on Jul 3, 2013 in Whiteboard
Thom Browne Spring 2014 Menswear Collection
[Photo Credit: IMAXtree]
When I am President, my army will be dressed like this.
I have a case of coat and jacket lust really bad.
I really need to see these pieces separated (minus the skirt jackets) in order to properly evaluate them. The styling is way distracting.
What’s the deal with the Mickey Mouse gloves?
And the ruffley socks???
This is menswear? Hmmmm………
Maybe it’s unisex, but PR or naming convention prevent them from saying so explicitly.
I wasn’t sure if the models were male
I totally thought they were women, until I reached the end.
Nope – Adam’s apples. They’re all guys.
There are a couple of the boyo’s who must be very young — jawlines don’t read “masculine” to me and honestly, I thought a couple of the models were dames.
There’s a small island nation in the Mediterranean where their entire military strategy is to show up looking as ridiculous as possible, causing the enemy to laugh so much they are utterly incapacitated.
They have never suffered a single defeat yet.
Well colour me in love with just about all of this
The hats are wrong for Winkie Guards.
Wow, seriously unflattering stuff there, Thom.
Unflattering?! Why I know plenty of men dying to show off some childbearing hips…
If only Michael Jackson had lived to see his aesthetic in high fashion….
Something tells me MJ would have LOVED some of these pieces. Slap an armband on some of those jackets and he’d be all set.
My first thought was “Michael Jackson chic.”
Michael’s aesthetic was manlier than this.
Truth be told, MJ’s stylist, Ruska Bergman, would put him in women’s T-Shirts, jeans & jackets, most notably Balmain, which, upon his passing, put them back on the map since guys & gals started inquiring about where to get MJ’s awesome outfits.
not according to Wikipedia, she never get to dress him
not according to Wikipedia, she never got to dress him
Should’ve read this before I posted, Vanessa. Jinx!
Interesting stage wear is was my first thought when I saw this collection.
Me too, I thought these outfits would make great movie costumes, like in the Fifth Element.
Somewhere there is an opera waiting for these outfits.
This isn’t even sort of menswear. This looks like a bunch of men in drag wearing Dior.
I can’t tell if you think that’s a problem or not.
My thought exactly. ‘Dior gowns for men!’
Well! Looking forward to seeing how this plays out in the real world.
Androgeny kicked up to a whole new level.
Yes, and military ceremony. That folded white flag is killing me (in a way I would not call bad).
For me, that was one of the edgier things about these photos. Since my life experience strongly runs to seeing that image at funerals of people I’ve loved or at least deeply respected.
Well this is enough for me to hate Thom Browne for the rest of my life.
I don’t even WANT to know where you insert the wind-up key.
Speak for yourself!!!
It’s the butt, obviously.
These are the Summer uniforms for the Wicked Witch of the West’s palace guard. Oh-wee-um-wee-oooh-um.
I’m just getting on, so I made sure I checked to see if someone else saw the Flying Monkeys. Oh no, nightmare time! I don’t think the monkeys wore giant circular cod pieces though…
Yes. In the context of a fashion show, that’s one of the things I like about this.
I’m shocked by all the negative reactions to the more loony collections. It’s called art, people. This isn’t main street fashion in the slightest because it’s not SUPPOSED to be. Sheesh.
With most crazy collections there are some wearable pieces. There is very little wearable here, and if this is really menswear this is insane.
Sorry , but fashion design is a business…If TB can’t show what he sells in his showroom on his runway and stand behind it, then I have a problem with it. If he wants to design for a circus, fine…just don’t call yourself a fashion designer!
If it was a loony collection that people found aesthetically pleasing, then presumably they’d respond more favorably. I’ve seen plenty of “I don’t know where I’d wear that but I’d find somewhere!” about beautiful but impractical pieces around here before.
Even the loony collections should have components that are aesthetically pleasing. I don’t think this collection fits the bill, but like all art, it’s subjective.
Exactly. There’s some interesting stuff going on here! Dismissing it as “unwearable” is like criticizing a sculpture because it would make a horrible coffee table; it misses the point.
Let’s be better than those Project Runway celebrity judges, and not divide fashion into “I would wear that” and “I wouldn’t wear that”, yeah?
I remember, too, that runway looks get waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay edited for RC or ready to wear.
To say that fashion is not meant to be worn is like saying that art isn’t meant to be seen. If you want to call it art, & complain that people want to wear it, fine; then stop calling it fashion. No one’s dividing it into “I would/not wear that”; we’re dividing into “clothes” & “ridiculousness”
I think you’re still missing the point. Can we first agree that there are fundamental differences between clothes one buys at low-end stores, designer clothes, red carpet fashion, and runway? It’s a spectrum not only of cost, but of functionality and design. I’m not saying clothes aren’t meant to be worn, nor am I “complaining that people want to wear it.” But I’m saying wearability is not always a priority in these runway collections, and shouldn’t be expected as a primary criteria any more than excellent aesthetic design should be expected of Walmart jeans.
