the initial unveiling at Gucci, it did not take long for the rumblings to start. Though Giannini punctuated her boy-cut trouser suits and flirty dresses with the occasional foray into glam-rock Lurex and keyhole cut-outs, by the Spring 2009 show, which featured red, white, blue and khaki, the critic Sarah Mower assessed the situation on Style with the equivalent of a prose yawn: “Gucci now is a clearly segmented, businesslike collection with no pretense of being anything other than hip, immediately understandable clothes for a young global audience.”

And the next thing you knew, Giannini changed tact. The aesthetic ante was raised; identifiable references were introduced; everything was given a visual hook. Perhaps too many visual hooks.

There was the Anjelica-Huston-meets-Florence-Welch collection of Fall 2011, all python and fur and jewel tones, and the Marella-Agnelli-meets-Marisa-Berenson collection of spring 2013 (think 1960s/’70s Riviera ruffled hostess dressing). There was the Spring 2014 Erte-meets-Rihanna mesh sports bras and stained-glass silks collection and last September’s Jimi-Hendrix-has-a-love-child-with-Ali-MacGraw-in-Kyoto parade. It got a little confusing.

Arguably, Giannini simply did not have the courage of her convictions and it was that insecurity, more than what she actually made, that led to the problems: At a certain point, it became very hard to identify what Gucci stood for, aesthetically, aside from bamboo-handled, made-in-Italy leather goods.

But it is also possible that, as attractive as the idea of “wardrobing” is, it serves more as a palate cleanser for a brand as opposed to an identity. It is, ultimately, not satisfying, or sustainable enough. There has to be something more, and it was Giannini’s inability to define that “more” that was the real issue.

The fact is, fashion works according to Newton’s third law of motion: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. If a brand is known for concept and fantasy, it will feel “fresh” to go back to basics and simplicity.

This is one of the reasons that everyone has responded so powerfully to Ghesquiere’s shows: In their simplicity, they have provided an antidote to his predecessor Marc Jacobs’ zeitgeist-switching signature. At Saint Laurent, Slimane’s highly merchandised vision lent clarity to former designer Stefano Pilati’s more confused archival experimentation. And at Dior, Simons’ emphasis on modernity counteracted the historicism of erstwhile creative director John Galliano.

The Gucci story suggests that at some point, fashion may demand they take the next step. It’s the cycle of the catwalk. As a lesson, it may be Giannini’s most resonant legacy.

mermaid prom dresses