Can a Fashion Designer be a Genius?
Genius is the word of the week.
As the wider world reacted to the collapse of John Galliano’s Met show, one thing did not seem in dispute: In many people’s eyes, Galliano was a genius whose work was unquestionably worthy of a museum retrospective.
That got us thinking: What does it really mean for a designer to be seen as a genius?
I asked my friend, the critic Tim Blanks.
“Galliano took fashion to places it had never been — on an unprecedented scale,” he texted me, adding that Galliano, like all genius artists, exceeded “ordinary insight and ability” and “defied quotidian gravity, geometry, geography, topography.” So, he’s a fan.
Styles editor Stella Bugbee and I continued to mull the matter over. Here’s an excerpt from our conversation:
Stella: Galliano was original and outrageous, but are we just parroting an oversubscribed term when we call him a genius?
Jacob: He took fashion to unexplored places. His designs were boundless, they reimagined the form, they were something not seen before.
Stella: I was revisiting images from his Dior years and came across some from the early 2000s, of models made up to look like they’d been punched in the face. It seems like such an empty gesture, done for shock value — to what end? He treated multicultural dress codes as costumes to be borrowed at will. And I’m unable to defend couture inspired by extreme poverty. There can be brilliance in pastiche, but are people conflating decadence and provocation with genius?
Jacob: Today, when people talk about Galliano’s work, it’s often as a static thing — more like sculptures to behold from afar, or videos to watch like performance pieces. It’s not about clothes as I think of them.
Stella: His work felt so contained in the world of fantasy. Did it change the way people thought about themselves in the world?
Jacob: Maybe not. His runway shows had theatrics, drama, and didn’t give a lick about being commercial. That’s compelling. His last Margiela show, especially for younger fans, tickled this desire for a ’90s fashion show with all the camp, corsetry and excess — good and bad.
Stella: I get that, though it feels really retro to me. That excess was supposedly what drove him to addiction — which he blamed for his racist outbursts. Have we learned nothing? He was like the ultimate caricature of a fashion designer. Who else fits the bill of genius, in your opinion?
Jacob: I’m sure you can see this coming, but Rei Kawakubo. She shattered the human form on the runway. In her clothes, I feel different. Both more like myself and less. I love that. There are others that have their moments, like Demna — his schlumpy silhouette shifted fashion in the mid-aughts. And Vivienne Westwood, bottling the mess and madness of punk. Even Kanye, who catalyzed the beige athleisure of the past decade. Those were all transformative trends. Anyone else for you?
Stella: Alexander McQueen, another often-cited genius of fashion, or Kawakubo as you mentioned, are both quite provocative, but seem to be tapping into something much deeper. I think Ms. Prada and Yves Saint Laurent have had genius collections. Perhaps designers can have moments of genius, and maybe that’s enough to earn the moniker?
But, these are just our thoughts. What do you think? Tell us what, if anything, makes a fashion designer a genius. We’ll include the best answers in next week’s edition of The Fashions.
Other things worth knowing about:
Bright red lipstick is part of my dress code and professional identity. Now I am wondering if it looks harsh and makes me seem outdated. How do you know when to say good-bye? — Lee, Tiburon, Calif.