It’s unlikely any of these items are intended to be mass produced, and there’s a good chance none of them will make it off the runway, instead being reinterpreted to suit a different function and a different place on the spectrum.
Not all designers approach the runway the same way, but when you have someone who is displaying a collection on a runway, they are not, at that time, selling functionality. They’re not even necessarily selling the particular looks they show. They’re pretty much just selling an aesthetic. It’s totally fine if people want to hate or discuss the aesthetic; I don’t have a problem with that and never said I did.
What I do find tiresome is people bringing the same criteria to a runway collection that they would bring to catalog shopping. It’s not informed and misses the point.
What does it matter what other people call it?
The fact of the matter is, you can find the work of fashion designers in museums around the world. The question of whether something can be both art and fashion has long been settled.
Yes. I went to the museum not too long ago to see a Balenciaga retrospective, and another time to see a Jean Paul Gaultier exhibit. Both exhibits were thought-provoking, beautiful and told a story of time and place, even if the pieces (esp. Gaultier) weren’t always the most wearable, and both were definitely art.
Whether it is “art” or “fashion” or both or whatever or whoever has decided what it is, I the viewer, or the beholder, have every right to look at it and go and think “Beautiful” or “Hideous” or “This isn’t art” or “This isn’t clothes” or “this makes men look Stupid!” – while the person next to me thinks the exact opposite. No one can tell me any differently nor can I tell the person next to me any differently. It’s the whole point, right?
I don’t care what ever any editor or anyone else has to say about Thom Brown’s runway collections. Each new one is a bigger joke than the last! End of story!
I dislike that it’s so much of the same thing rendered in different colors…. but I kind of love the thing itself. There are men who can pull this shit off.. put Adam Lambert in one of the longer, black ones, and I bet Ewan McGregor or Joseph Gordon-Levitt could make one of the shorter, tighter coats look pretty fabulous.
I totally agree. Even boiled down to its elements, it’s just tiny, fat lapels. I’m not sure that’s enough…style.
Maybe this could pass as stage costuming, I’ll admit that, and just maybe to make an entrance at a party – but as far as being actual clothes these are about as wearable as the Meat Dress
I looked at TB coming out at end of show…he’s wearing a conservative pale grey jacket and shorts with loafers! I want to see him wear some of this collection…the WORLD could use a good laugh right now!
But thanks for the laugh.
Menswear? I see a few more coats and jackets for Shelly O, but that’s it.
I love this. It seems thoughtful and intentionally thought provoking ! I also legitimately covet some of those jackets . I love the exploration of the idea of menswear as womenswear on men if that makes any sense
It definitely makes sense. It’s womenswear inspired by menswear AS menswear. Really highlights how badly so many of the designers failed in the PR androgyny challenge.
What an interesting take. This thread has made me rethink my initial reaction to the collection.
I completely agree. Menswear is still so idiotically hamstrung by narrow color and shape choices. A woman in a sharply tailored, menswear inspired suit is often thought chic and hot. Men treading over that same boundary do so at their peril.
I think it is still that fear of being “emasculated”, whatever the hell that even means any more. It starts early, with little boy’s clothes morphing into these aggressive, uber-boyish things as soon as they turn six. If your kid doesn’t like skulls or electric guitars or skateboards, they are out of luck.
I would love some more imaginative takes on men’s wear.
*shrug* My sons have tons of clothes without those signifiers and they’re still clearly boy clothes. But, yes, most menswear is not particularly innovative because most of us aren’t that daring. There is no time in my life when I would ever have worn any piece shown here but I wear clothing, not fashion, so I’m not the target market.
So does mine, but only because I look for them. If you don’t agree, fine, but I think it is a problem that if a boy, like mine, isn’t into those kinds of things, options are thin on the ground. I buy a lot of stuff online for that reason.
I agree with you completely on this. I have two boys. One loves skulls and pirates. The other likes sports. But man, I get tired of those being our only two options without buying them baby clothes! I don’t want to spend a fortune or just buy stripes all the time, either. Designers for boys, how about branching out a little? Boys like roller coasters. They like math problems—well, mine do, and that could be a cool graphic. One of them likes Legos. The other one likes science. They both like volcanoes. There is so much you could do with boy clothing beyond guitars and skateboards and skulls and Spongebob and Mario Brothers.
