Tuesday, 06.03.08
YSL, RIP
PIERRE VERDY/AFP/Getty Images
Couture Clash
January 2008
Dress Sense
May 2007
Virginia Postrel argues for the place of fashion in art museums.
In a career that peaked in the 1960s and 1970s, Saint Laurent produced many striking collections and pieces, including his tentlike "trapeze" dresses for Dior, his 1966 Mondrian minidress, and his opulent Russian-inspired 1976 collection. But his most important contributions were the least individually memorable -- the innovations that became so much a part of fashion that we hardly notice them. To much controversy, he took turtlenecks and leather jackets out of beatnik subculture and made them high fashion. He turned pea coats and safari jackets from utilitarian apparel into recurring expressions of style. Above all, he made pants suits normal feminine attire, neither transgressive nor intrinsically casual. When in 1970 my elementary school finally decided to let female students and teachers wear pants, we could thank Yves Saint Laurent.
The first living designer to have his work featured in a Metropolitan Museum retrospective (in 1983), Saint Laurent is uncontroversially considered an artist in the fashion world -- "the pre-eminent designer of the second half of the 20th century" and the "baseline" for any museum's fashion collection, Harold Koda, the curator-in-charge of the Met's Costume Institute, said in an interview last year.
In his most important clothes, however, Saint Laurent's artistry wasn't obvious. His clothes did not display bravura feats of construction. They did not evoke the adjectives "theatrical" or "intellectual." Even his signature innovation, the evening suit "Le Smoking," was a feminine play on the classic tuxedo. Touring last year's Costume Institute exhibit of outfits from the late Nan Kempner -- essentially a Saint Laurent show -- I was struck by how contemporary and ordinary the clothes looked. They might be decades old, but you could imagine leaving the museum and seeing someone wearing those outfits down Fifth Avenue. With only minor tweaks, the pieces would seem completely up to date.
Like Coco Chanel's, Saint Laurent's work is timeless. Yet, like Chanel, Saint Laurent was radical in his day. And therein lies a paradox. Their "timeless" work was very much a product of their times. It would have looked bizarre a half century earlier. It seems that timeless art -- whether in fashion or painting -- has its origins in a profound response to a permanent, or at least very long lived, change in sensibility and culture.
The YSL swaggerRobin Givhan admires the designer for dissolving the "stultifying hierarchy" of the fashion industry. |
RedesignerMary Rourke's long obituary follows YSL's path from Dior disciple to definer of modern French couture. |
Fashionably lateA New York Times slideshow revisits the designer's life and work. |
A memorable flamboyanceAlicia Drake talks about the rivalry and parallel careers of YSL and Karl Lagerfeld. |
(1)
Ms Postrel:
Egregiously wrong analysis.
Even in his most unimportant clothes, Saint Laurent's artistry was obvious. His clothes did display bravura feats of deconstruction. They did evoke the adverbs "theatrically" or "intellectually." Only his signature innovation, the morning suit "Le Quitter," was a masculine work on the modern tuxedo. When I toured last year's Costume Institute exhibit of outfits, I was struck by how classical and unique the clothes felt. They might be days old, but I could imagine entering the museum and sensing someone wearing those outfits up Fourth Avenue. With a lot of major surgery, the ensemble would seem somewhat out of date. Unlike Coco Chanel's, Saint Laurent's recreation is timeless. And, unlike Chanel, Saint Laurent was a reactionary in his night. And therein lies an aphorism. Their "short-lived" recreation was very much a division of other times. It would have looked appropriate a full century later. It seems that short-lived art -- whether in traditional costumes or sculpture-- has its death in a profound response to an evanescent, or at least very short lived, permanence in callousness and mathematics.
You have portrayed an antonym of Laurent's life.
Shame, shame, shame.
Posted by Luis A. del Valle | June 4, 2008 1:50 AM