“ELEMENTS OF STYLE: FASHION AND FORM AT THE BEINECKE”
Through March 27 Yale University [New Haven, CT]
This exhibit pays homage to Strunk and White’s classic grammar primer, “The Elements of Style,” first published 50 years ago, and considers the idea of style as it relates to sartorial expression and prose/poetic form — the role of clothing and design in literature and everyday life, and the artful way in which words appear upon the page. “Elements of Style” highlights literary artifacts such as Gertrude Stein’s embroidered waistcoats and Muriel Draper’s hats, while it also draws attention to the evocative relationship between text and texture, fabric and paper, as well as the book artist’s continued fascination with sewing and the decorative arts.
“OUR FACE FOR THE WORLD: THE CLOTHING OF JAMES AND ELIZABETH MONROE”
Through March 31 The James Monroe Museum and Memorial Library [Fredericksburg, VA]
This exhibit highlights how the Monroes used fashion: it was the good impression that the Monroes made at the French court, where fashion and image was everything, that allowed the United States to retain France as a powerful ally and eventually to complete the Louisiana Purchase. Appearance was important at home, as well: the Monroe family had to change their style to fit the American view of what a statesman and President should be. It was their public appearance during the Monroe Administration that created the presidential image that we still have today. Everything from the suit that James Monroe wore during the negotiations for the Louisiana Purchase to Elizabeth Monroe’s wedding gown will be on display.
“LACE IN TRANSLATION”
Through April 3 The Design Center at Philadelphia University [Philadelphia, PA]
These European and Canadian art/design teams explored
the historic Quaker Lace Company collection of The Design Center at
Philadelphia University for inspiration, and were commissioned to create
new, site-specific works for installation in the Center’s galleries and on
its adjoining grounds.
The highly conceptual women’s clothing brand Rodarte, a label founded by the design team of sisters Kate and Laura Mulleavy, has been the recipient of many awards including the Council of Fashion Designers of America 2009 award for Womenswear Designer of the Year. The Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum’s current exhibition “Quicktake: Rodarte,” on view February 11th – March 14th, 2010, takes a look at what makes Rodarte clothing more than just “cool.” (I should note too that Rodarte was one of the most recent designers to collaborate with Target, showing that despite the incredibly sophisticated nature of Rodarte garments, they still can manage to appeal to a broad range of consumers.)
The most striking feature of the garments in the exhibition is the constant interplay between hard and soft. There is an avoidable homespun feel, yet each piece feels strangely future-oriented. Re-shaped and re-formed, these garments are the epitome of collage. They are clearly falling apart, yet intentionally held together. As such is seems that they are the embodiment of the simultaneous decay and reconstruction that characterizes our current social environment.
At the risk of being overly dramatic, I’m inclined to say that Rodarte’s clothing also represents the spirit of the contemporary woman – a phoenix rising out of the ashes, a forward-thinking “fierce” being, yet one who still revels in tulle and pastels reminiscent of the ballet, and who still values craft and homespun materials which highlight the essence of femininity.
Chains, studs, intricately manipulated leather, crocheted metallic yarn, pale pink tulle — one hundred percent tough, yet entirely delicate. A few of the garments are characterized by gathered and wrapped gauze, covering the frame like a corpse or a mummy. There are certainly gothic elements at work in the clothing, but somehow there is a freedom or a power still latent in the overall effect.
Spider webs of crochet cover the chest and the legs of the mannequins, wrapping them in cocoons, but again this body covering feels like armor, preparing the wearer for action. Encased in feathers, leather, and tie-dye, snakeskin and puckered yarn, these bodies looked “dipped;” thev’ve been “treated” rather than dressed. The garments possess a true tactile quality. A person wants to touch them. This haptic visuality that informs the clothing appeals to the new shifting emphasis on touch versus sight. We no longer want to be seen, but felt as well.
Rodarte is adored by young starlets for the brands’ indescribable “it” quality, but this show at the Cooper-Hewitt demonstrate the designers’ staying quality as craftswomen deserving of actual recognition for the quality and innovation apparent in the garments they create.
The 21st Winter Olympic Games begin Febraury 12 (this Friday) in Vancouver, Canada. Ralph Lauren designed the US team’s official opening ceremony outfits (pictured above), and was inspired by “classic outfits worn during the 1932 competition in Lake Placid.” But what exactly did the opening ceremony outfits look like in 1932?