That’s because there’s still a massive amount of misogyny involved in the concept we think of as androgyny. A thin, tall woman with very small breasts and slim hips is thought to be incredibly sexy because she’s a woman who looks like a very young man. It’s the manliness we approve of, in that image. But any man who has features that might look like a woman’s–pretty face, wider hips, slightly more fat on the body–will suffer for the features he possesses that we’d call “feminine”. The feminine is always the negative in the whole androgyny idea. And you’re right, peril is the word to use.
You are so right to introduce the misogyny concept into this discussion. You’re absolutely right on the button about it.
Also: I love it when TLo posts occasionally wrestle with more profound notions. (grin)
Thank you, that is really well stated. I’d emphasize that the ideal for both male and female and female androgynes is usually the teenage boy. I’m thinking of David Bowie in the early 1970s. He looked dewy and romantic, but even in eyeliner and a dress, nobody would have mistaken him for a woman. (His recent gender play with Tilda Swinton is quite charming, though, in part because it is equal opportunity.)
The problem I have with this collection is how it crossed the line from editorial into pure costume. It looks like something for the next Tim Burton film or an update to Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
There’s pushing boundaries and being artistic and then there’s just plain self-indulgence
I agree, I thought “movie costume” when I saw it. Not necessarily bad, but not really wearable by humanoids
Is it just me or are some of these coats a little “hip-y”?
Has the aesthetic moved from parachute pants to parachute coats?
Beautiful tailoring, but not very real world.
I haven’t seen lacy socks since my girls were tiny, and that was 25 years ago. Never thought the next place they’d show up is on a bunch of men.
Marks and Spencer sell them for adults, which means lacy socks are pretty mainstream.
I don’t love this particular collection much, but I do like the trend of having men’s fashion be as widely-varied, demanding, flamboyant (and not necessarily gay!flamboyant), bold, colorful, patterned, textured… It’s refreshing.
I agree. I can get behind exploring new ways to present fashion for men. Naturally success will vary from designer to designer. This collection is both too repetitive and too avant-garde
Suddenly, I feel the need to pack my most precious keepsakes in a small suitcase and run for the hills.
I know it’s runway ‘art’ cum military chic, but I hate the vibe.
I’m finding this all a bit depressing and a little menacing.
Possibly because they all look like cartoon WWI villains.
There’s some menace, I think: it’s deliberate. I’m reading this all as a bit more than just clothing to put on your back, and I think it’s timely and witty, but not a bit “light”. I wouldn’t call it “depressing”, but I would say it’s meant to be sobering. Anyway, I look at this and think about David Bowie’s “Fashion”; I’m reminded that as a culture, we’re all in love with the narrative of war (and we are now, all of us aligned with the US in some way, involved in at least 4 wars at the moment, declared or undeclared, which show no signs of their end–in fact, it looks like more are coming). We think of power most often in the idea of domination (but we never like to think about the actual role submission plays in that dynamic of power–consider where that shows up here in this fashion show). Now throw in the whole concept of gender, with all its severely restricted baggage, not limited to just very rigid and defined ideas of beauty, charm, sexuality, and chic. That’s Dior’s New Look, all right.
I don’t really give a damn if this isn’t someone else’s cup of tea or idea of what to wear to work. It’s a bit more important than that.
Yours is an interesting comment – actually your other comments regarding androgyny as well. I was particularly struck by the “sameness” of the models. Not only are they all Caucasian, but they are made up to be the same pale white shade, completely homogenous, indistinguishable from each other. I wondered what that was all about and in the light of your comment here about dominance and power and culture with an interesting twist on submission. Maybe it’s not a comment on race or gender as much as a comment on the lack thereof .. . . . it’s quite a statement he’s making (or maybe a question he’s asking) although I can’t tease out exactly what that is. It’s quite a narrative he’s put on here and I love it. The clothes too. I just wish I could see it move.
Well, certainly, a lack of diversity–but then again, that’s the whole idea behind a militia: it’s the definition of “uniform”. Each individual is indistinguishable from any other. As for gender, well, this is loaded with commentary, and it’s fairly ambiguous too but it is there. Considering so many people’s reaction to this line, which ranges from finding it “dread”ful, to “a joke” to “ludicrous” or ugly, I’m pinning those reactions directly on to the femininity in the clothes. These are stark references to Dior’s post-war, stop-focusing-on-want-and-start-thinking-lush-luxurious-femininity New Look. I don’t think it’s accidental, and in our present time, this is quite possibly the most feminine ideal in clothing that we’ve got. If you impose all of that onto the very masculine idea of war and militias and armies, you get the androgyny that upsets people, and not the kind that turns them on. How strong is an army where the men have waists, hips, and thighs, or show a glimpse of stocking at the ankle, or wear colour as an ornament all over their bodies, just like women are supposed to do? Isn’t there remarkable strength is what we consider to be submission, isn’t there a power that women possess in that they can create life (when war is all about taking it)? These clothes are completely transformative–they completely alter the masculine body by making it take the shape of a female body, and then, the fabrics themselves carry all the signatures of feminine self-decoration. Everything “signs” woman–yet they are all men. It’s as if Brown is subverting the whole notion of “hero” by overwhelming it with the appearance of “heroine”.
