WARDROBE INSPIRATION | Céline Retrospective

An instant journey to the small history of Phoebe Philo's creation in Céline is much more nostalgic than I think. 

Spring 2014

The editors and buyers, as well as customers, are praising Phoebe Philo over and over again, for what she crafts under the French house, Céline. I, on the other hand, have had difficulties channeling myself to the house's creation, as it exudes--pardon my word--awkward simplicity I cannot bring myself to. So here is my attempt to get acquainted at mere seconds to the world of Céline, the Philo reigning period to be exact, by extracting my favourite looks/pieces from several seasons of the brand and imagining myself having limitless bank account so I can have them in my closet. That way, I assume, would help me appreciate Philo's aesthetics that somewhat empowers women through what they wear. After all, credits for Céline almost always contain the words versatile, accessible, simple and relate-able if not luxurious and modern.

First up is the blues

Fall 2013/ Spring 2010

Black and white are the utmost neutral of the color spectrum: the safest bet and the easiest to pair. True. Nevertheless for me, blue is the most versatile. Not only the colour has numerous shades, it also complements various skin tones and is able to deliver fun, feminine and powerful at the same time. Philo adopts the colour real well, given that the left look from Fall 2013 collection remains as the most inspiring (or copied, depend on how you perceive it) getup of the year. Additionally, the draped dress on the right is a definite go-to for a night out, or even for a work-related event if a blazer is thrown over.

White has shades, too

 Fall 2013/ Resort 2011

...and it is called creme. I know, I know those two colours are noticeably different, both of which are the neutrals and will always be. This time I imagine keeping myself a dress from the Fall 2013--the dress at the first glimpse appears unbelievably genius and at the second infinitely wearable. Meanwhile from the Resort 2011, the non-existent season, a slight stroke of colors on the pure white separates manages to amp up what otherwise is a sporty pairing. Must. Have.

Dark meets bright

Resort 2010/ Spring 2010

Perhaps not a lot of women fancy the pairing of light and dark back then, but now, it is everything modernism has to do. Well, probably not everything. But the cape-like top on from Céline spring collection on the right is EVERYTHING. I seriously consider that it is one of the prototype of the cape-ubiquity today, the ones designed with such airy yet structured feel. At the same token, the suit and top combo relinquishes "too uptight" once the flowing part of the top emerges. It is dark meets bright meets brilliant.

The effortless neutral

Resort 2014/ Resort 2010

If you are the ones shying away from wearing neutrals because the shades can make you appear nude, I am with you. But if you are the ones resisting oversize vest/parka like the one from resort 2010 installment, I am afraid I am not with you. Maybe it is the patchwork talking, or the oversize shape persuading, but this is an archetype of successful dressing: picking a statement outerwear that understates everything. Meanwhile, the Asian inspired top and pants from the recent 2014 collection are mere extensions of what kind of neutrals we all should be aiming for.

Unexpected is always in

Spring 2014/ Fall 2012

Lastly, after a wardrobe/retrospective/whatever full of basic colours and shapes, it is about time to let striking pieces kicking in. It is the artsy season, the spring 2014, and the watercolour dress filled with strokes of Philo's artsy inspirations is reasonable to don. The structured upper part and flowing bottom part summarise precisely the future of dress, and possibly the future of femininity. And what is fall without Céline big coat? Or at least, let's get something in similar styling. With the red pants, of course.

Images are all from style.com

TALKING POINT | The Simplicity of Being

I ramble about minimalism (again) and the price we have to pay for "less design."

left: an editorial using Stella McCartney's collection, from tumblr; right: Thakoon Addition Pre-Fall 2014

A simple t-shirt, a structured blazer or a nicely shaped skirt--are those what we are looking for when skimming clothes in stores? Something that would effortlessly blend with the rest of what stays in our wardrobe, perhaps? Or something to complement that statement pieces we've long acquired but has never been worn because the right match is not present? I know that is what I tend to do when going shopping these days, precisely hindering myself from the crazy motifs while having the Celines, the Wangs or the Balenciagas (from Ghesquiere's Spring/Summer 2013 that I still cannot erase from my fashion reference just yet) in mind.

The resurgence of everything pared down, simple and clean, or what columnists and writers refer as the "minimalism" trend leaves me with my own dilemma. Why is fashion, something so close yet so far to reach slowly turning into something overly accessible (cue the easy-to-pair pieces) these days? Where are the ornamentation, opulent fabrication and intricate silhouette? In a not-so-distant past I justify the beyond logical pricing of designer offerings because of the intricacy and expensive fabrics, but now that everything seems like what I have or about to have in my wardrobe, the excessive pricing somehow does not make sense anymore.

What happened to the crazy, over-the-top, whimsical fashion, people? Yes, I do not dismiss the fact that there are still visionary designers who go that way, but now everyone seems to prioritise minimal shapes over everything. Design wise, one has once said that the best design is not to design at all. I partly agree. But when you label it with a lot of zeros, don't the designers have the obligation to put certain magic touch to justify the price?

I guess it is not fair to generalise all designers who champion the clean, pared down look to commercial designers who race after the trend and grab buyers' attention. While going through some pre-fall early arrivals in style.com, my sinister argumentation of designers going for simple look boils down to a fact that a handful actually exemplifies certain kind of vision. These brands really make clothes people actually want to wear, and that is a genuine, pure complement a designer can get. Otherwise, what is the point of pre-fall? Why do we even have such label for a season that does not exist (in real life)? I will leave the answer to you.