Lake Placid 1932-Opening Ceremony-The American delegation (USA). (Via olympic.org)
The 1930s saw a huge rise in interest in winter sports attire, especially ski-wear. According to Charlie Lee-Potter, author of Sportswear in Vogue Since 1910, “Between 1930 and 1933 the smart ski silhouette for men and women was long and narrow. Waists were accentuated by short, double-breasted, boxy jackets with the broad shoulders introduced by Schiaparelli, and wide lapels worn with Norwegian-style trousers with gathered hems (the precursor of plus-fours).” The Painted Woman blog, has more wonderful images on 1930s winter sportswear for women. Those looking for a little more should read Pat Warners, When the Girls Came Out to Play: The Birth of American Sportswear, and be sure to check out Worn Through’s related posts from 2008.
Schiaparelli Ski Suit, Harper’s Bazaar, December 1938.
Some other examples of historic winter sports attire include:
Ski Jacket, House of Lanvin, 1924/25, MET, Costime Institute
Wool ski suits from the fall/winter 1937-38 Montgomery Wards (via Fuzzylizzie.com)
Skating dress by Hattie Carnegie, 1930, Met Costume Institute
Gretchen Fraser, 1948 Olympic Gold Medalist (USA) in St. Moritz
Tenley Albright, 1956 gold medalist (USA) in figure skating, at Cortina d’Ampezzo
Ski Ensemble by House of Balenciaga, 1967, Met Costume Institute
Rodard and the Olympics, 2010
Johnny Weir in custom Rodarte
Kate and Laura Mulleavy, who make up the hot and rapidly expanding* fashion duo, Rodarte are getting in on the Olympic action with a photo editorial in the New York Times Magazine. The ‘loopy’ video is entertaining, but indications are that these high fashion/costumes won’t appear in competition.To tie in to both the Olymics and New York Fashion Week, The Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum in New York is having a ‘Quicktake’ exhibition of Rodarte (tomorrow through March 14). The Cooper-Hewitt Design Blog has some good behind the scenes information.
*Rodarte, in case you’ve been hiding under a rock, are quickly becoming an empire. In addition to their spread in the New York Times Magazine this past weekend, and the exhibition at the Cooper-Hewitt, they recently developed a collection for Target, announced a menswear line, and were even featured in a New Yorker profile.
Donna Karan has said it best when she encourages those in fashion to really think deeply about why they are making the garments they are making and what purpose are they actually serving? I think the other issue informing my criticisms (of the panel discussion at Pratt) is that I think the only way we can make actual and significant headway on the sustainability front is 100% through cross-disciplinary collaboration — and by that I mean an actual think tank with architects, environmentalists, lawyers, and academics as well as professional fashion designers discussing the new future of fashion. The discussion over something as important as sustainability has to come from a variety of avenues, not just from within fashion itself. That’s when the sentiments become a little difficult to read.
It’s true that there is a great distinction between the art and craft of garment-making and the fashion industry proper, but it seems that those who benefit from the latter in their pursuit of the former need not be so dismissive of the hand that feeds them. It just feels a little odd when successful designers start complaining about “the system.”
Julie Gilhart noted that the Barney’s CEO is so concerned about the “bottom line” and that’s part of her difficulty in introducing sustainable designs to the Barney’s customer. But doesn’t that also indicate that everyone’s job really does depend on the fashion industry maintaining the status quo? Isn’t it then necessary that available fashions constantly change, thereby presenting the customer with a continual series of different options to purchase?
Fashion as it exists in the United States really is an enormous industry – providing millions of jobs and dealing in loads and loads of money. Do those who are at the highest level of that totem pole really and truly want to see everyone running around in re-usable linen shifts? I highly doubt it.
I also wonder if there isn’t something innately human about the desire to change our skins. Would any of us really be content with one or two garments, even if they did stand the wear and tear of time? Again, I have my doubts. And I think it’s little false to suggest otherwise. Perhaps the solution lies in thinking very seriously about how we can satisfy our thirst for the new in a physical environment that is quickly forcing us to settle for less.
Designs by Kelly Cobb, "Ethics and Aesthetics: Sustainable Fashion" Exhibition, Pratt
Another point I’d contest is this idea that individualism really has that much power over the fashion industry. Are the days of the “it” dress or “it” bag really over? Is it really so true that everyone just wants unique, well-crafted, individual pieces? While that idea sounds incredibly refreshing and yes, perhaps in New York and other highly style conscious places the quest for the “special” item may be in effect, I just don’t think that applies to all women everywhere.