Still figuring it out, and I’ll probably think of these clothes for a long time!
When people complain about the dull repetition of the modern western power suit for men, I always see two main avenues where male power is still represented by grandiose clothing: the church and the military. Both draw on ancient traditions of bold, masculine adornment. Nobody ever suggests that a cardinal is made effeminate by his lacy alb or satin robes. In the same way, these clothes show the peacock arrogance of a swaggering officer. There’s a reason they refer to medals as military “decorations.” I would actually love to see some of them on more macho looking models. I think the effect might change from cartoonish to menacing.
Y – M – C – A
Despite the initial impact of the first few pics, I got bored rather quickly.
I want all the long coats.
Is this reminding anyone else of the performance artist Vulva from Spaced?
Did Boy George threaten him with an act of terrorjizm?
Also, ONE OF THE MODELS IS WEARING MICHELLE OBAMA’S COAT FROM JAN 21! WORDS COAT WHAT WORDS. OK, I can’t handle any more of this fuckery today. It is time to start drinking.
Looks like an off-broadway production of 1984.
Not feeling this one despite some of the coats being pretty fierce. The styling bugs. I see candy-colored gestapo. All the models being pasty white isn’t helping.
This is so goddam fabulous I could just scream….
Some of these are quite stunning if you ignore the high water jodhpurs and frilly girl socks… I would hurt someone to be able to pull off #’s 3,6,10, 14, 15,20,32,34,37, and 38 … numbering starting at the top, left to right…. but you’ll note those are mostly the short jackets without the codpiece embellishment.
IDK who the hell this was designed for.
Can the cinched waist for men pleeeeeeeeease become mainstream?
Maybe it’s coming back from being a trend in the 1700-1800s.
Making a corset for a male client right now. More out there than you’d think.
Oh for god’s sake. There isn’t ONE wearable item in that collection. It’s a costume collection!
Is anyone else reminded of the soldiers who work for the Wicked Witch of the West, in the original Wizard of Oz? Those long green flared coat, and when the Cowardly Lion put one on, his tail kept flipping out? Yeah. That.
Came to mind. For me, it’s a good thing.
I say this with no expectation that I’ll ever see anyone in my life wearing one that has not been modified to a less extreme silhouette.
This is a show I would like to have seen. It looks fun and fantastical and totally crazy. My first thought was winner of a Project Runway design new outfits for an army of fabulous gay soldiers challenge.
Oh man, this is so fabulous. I covet so many of these coats. As a menswear collection, I don’t know how well it really works, but hooray androgyny?
Not yearning for Storm Trooper chic.
Apparently the Queen’s Guard has contacted Thom Browne to redesign the regimental uniforms. The impending birth of the future King or Queen demands a sartorial update, heretofore never seen in Royal circles.
The mental image is glorious.
I’m asking myself who’s gonna wear this stuff.
Absolutely no one! They will never be produced like 99% of TB’s collections. But if you want to wear TB you can always by the conservative preppy choices that he wears…I doubt you would ever catch this “artist” wearing a look from this collection!
Long time ago, with fashion such as this I stopped looking at the actual clothes but the overall themes and ideas behind them.
It’s hard to react to clothes because the styling is so distracting. How do they see out of those glasses? Lipstick and stubble? Flared a-line skirts and coats? Well, I guess it’s entertaining. I will have to scroll back up to get a good look at the clothes.
At least they aren’t wearing those glasses and 8″ spike heels at the same time.
When you’re Thom Browne, or anyone other name-brand designer, you have earned the right to display your design as art on a runway. There is no dictate in fashion that what you show must translate well to streetwear, just as there is no dictate in painting or photography that what you show in a gallery must look good hanging on the walls of the average homeowner.
I strongly object to the stringent idea (best formalized by any random Bert Keeter comment) that fashion is “just” a business. Of course Thom Browne is a businessman. But he and his designers are also artists with creative vision, and have excelled enough in business to display the fruits of their artistic endeavors. Why are we so afraid of unusual shapes, colors, and style choices on runways? Runway shows have provided homes to vibrant, crazy fashion for many decades now, and some of those ideas make it into our department stores while others do not, simply because they are meant to be appreciated differently. I struggle with the idea that a designer would condescend to another highly successful one because it isn’t aimed at the consumer, and therefore must be some kind of joke.
