MALE CALL

Fashion Week a spectacle and clothing isn't wearable

Q. I know you have written about attending New York Fashion Week, where they show clothes that will be in stores next year. From what I saw on television for the shows that just ended, it seemed that nothing stood out. You seem to have a more realistic understanding of what it means for those of us off the runway. Did you go to the shows and did you get any clues about what the women of America will be wearing? Is Fashion Week as exciting as it sounds?

A. Yes, I went. And, yes, it is exciting. Of course, it's always a fun experience. But, no, I did not learn a great deal about what women will actually be wearing next spring. It's hard to spot trends from what is shown on the runways. Often, it does not translate to what stores will buy and what women will wear; and, as you seem to have picked up from off-site, this year was even a bit more jumbled.

Ever since Fashion Week moved first from "the tents" in New York's Bryant Park and then from Lincoln Center, it has become a disorganized, rather ill-conceived scattering of events at venues all over the city. Often the loosely-put-together shows baffle the observer and make one wonder, why is this collection even being shown? Who would wear it? And where could you go dressed in such combinations?

Back when Fashion Week was a group of shows held at a central location, audiences largely consisted of fashion writers, store buyers, celebrities and the designers' best customers. Now the thousands who finally discover where this show or that one is being held are primarily bloggers and people who manage to buy tickets in the hopes of sitting near some reality show personality from a Housewives of ... show.

A lot of what I saw on the runway and in the staged presentations lacked cohesiveness and wearability.

At one very well attended show, dozens of garments were based on Southwestern references to Navajo blanket patterns. Outfits were clashing mixtures of more than one blanket design in heavy fabrics, often layered with lace and sheer chiffon. Many were sprinkled with inconsistent sparkles from crystals, pearls and sequins. These mismatched materials did not suggest couture design.

To add to the confusion, the models all wore one of four types of footwear: clunky platform sneakers, high-heeled sneakers, cowboy boots paired illogically with colorful striped knee socks, and vampy stiletto heels with fluffy marabou pom-poms at the toe. No matter how young and edgy the wearer might be, where would she choose to wear such mixtures?

Certainly, there were a lot of shows with elaborately beautiful clothes, but many presented too few retail-friendly pieces. (Designers are often criticized if they show collections that are too commercial, rather than runway special, designed to create the hoped-for "buzz.")

The styles I disliked were too busy, had too many colors and too many varying textures that did not seem to make sense together. Several designers showed ethnic looks, including African-inspired patterns and batik prints. A few worked grungy "street wear" looks into their designs. Because the styles were for next spring/summer, several designers interspersed brief beachwear and coverups (that were hard to distinguish from evening wear) among their flowing gowns; but they seemed to have trouble making a seamless transition from one to the other. There were deeply plunging necklines, dog-collar chokers and see-through fabrics that bordered on nudity. As to that inevitable hemline question that accompanies most fashion shows, "What were the skirts like?" The answer: Long, short, asymmetric and all three mixed together, as well as fitted, full, draped, layered, slit, floaty, frayed and sheer.

Some of the designers' themes were unexpected. Among the more interesting was Thom Browne's unique use of trompe l'oeil (fool-the-eye) techniques. He showed one-piece dresses that were pretend multipiece outfits, looking like three separates: a skirt, blouse and jacket. A sporty theme that showed up was the use of a designer's initials/logo prominently displayed on casual garments as seen at DKNY and Anna Sui.

Oddly, several shows featured more fur than one would expect to see in spring styles. One designer, Vera Wang, showed only all-black (or black-and-white), highly constructed, mostly short clothes. Regular readers will recall my complaining that every year the shows have too much black. This season was the reverse ... too much color and way too much pattern.

A new phenomenon cropped up this season: cashing in on the digital age and to increase revenue, a number of styles shown on the runways were immediately available for sale. No more having to wait until next spring to buy them. Also new was that many shows were streamed live. So, even if you did not get an invitation, you could still see what went on.

No matter that it was far from perfect, Fashion Week is always a spectacle ­-- different, exciting and fun. And I am looking forward to what I will see next season.

Send men's fashion inquiries to Male Call:

lois.fenton@prodigy.com

High Profile on 09/25/2016

Upcoming Events