I just wonder if the idea of the “new” combined with our need for group conformity are simply too much a part of why we dress the way we dress. And if group conformity (and the perpetuation and following of trends) is really at the heart of the fashion equation how long will we be satisfied without wanting what the girl next door is wearing?
So what is the answer? I agree with the Pratt panelists that a return to quality craft and individualism is a huge part of the solution. It’s typically when we feel the responsibility and the gravity of our own choices as individuals that we may come to really thoughtfully consider how our fashion and consumption practices affect others. It’s as individuals that we become accountable.
When blindly following trends we literally become one of a pack and we cease to feel a responsibility for our actions. So it does feel like more collaboration and cooperation on the design end, more individual responsibility on the consumption end, and we may see ourselves reaching some kind of solid grasp of the solutions to the problems of creating, promoting, and attaining sustainable fashion.
Julie Gilhart reminded the audience at the Pratt panel that we are now at a point where these issues of sustainability are simply unavoidable. That is definitely true. We are faced with a moment of crisis in all areas of consumption, but I think we need to ask a lot more primary questions about why we design what we design and why we buy what we buy. It’s only after dealing with these larger theoretical issues that specifics of this problem will come into focus.
I recently attended a panel discussion on Sustainable Fashion in conjunction with the current exhibition “Ethics and Aesthetics: Sustainable Fashion” at Manhattan’s Pratt Gallery. The moderators were exhibition curators Francesca Granata and Sarah Scaturro, and panelists included Julie Gilhart, Barney’s New York senior vice president and fashion director of Barneys, Mary Ping’s of “Slow and Steady Wins the Race,” and Uluru’s Caroline Priebe.
The question of fashion and sustainability is a huge one. To begin with, there is so much confusion regarding what we are actually talking about when we speak of sustainable fashion – do we mean the use of organic fibers? Do we simply mean incorporating fair trade, cruelty-free practices into garment production? Or do we mean creating garments which are themselves meant to be sustainable and reusable?
And here’s another conceptual dilemma to add to the confusion – aren’t the words “sustainable” and “fashion” mutually exclusive? Isn’t the concept itself an oxymoron? Isn’t fashion by definition an endeavor that is designed to change, to chase novelty, to constantly present something new? For many, yes — seasonal runway shows and the constant cycle of trends are an inherent and unavoidable aspects of fashion — aspects of the industry that are perhaps contradictory to sustainability ideology.
Several particularly interesting points were highlighted through the discussion – especially concerning this issue of trying to define sustainable fashion. The question arose regarding instituting some sort of certification process through which garments and manufacturers could be proven to incorporate sustainable methodologies into their clothing design and production. If such a certification were possible, then labels could be utilized guaranteeing a level of sustainability awareness and concern.
However, it is significant to note that Julie Gilhart admitted that Barney’s intentionally removes any labels indicating a garment’s organic or eco-centric origin. Perhaps it is the stigma still associated with such terms that Barney’s clients can’t bear. She said that most people still assume that an “organic” article of clothing should look like something that could be purchased at Whole Foods. Until there are clients who actually want to find and purchase ecologically-sound and sustainable clothing, it seems like the whole effort really is an up-hill battle. Eco-fashion does not equal a burlap sack, but the shopping public doesn’t necessarily know this.
An idea that goes hand in hand with sustainable fashion is “slow fashion.” The panelists discussed whether or not there exists a possibility for a slower production/consumption model in the fashion industry. One really good point that Gilhart mentioned in light of this question is that if we invest more history and memories into our clothing, in a sense investing more emotionally, then maybe we could effectively slow the tempo of the industry.
There was an overall sense among all the panelists of “Oh, we’re tired of fashion. We want a return to the ‘classics,’” “We just want good design.” But is that really true? Isn’t that just one side of the argument? I think it’s such an affectation to claim to be “tired of fashion” when you are smack in the middle of it.
The biggest message of the discussion is that the power to make a major switch towards sustainable fashion lies in the hands of the designers. Designers should not wait for the customers to ask for it. Designers need to be the ones to step up to the plate and begin shifting course.