I don’t like every creative vision; the Versace men’s collection was not in any way pleasing to me, for example. But I am glad these designers exist, to give us interesting things to look at, and to remind us that this kind of fashion isn’t just about whether you or I should be wearing it next year. Is it not ok to look at the ideas, the details, the impact, and appreciate this as visual art? Why must we disparage it because I can’t take to the streets in it, or because it can’t and won’t be sold as-is to most consumers? Fashion is many things. It doesn’t have to be street-wearable as displayed on the runway to be valuable or appreciated.
Fair enough, but eventually every business has to make money, and if the central purpose of the business is to create sales then the business should provide something customers want.
I’m sorry, but I find it impossible to believe that some of the over the top negative reactions here are because people are worried Thom Browne can’t pay his bills.
Art and expression is, by its very nature, self-indulgent.
It’s still a business. And if it’s too self-indulgent it fails.
I taught business courses for almost 20 years. But whatever.
I fully comprehend the difference between runway art and wearable clothing and don’t necessarily expect a clear transition from one to the other, especially when the runway versions are outré.
However, ART is subjective and I don’t necessarily have to appreciate it visually if it isn’t aesthetically or emotionally pleasing to me.
Sometimes it’s just a waste of fabric.
TB absolutely has the right to show whatever he wants…just as viewers of his collections can state their opinions on his design. I’d like to see TB wearing just one of these get ups…just once, instead of his conservative preppy look one always sees him trot out in at the end of a show. And actually as an over the top artistic expression it’s actually even more one note and lame!
Ahh. How often I’ve wondered if womenswear designers (mostly male) would express themselves in the same manner if they had worn some of their own creations!
That goes triple for designers of women’s shoes.
(ETA: I acknowledge that this comment is not really in line with the level of analysis of the rest of this thread.)
I wasn’t going to say anything about this collection…because I wasn’t going to say anything. It’s what I do when a thing doesn’t speak to me….but this DOES speak to me…it creeps me out. And I’m a drag queen with a penchant for treading the line between masculine and feminine. I’m also a fashion rat..and I follow TLo because they present things that challenge me sometimes. Bert K’s comment wasn’t random…it was as valid as yours, except that Mr Keeter expressed his personal opinion without mounting a sermon.
What you say seems to dictate that anytime a designer chooses to show a line, any adverse opinion is to be dismissed as “random” because the Designer is an Artist and therefore can do what he or she wants without criticism.
The bottom line is, after careful consideration of my own motives…I see some of this collection as, possibly, a deep and unattractive statement about sexuality in the world military…the rest I think is just stupid, ill conceived and badly overdone.
I’ve said the same about McQueen before…but I have a McQueen in my wardrobe (a gift) that I cherish.
This site is about opinions, clever and/or sincere…we are all fabulously opinionated. If you get on a soap box because someone doesn’t think what you do…it’s really your business, but it starts to read as a dismissal of a valid point of view…and we Bitter Kittens love to disagree, but we defend each other without reservation…
and we can type paragraphs of self-important drivel right back.
pssst….i heart you….a lot
Well said and argued. i don’t particularly like this collection either, but I think the styling is really distracting. Break it apart and there may be some real-world gems in there, if you want to shell out the cash for them.
Hm, I didn’t get the idea that fiddlecub was saying that designers shouldn’t be criticized because they are capital-A Artists who are above criticism. I think he’s fine with a statement along the lines of “this collection sucks because I think it’s ugly.” What he seemed to be disagreeing with was a sentiment more along the lines of “this collection sucks because most people won’t buy it.”
Both of those (aesthetics v. commercial viability) are perfectly valid criteria on which to evaluate a collection. However, they are not interchangeable concepts, and I don’t think we as Kittens have necessarily been doing a great job in this thread of drawing the distinction. And people tend to get defensive when they’re having an argument but aren’t arguing about the same thing.
For me it doesn’t help that a significant chunk (but not all, by any means!) of the criticism I’ve read here that addresses the aesthetic merits of this collection seems to involve a lot of “ewww, lipstick and frilly socks on men, gross” comments. I think there’s some conditioned misogyny there that we’d do well to look at.
There’s a general inability to see past the styling from many people. I tend to liken this to the people on property TV shows that go ewww at a perfectly nice house because they don’t like the wallpaper.
Yes, criticising something for it’s aesthetic merit or whether or not it appeals to your own tastes is totally different to saying only very commercial collections that meet someone’s personal idea of wearability should walk the catwalk. That approach has me skipping even looking at a lot of collections, especially many of the NYFW ones which tend to swing that way. It becomes, as someone else said in these comments (sorry can’t find the comment again to credit) more akin to catalogue shopping. High end catwalks shouldn’t look like a department store launch. They should be any or all of beautiful, challenging, fun, over the top, powerful, silly, political, meaningful and of course publicity grabbing so the designer can then sell the more sensible versions. But surely we all know this. We may not like a collection but we can support a designers right to put it down a catwalk and not be chivvied into boring us to tears with average, pleasant conservatism.
Eh, I think there should be room for both art-for-art’s-sake and commercially viable collections. Just because something’s wearable doesn’t mean it’s boring; and just because something’s being sent down a runway doesn’t mean it needs to be wearable.
Of course. Room for everything as long as it’s worth looking at, whatever end of the scale it’s at. And of course wearable doesn’t mean boring. But pushing commercial as the chief factor doesn’t do much for creativity.
I absolutely agree with you, ankali. I’m afraid,perhaps, that I didn’t communicate in my post that I was not taking exception to Fiddlecub’s point of view about design and runway as art, but with the fact that another poster – also with a valid point of view – was being named and dissed out of hand…I like this site because we can disagree fiercely with one another here without being disrespectful to other posters. This leaves T & Lo open to add their opinions in support of any view they please (as they did with Fiddlecub) and not have to moderate so much for name calling, cat fights and trolls as so often is the case in other forums.
While I know I was personally triggered by the themes of this collection (strongly) – I actually agree with Fiddlecub, to some extent, but I felt he took a shot at another poster by name and, for me, that’s off limits. I’m sorry if I crossed that line myself.
But he didn’t take a shot at another poster. He singled out another poster’s commentary to show that he disagreed. It’s not the same thing. In fact, it’s something we encourage here, so long as people remember not to get personal in their disagreements.
Again, correct. Mea Culpa…I clearly took an unnecessarily defensive position…I don’t know why, but the word ‘random’ seems to make me see red.
Most of us cross a line now and then. Not all of us have such lovely manners about it once we’ve had time to step back.
Comes purely out of my own examination of conscience.
Oh, please don’t apologize! You seem perfectly lovely, and I totally understand the impulse toward civil discourse.
There is little in your posts and the subsequent posts I disagree with. You’re all making appropriate points. But on occasion I have had the same reaction to… Other’s reactions to… the couture shows TLo blogs. I bet people would be shocked to see the evolution of items in their very own closets – and their origins, which are often birthed in these shows.
Designers aren’t responsible for the profitability of the fashion industry, rather, they are hopefully responsible for its revelance, innovation, advancement, momentum, and excellence. The interim “developers” of a fashion idea, who are creating consumable streetwear that has to be bought and available to consumers – is responsible for profitability.
I read a lot of commentary here at TLo from the layperson’s perspective of wearable fashion, which is cool. Even cooler is that fashion – as an art – is so accessible to all of us. Mostly because the inescapable entertainment industry is our porthole, but it’s an effective vehicle in bringing current trends, ideas, sensational and the outrageous into our little lives. It’s fun to analyze, criticize, and cheer and jeer. But also, I think it’s important to consider the presentation (RW) for what it is. Enjoy and appreciate BKs…
Sorry – cant edit my post but meant to add the you are supposed to have a (strong) reaction to art. Indifference is the greatest insult.
My appreciation to you, fiddlecub, for taking the time to lay out your perspective and thus sparking an interesting series of comments.
I really enjoy this site because so many people with different perspectives, different experiences and different levels of expertise are comfortable expressing their point of view. (And I appreciate our hosts because I suspect a lot of that is due to the effort they put into moderating posts so as to maintain a high degree of civility.)
So is this menswear inspire by womensware inspired by mensware?
I covet SO MANY of those coats!!!!
That last leather one is unbelievable, gorgeous!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. No, really i mean HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! quite funny, in fact! It’s a dervish-army with Aviator sunglasses – priceless.
Thank-you. “Dervish-army” comes closer to describing the silhouette than what I have been thinking in my head. Though I quite like a lot of it, without believing I’ll ever see it on anyone in my day-to-day life.
I love every androgynous gender bending minute of it. I had to double take when I remembered the post was titled Menswear. I don’t know that men would actually wear those full-skirted coats…BUT I TOTALLY WOULD.
The briefcases with the anchor motif make me giggle. I guess those are meant to be the office wear looks. This is really a fun collection.
who do i have to kill to get one of those coats?
What is going on with menswear? This is the second collection that is pure costume. It isn’t even androgynous. Most of it is womenswear.
“Yes, those pants make your hips look wide.”
I appreciate Thom Browne for being so far out there. He keeps things interesting.
Answers the question no one ever, anywhere, thought to ask: “Hey, what if the Nazi’s cloned Mary Poppins?”