Quality, craft, and individualism were words that echoed through the panel. Tailor-made custom designed clothes – these are the components of a new movement towards sustainable design. The panelists kept stressing that “people want what no one else has,” but I have to ask how honest that is. What about the regular woman in a regular town — the mom who shops at Old Navy? How much does she really care about originality? I wonder how much this whole move back towards craft and the quest for individual, unique items is really just another trend.
A week ago today, I was in Paris, marveling over Madeleine Vionnet’s work in the Musée des Arts décoratifs‘ exhibition, Madeleine Vionnet: Puriste de la Mode. The exhibition, running June 24, 2009 through January 31, 2010 (you still have this weekend!) has brought to the public the first-ever retrospective exhibition of Vionnet’s oeuvre.
The exhibition is a delightful walk through early twentieth-century design, showcasing 130 of Vionnet’s designs, dating from 1912 to 1939. In 1952, Vionnet, one of fashion’s most celebrated designers, credited with the creation of the bias cut and the one-seam dress, and women’s transition out of corsetry in the early part of the century, generously donated her collection of dresses, patterns, and photographs to the newly created Union Française des Arts du Costume, for preservation and for the education of future generations. Included in the donation were 126 dresses and 727 patterns, 73 copyright albums (including sketches), and more than 12,800 photographs, constituting her maison’s entire archive.
The exhibition was staid, chronologically and thematically laid out, in keeping with the reverence with which you would expect the work of a master couturière, known as the couturier’s couturier, to be displayed, simply letting the construction and exquisite details of the dresses speak for themselves. Greeting us when we entered was an articulated small scale mannequin which Vionnet used to drape designs. It was humble, but its significance was repeated visually, as the exhibition’s display mannequins were all full-scale versions of the doll-like figure.
I had hoped to have many good photographs of the exhibition to share, however, photography was interdit. Even better than my grainy photos are the following short (about two minutes each) and professionally produced videos on the exhibition.
Most of the dresses were accompanied by copies of the original illustrations for the designs. Below is one example.
The show ranged over two floors in the museum. The first floor covered Vionnet’s early decades. The second floor covered her later period. It was the second floor I had to breeze through, unfortunately, as my traveling companion was more interested in the museum’s other show, the Playmobil 35th anniversary exhibit, and had kindly been quite forbearing while I examined the displays on the first floor quite thoroughly, and whose patience was rewarded with a timely exit.
For more about Madeleine Vionnet: Puriste de la Mode, visit the Musée’s extensive web site for the show. It is in French. If you do not read French, the site has a marvelous slideshow of dresses, photographs, and more, for which little understanding of French is needed. If you do read French, you will particularly enjoy Pamela Golbin’s Imaginary Interview of Madeleine Vionnet, taken from the exhibition catalogue.
On the subject of the exhibition catalogue (titled Madeleine Vionnet: Puriste de la Mode), I made sure to purchase a copy from the museum shop, 107 Rivoli, while I was there. I wanted the catalogue in its original language and I wanted to be frugal, so I purchased the 55 euro French language edition over the 70 euro English edition. As I write this, I see that purchasing the English edition from Amazon would have saved me even more money. Today’s price for the title: US $47, plus free Super Saver shipping. Not bad for a book weighing more than 2 kilos. Alors, c’est la vie, I have a wonderful addition to my library, and a treasured souvenir to help me expand my French vocabulaire de la mode. If you would like to purchase your own copy in French, the museum shop’s site does not appear to offer online shopping, but here is a link to it on Amazon.fr.
I’m please to bring you a book review by Laura McLaws Helms, a photographer, blogger and fashion history graduate student at F.I.T.
“For me, Foale and Tuffin represented the revolution that was happening in London. They were all about all that was new. They were before Ossie Clark, before everyone.”
As two of the key players in the creation of the groundbreaking Swinging Sixties look, Foale and Tuffin were long overdue for a book based on their legacy. Iain R. Webb, a well respected British fashion journalist and author of Bill Gibb: Fashion and Fantasy, has taken on their rather remarkable story and put together a well-edited look at their designs and partnership in Foale and Tuffin: The Sixties. A Decade in Fashion (ACC Editions, January 16, 2010). An eleven-page foreword succinctly tells their story, while the rest of the book is rather cleverly organized around three interviews Webb had with Marion Foale and Sally Tuffin. Interspersed between these interviews are short one or two page interviews with thirty-seven characters connected with their company and the period.
Marion Foale and Sally Tuffin met at Walthamstow Art School in London in 1955, studying art and design. From there they were accepted into the exclusive Royal College of Art’s fashion design program, led by the legendary Janey Ironside. While in school they were taught to look to the great Parisian couturiers for inspiration, but they also sought to design simple and wearable clothes for themselves, the kind of clothes they couldn’t find anywhere. Graduating in 1961 Foale and Tuffin decided to set up a company out of their flats, and approached several stores with a lookbook of youthful designs. Fashion had not yet moved on from the full-skirted silhouettes of the fifties and only one buyer, the 22-year-old Vanessa Denza from the 21 Shop in Woodlands department store, took them on.
The 21 Shop was a completely new style of store-within-a-store geared toward young people and carrying designs that were “simple, zany, not for squares (in any sense).”[2] She chose three dresses from their collection, buying three of each and placed one, a simple gray a-line flannel dress with frill front, in the window. Spied by an editor from Vogue, it was quickly photographed for the magazine by David Bailey and subsequently ushered in the new Dolly Bird look. Soon orders were coming in from stores all over the globe as everyone became enchanted with the London Look. Caroline Charles, the British designer, says, “Foale and Tuffin’s clothes were absolutely delicious, very pretty in a girly way. It was a joyous and innocent time and Foale and Tuffin reflected that brilliantly.”[3]
Foale and Tuffin were always seen to be at the forefront of fashion in London, constantly coming up with new styles that would have young women running to their little store off of Carnaby Street, one of the first boutiques to open following Mary Quant’s Bazaar, and would have other designers and manufacturers scrambling to copy them. As the decade went on their style evolved from a-line minis into more feminine bohemian maxi dresses, foreshadowing the rise of hippie culture. Webb writes that “their narrative… perfectly traces the decade from its groovy, optimistic beginnings… to its demise, as sixties sanguinity melted away into a hangover of seventies cynicism, masked as it was by fancy-dress escapism.”[4] They closed the company in 1972 after a few seasons of more exotic, Japanese inspired looks even though they were still highly successful and still widely used in magazine editorials.
Webb’s decision to structure this book around interviews is very interesting and at times very compelling. The interviews with both women are wonderfully engaging, as their still close relationship is palpable and inspiring. The short interviews with others are also of interest as he took great pains to speak to everyone from their machinists to several fashion editors, celebrities, other designers and friends. These interviews are quite illuminating about the incredible creative energy in London during that era and capture the “anything goes” attitude that helped these young girls with no business training become successes.
According to the fashion editor Meriel McCooey, “Everything was going on in London at that time. It was like a big club really, and you had to be talented to become a member. You had to be producing something amazing; you had to have a credential, a form. Everybody knew everybody, and we all had enormous respect for each other.”[5] Their associations with the other great creative minds of the period, from the Beatles to pop artists like Peter Blake, helped their business and also kept them at the forefront of popular culture. Webb makes their importance to the London scene clearly visible and illustrates it with hundreds of snapshots, fashion photographs and sketches.
The one failure of this book is that at times it can be rather repetitive- whereas normally a historian will take the best quotes from all their interviews, Webb has included quite long sections from each one and many of the participants have many of the same things to say about Foale and Tuffin and about the 60s. There is also a lack of real depth as all of the interviews are short and more general in subject. While I would have enjoyed a more detailed analysis of their clothes and business Webb’s book is still a highly enjoyable and worthwhile look at these very influential designers.
In conjunction with this book a retrospective is on view at the Fashion & Textile Museum in London. Titled Foale and Tuffin: Made in England and curated by Dennis Nothdruft, I was lucky enough to see this exhibition while in England over Christmas. Cleverly designed, in the main hall of the gallery a replica of their famously tiny shop has been recreated down to the metal pipes for hanging clothes, their innovative hangers with long necks, records and their sign made out of red and blue light bulbs. The main gallery showcases all of their mod designs with supplementary sketches and photographs, and a large video projection of girls zipping around London in their trendy frocks. The upstairs gallery is given over to their later designs, the floaty hippie pieces made from Liberty fabrics. Rather remarkably both women’s worktables have been maintained in their original condition and are on view heaped with original fabrics and notions. At the end of the show is a small display of the work they have been doing since they closed the company- Foale has found great success with her company of handknit garments, and Tuffin as a ceramics designer. The show is on until the 24th of February and is well worth a visit if you are in London.
Delman, cocktail shoe, multi-color floral print with gold brocade, circa 1958, USA. On loan from Delman Archive. Photograph by Eileen Costa.