Bingo. You said in one short sentence what I’ve been trying to say in a bunch of mumbly, wordy comments. Also: How much do you love a man in a uniform if that uniform includes frills, lace, embroidery, and lipstick the colour of poppies?
Designed by Michael Jackson. Lipstick included.
I just saw a post on FB about this collection….had to check it out. They were right…it’s a remake of “Raider’s of the Lost Ark” with Rupaul” in the lead as the head NAZI! Go GURL!
I feel like I’ve walked into a very high-end, slightly confused fetishwear shop. (And I love it.)
not really digging it. at some level I know this will never make it down market, but I just can’t get behind it.
It’s all too costume-y for me. Including the hats, gloves, and red lipstick.
So, this is the collection if you want to make your man dress up like Ilsa the She-Wolf?
The ruffles at the top of the white socks are a nice touch.
Question by a fashion newbie. I remember the fall menswear collections and they were not artistic or outre like all of the spring collections. Mostly suits, IIRC. So what happened to menswear this spring, is this normal for the spring or some new trend in menswear?
Go home, men’s fashion, you are DRUNK!
Utterly unwearable. I’ll be curious to see what things look like when the items are actually sold for the ‘mass market.’
Dear god. No.
I keep coming back to look at this collection, something I rarely do. The tailoring is exquisite on most of the pieces, and I like some of the silhouettes.
One of my male cousins only wears kilts. He would get a kick out of that skirt, I think.
Did anyone else notice the codpieces on the bottom fronts of the jackets? It is bizarre, but would certainly solve a problem or two. For those who prefer everything in military, ship-shape, precision form, with no flyaway coattails. And no worries about revealing one’s level or lack of sexual excitement. So there’s that.
The codpieces are cracking me up! They look like little hats!
bowie’s in spaaaace
So men want to look short and hippy now? Fashion…whatcha gonna do
I don’t pretend to understand it, but I want to see the movie where this army fights in. And I want it to feature Vin Diesel.
I don’t know… most of this stuff makes them look bulky and not in especially attractive ways. It’s cute, but I don’t really see high fashion as being “cute”. Meh.
Yes. YES. It’s become clear to me that ALL menswear collections should look like gender-fluid toy punk toy soldiers. I’m not being even a little sarcastic here.
Although I could do without the ones that look like they have appliqued toilet seats glued over their crotches.
I couldn’t figure out where I’d seen something like this before, until I realized I was humming Lady Gaga’s “Alejandro.” This collection would be great for a crazy music video, but that’s about it.
All I see is red lipstick and super gay uniforms. Is this supposed to be a cosplay collection or something?
Because men all secretly desire to wear the little lacey anklet socks that were formerly the province of 7 year old Catholic school girls at their First Communion. Personally I’m fond of the patent leather codpieces. The male equivalent of the push up bra. I think Johnny Weir actually rocked this look a few years ago.
Now they’re just f**king with us…
The Nazi Party joined the Pride Parade so gradually I barely even noticed….
Just . . . Yuck.
Ugh. The word “overkill” comes to mind…
I’d actually like to see these on guys less androgynous looking. I think it would almost work better. Sometimes I think people try to hard to blur gender ideas.
What just happened here?
Oh my God, I love Thom Browne. Man knows how to put on a show. I think that it will be interesting to see some of this translated to ready to wear; I love the androgyny and the exaggerated silhouettes, and I think they could be very effective even toned down from the cartoonish proportions here.
It’s like menswear collections are about making fun of men or about dressing men for gay dance clubs. There are some exceptions, but it’s a real pity.
And no one laughed out loud while this stuff was presented??
INNER LAUGHS …..for sure!
Man, how did they take so many FABULOUS pieces and put them together so the models look like the chorus in a very VERY odd movie musical?
Maybe they’re the chorus line of “Springtime for Hitler” in a new production of The Producers?
I am confused…
i like the frilly socks so, a question, I haven’t seen any men wearing skirts yet, and I’m in soho in london. do we think this is going to be A Thing? i could definitely get behind it.
He’s had The Producers DVD on too many times when he was designing this collection LOL!
There are some great garments in here. Obviously the styling and the whole is rather out there. I’m sure there’s some intentional tongue in cheek in that. But some people take everthing too literally and too seriously.
Find me the man (who identifies male) who wants to wear this cut of coat.
That would be me. I don’t like the collection as a whole, and I hate the way it’s styled, but I do love most of the coats and would wear them in a heartbeat.
Here I am & I am 50!
This collection just made me laugh out loud; It’s great to see designers having genuine fun with men’s clothes. And to be honest, if I were 45 years younger, I’d wear a lot of these.