The Museum at FIT presents Scandal Sandals & Lady Slippers: A History of Delman Shoes, featuring a vibrant and detailed selection of the glamorous, innovative, and classic styles that made Delman Shoes—now celebrating its 90th anniversary—a leader in women’s footwear. As the first exhibition devoted to the history of the brand, Scandal Sandals will explore and reveal the company’s renowned style, advertising and craftsmanship. The objects on display, dating roughly between 1926 and 2007, will chronicle the company’s rich and creative past. Delman shoes were worn by many movie stars and distinguished women of society, including Jacqueline Kennedy, Joan Crawford, Marilyn Monroe, and Marlene Dietrich. The company’s name will forever be associated with these iconic women.
Scandal Sandals and Lady Slippers has been organized and curated by FIT graduate students of the Fashion and Textile Studies: History, Theory, Museum Practice program.* The exhibition celebrates the 90th anniversary of Delman and marks the 25th anniversary of FIT’s Fashion and Textile Studies graduate program.
*Thanx Nicole for sending this info along to Worn Through. Good luck with the exhibition!
A few weeks ago, I was thrilled to be able to visit the exhibition Cartier and America at its only venue, the Legion of Honor in San Francisco. It is a complete history of Cartier in America (read, vast collection on display). A photographer friend and I spent a good deal of time wandering through the exhibition, on view through April 18, 2010, drooling over the priceless, glittering, showstopping objects on display. The exhibition covered the Belle Epoch, Art Deco, Pre- and Post- War all the way through to the present.
Orchid Necklace, Cartier Paris, 2007, Beryl, pink sapphires, diamonds, and platinum. Photograph by Ren Thompson.
I am going to disclose now that my ‘academic hat’ was blown right off by this exhibit. I was completely unable to cast an analytical eye towards the display, the rhetorical thesis of the show, or the framework because I was so distracted by the magic and sparkle of 100s of millions of diamonds. But I can’t really say that I’m sorry about it. Some of my favorites from the show include the following:
This special order necklace for María Félix , a Mexican actress, is set with 2,473 diamonds. According to the exhibition catalog, “when handled, the necklace mimics the slitheriness and weight of a real snake with hundreds of individual sections that are hinged internally. To enhance the sensation of snakeskin and protect the wearer, the inside segments of the necklace are enameled.”
Snake Necklace, Cartier Paris, 1968 (Diamonds, platinum, white gold, yellow gold, emeralds, and enamel). Sold to Maria Felix. Photograph by Ren Thompson.
Over and over again, my colleague and I were left standing speechless, dumbfounded and utterly bewildered by the beauty of the jewels -especially the tiaras- included in the exhibition. There were at least 10 or 12 tiaras (some called head ornaments, or bandeau’s). I think it must of touched something deep within me – the love of fantasy, of princesses and royalty. Something I thought was only fictional, and that could not really possibly exist. And yet here they were, amazing beautiful jeweled cacophonies of luxury – and so beautifully displayed and well-lit. One of the security guards suggested that we walk, 180 degrees around one of the pieces (I think the Star of South Africa brooch – 47.69 carats) just to watch how the sparkle changed. An absolutely brilliant suggestion. If you see the exhibit, I suggest you try it. This truly is the definition of glamour.*
Tiara, Cartier Paris, 1902, Diamonds, silver and gold, Sold to Adele Grant, Countess of Essex. Phogoraph by Ren Thompson.
The tiara above is “Made from 759 brilliant-cut and 289 rose-cut diamonds” and worn by the Countess of Essex (was also known for her beauty).
Hair Ornament, Cartier Paris, 1902, Diamonds and platinum, Sold to Lila Vanderbilt Sloane (Mrs. William Field). Photograph by Ren Thompson.
Tiara, Cartier Paris, 1910, Elizabeth Queen of the Belgians. Photograph by Ren Thompson.
The exhibition also featured objects purchased by and worn by major celebrities and style icons include: Grace Kelley (her engagement ring – 10.47 carat emerald-cut diamond – and jewels), Elizabeth Taylor, the Duchess of Windsor, Gloria Swanson and many many others.
Necklace, Cartier Paris, 1951. Rubies, diamonds, and platinum. Sold to Mike Todd in 1957. Collection of Dame Elizabeth Taylor. Photograph by Heather Vaughan
Gloria Swanson, ca 1930 wearing bracelets supplied by Cartier in 1930. (on display in the exhibition)
Panther clip brooch, Cartier Paris, 1949. Sapphires, diamonds, yellow diamonds, platinum, and white gold. Sold to HRH the Duke of Windsor.
According to the catalog/exhibition “The panther is pave-set with diamonds and tiny sapphire cabochons. The Kashmir cabochon sapphire is of 152.45 carats.” It was owned and worn by the Duchess of Windsor.
So as to not be complete swept away by fantasy and luxury, I thought that an interview with the curator of the exhibition for the Legion of Honor, Martin Champan, might help bring us back down to earth (and the world of academia). I asked Chapman specifically about the nuts and bolts of the exhibition: putting it on, designing the space, and working with his exhibition team. I hope you’ll find the results stimulating.
Heather Vaughan for Worn Through: When did you first begin work on the exhibit (how many years ago)?
Martin Chapman: We started about two years ago when Cartier was introduced to us by our trustee Lonna Wais.
Lonna Wais at the opening of Cartier and America
Can you talk a little about the process of putting together such a major exhibition? What did your timeline look like, with regards to the planning, research, the catalog , and installation, etc.?
Timing was to coincide with the 100th anniversary in the Untied States. Most of the work however was done since last June when I visited the Cartier collection in Geneva, and visited the archives in London, Paris and New York. I chose the objects in the Geneva collelction working with their curator, Pascale Lepeu, and our designer Bill White, then I researched some of the pieces and personalities in the archives. I then wrote the catalogue in July and August and we installed the exhibition for 2 1/2 weeks before it opened.
Pascale Lepeu
Were there any major hurdles to overcome (that you can talk about)?
Borrowing from private collections.
Where did you go to research, what resources did you use?
What role did Cartier play in determining the curatorial focus of the exhibition, in choosing the pieces to display?
I determined that the focus of the exhibition should show the history of Cartier through its finest objects and by presenting as many pieces as possible with an American connection.
What sorts of issues came up over the display of the pieces, were there condition issues that were of concern?
Fragility; light levels for miniatures and photographs in objects. Their decorator Monique Saner installed the Cartier pieces in the show. She has worked for Cartier for many years and knows the pieces intimately. Our designer Bill White came up with the wonderful design and the background colors.
Our lighting designer Bill Huggins, who is a brilliant lighting technician and artist.
Who do you feel is the audience for the exhibition?
Any one interested in high quality jewelry, 20th century American decorative arts, history and social history, anyone interested in movies and celebrities.
What is your favorite piece in the exhibit and why?
The Duchess of Windsor’s flamingo of 1940 because it was such an iconic piece for her, and because it has never been shown in an exhibition before.
Flamingo clip brooh, Cartier Paris, 1940. Diamonds, emeralds, rubies, sapphires, citrine, and platinum. Sold to HRH the Duke of Windsor.
How is Cartier important in terms of San Francisco history, what role did it play?
There were few addresses in the Cartier archives from San Francisco, only one customer, a Mrs Neustadter who had a wonderful diamond choker made in 1908. We have a photo of it in the exhibition but we do not know where the piece is today. Neustadter was a clothing manufacturer with a shopon Market street in the early 1900s. There were some customers who came from San Francisco who lived elsewhere such as Virginia Fair Vanderbilt, born Virginia Fair, daughter of Senator James Fair, and who built the Fairmont hotel. There are several of her pieces in the show, along with her portrait by Boldini.Lady Cunard leader of London society in the 1930s who was born Maud Burke in Oakland, and Lady Granard, of whom Chips Channon, the diarist, says in 1937 she “ could hardly walk for jewels.” She who was born Beatrice Mills, daughter of Ogden Mills of Millbrae. Her massive diamond and emerald necklace is in the show.
Virginia Graham Fair Valderbilt, 1905 portrait by Giovanni boldini, gift of Mrs. Vanderbilt Adams, FAMSF. Photograph by Heather Vaughan
Necklace, Carter London, 1932. Diamonds, emerald, and platinum. Sold to Beatrice Mills, Countess of Granard. Photograph by Ren Thompson.
Quite often, design exhibitions that focus on single designers/makers can be categorized as ‘too commercial,’ especially if the company is still actively producing goods (for example, the Chanel exhibition the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the YSL exhibition at the de Young). Clearly, the Cartier exhibition ties into the economics, history and culture of the US, but how do you specifically address those issues in this exhibition?