I can’t wait to see which outfit Alan Cummings shows up in on the RC.
Heh, heh, heh…!!!
Three cheers for the red white and blue!
Thy banners make tyranny tremble …
Um, yeah. Women’s wear as men’s wear, with the occasional nod to the nether regions.
Kind of digging the feminine silhouette. Thom Browne always give such amazing fuckery with his menswear collections. If it wasn’t a trillion degrees with 90% humidity I would be more excited about coats but right now my mind is just “omg get it off”; I can’t even stand to look at people bundled up at the moment.
WHAT. These are dudes! *Gaspshock*
And they have smaller waists than me. *sob*
And NONE of it resembles ANY RUNWAY show that he has presented…EVER! Total bait and switch!
Das Boot The musical
Nazi meets Bowie meets The New Look meets Wizard of Oz Winkies. (the guards at the Wicked Witches Castle) Adrian is rolling in his grave,with laughter!
Some of the coats are gorgeous, but they look to be…I don’t know what the word is for it, puffed out? Lined with a lot of stuff? They make the models look thick-waisted, and I’m pretty sure they’re not.
The styling is really throwing off some of the looks. If I put my thumb over the face and then another finger over the shoes, I can appreciate some of the looks a bit better. Some are just silly (like the first look), but some are quite interesting and certainly have sparked a great discussion.
Couture by Colonel Klink.
i’m pretty go with the flow, but this flow makes no sense whatsoever.
me no likey.
eta: i like the lipstick.
Back in the 80s I remember Vivienne Westwood appearing on a chatshow mid London fashion week. They brought some of the models on wearing some of the pieces. She was laughed at, the audience laughed and although she held her head up and carried on, it was horrendous. Just awful that in a country and during a decade that had seen some of the most peacockish street fashion in eons people could be so narrow minded and lacking in imagination as to laugh.
Yet here we still are. It’s a catwalk SHOW. Publicity, promotion, draw it large, make it have impact. And look, actually look. See past the Springtime for Hitler styling and the more excessive show garments and there’s a core of beautifully tailored jackets and coats that are perfectly wearable and only a little offbeat.Thom Browne isn’t intending men to strut around in plumed peaked caps anymore than Sarah Burton thinks women will be wearing face cages after all.
What’s with the crotch targets?
I now want to see more men wearing lipstick. I love this collection!
Jawohl mein herr!
I’m usually sucked in by Thom Browne’s fabric choices and I immediately start drooling. Not so with this collection. I’ll wait for fall, thankyouverymuch.
Nazi flying Monkeys….I mean REALLY????????…Have to admire the models..they all kept straight faces!
Not to my taste at all, but hot damn, I want whatever lipstick they are wearing.
There have been 203 comments and I haven’t time to read them all, so I’m just going to assume somebody has already made a joke about how Thom Browne now represents the Lollipop Guild.
There seems to be some debate whether it’s closer to a Lollipop Guild or Springtime for Hitler.
It will be interesting to see how this translates to reality. Double-breasted comes back? Brass buttons? Doc Martins with floods?
So he put Michelle Obama’s dress on the runway six thousand times! hmmm
This looks like the drag king army of Candyland.
Subtitle ‘Allo ‘Allo! the musical. Herr Flick would look great in most of these.
My son (age 5) said of the group with red jackets, white pants and black boots – they look like embarrassed zebras!
I want to like the gender bending of the styling (admirable effort and all) but the fabric choices and proportions are completely wrong and aggressively unflattering.
Thanks I love it. I guess they were expecting CK or Armani.
Had to go back up and check to see that this was menswear because it certainly doesn’t read as such. However, I am looking forward to seeing Channing Tatum or that SuperMan guy in the first look.
It’s all very Boy George in the Third Reich for me. Love the BG makeup aspect – and the frilly anklets.
The SS in drag?
I really like the shoes and boots (sans ankle ruffle). But the coats with the big skirts remind me of the scary guards at the Wicked Witch of the West’s castle. And the models are styled like storm troopers in drag.
Oh, for God Sake! He invented that style in the 80′s and that stylist supposedly worked with him in 2007!!!
Well, if they do another Austin Powers remake, I know what the quasi-Germanic villain will be wearing.
Nazi femme wear is making a comeback?
The outfits make those beautiful tall men look like midgets. Though some of them may look beautifully matched with other pants. The pants are questionable all the way.
I wish they werent wearing those sunglasses. It makes everything seem Michael Jackson.
I really like the clothes though. Or the idea of the clothes. Just the jackets. Why’d they have to go full on crazy with this?
Is it ironic that I find the styling to be ballsy here?
Please tell me David Bowie circa 2006 was sitting in the front row.
Logo designed by shdgraphics