The Cartier objects in the exhibition are not the sort of pieces that are for sale these days, apart from one necklace that belongs to a local patron. Otherwise the emphasis is on history, social history, workmanship, and design.
I’d like to ask a little about your career history, as Worn Through readers are often very interested in this.
I was a curator at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London for 16 years. It gave me my training in decorative arts.
What advice would you give to students interested in pursuing a career in this field, what schools, experience and internships would you recommend?
If you have the opportunity to see this exhibition, I highly recommend it. For those unable to go, the exhibition catalog is a wonderful resource, not only for the history of Cartier, but also for a tracking the tastes of the wealthiest people in America over the last 100 years.
The catalog is available for purchase as of January 10, 2010.
Note: Opening image is of my hand next to Pendant Brooch (also the cover image for the exhibition catalog), Cartier London, 1923 (altered 1928 by Cartier New York). “Marjorie Merriweather Post was a regular customer at Cartier New York, Her brooch, one of the most spectacular jewels made in the 1920s, incorporates Indian carved emeralds, one of which dates from the Mughal era.” Photograph by Ren Thompson.
*From the Oxford English Dictionary: “Glamour: 1. Magic, enchantment, spell; esp. in the phrase to cast the glamour over one (see quot. 1721). 2. a. A magical or fictitious beauty attaching to any person or object; a delusive or alluring charm.” See also Glamour: Fashion, Industrial Design, Architecture
While at home in Michigan I went with my mom to see the Avedon Fashion Photographs 1944-2000 at the Detroit Institute of Arts. It’s the first stop of the exhibit that I assume will travel but I’m not sure. It runs in Detroit through January 17.
Overall I’d give the exhibit a good review. A-/B+. It was packed which is fab for Detroit on a bitter cold day.
There were numerous images flowing between multiple rooms painted stark white, black, and grey. No photos were permitted so I’ve included some I found online that were in the exhibit to illustrate this post. It was a mix of prints and magazine images from different aspects of his career, and panels discussed that Avedon felt they should be displayed differently and served different purposes.
The images weren’t too crowded together, and in each room there was a display case with magazines featuring other pieces of his work. Although it was a fairly stark, photo-centered exhibit, the panels didn’t speak much of photography technique, and instead focused on his role socially and within the fashion system. These commentaries, which were somewhat further explored in the accompanying audio tour (a free system where you call from your own cell phone) were often the most interesting part, but could have been greatly enhanced. It seemed that the curators wanted to bring up many intriguing points about Avedon’s relevance throughout the decades, but would leave us hanging with concepts alone, and not more thorough explanations. Examples were the discussions of aesthetics within his work, his potential for irony and humor poking fun at the fashion industry he was so beautifully showcasing, and most glaringly the brief mention of his breaking down racial barriers within the arts. Each of these were fascinating concepts that were thrown out there as food for thought instead of richly investigated. Perhaps in the $100 stunning book I decided I could not afford….
On a related note, my only other potential complaint was that although it was a fashion photography exhibit, I seemed to primarily be overhearing patron talk of the fashions shown, with questions about movement, color, weight, fit, etc. It might have been nice to see video or even the real deal displayed to get a more complex view of what he was working with. But of course that’s my own bias a little showing through. If the focus was strictly the photography itself, more focus on technique would have been interesting. Those behind the scenes details do make the exhibition viewer appreciate the craft more.
So onto to the details. Most of it was fabulous of course, it is Avedon after all! However, seeing that much in one place it became clear he did have strong suits and weak areas just like everyone else.
Here are some notes:
The Dorian Leigh images from the 40s were simply gorgeous.
The audio commentary discussed Avedon’s appreciation for aesthetics including movement in photography because he felt “real people move” and should be shown in natural poses. Yet the people in the crowd next to me were saying “he never has them stand straight!” in an irritated tone. I agree with Avedon of course.
The faux movie stills from the 50s and 60s were less striking than his more refined and focused shots highlighting a model and a dress. Granted this was some early imagery that would be copied a thousand times over (famously and honestly more effectively by Cindy Sherman). There seems to be great revernce for the elephant shot, but I think it’s sort of lame. Most of the overly contrived ones were a little lacking. The imitation Elizabeth Taylor/Richard Burton tabloid shots of the ’60s were probably the best of the style, but still somewhat overdone. Overall, this concept wasn’t his strong suit at all as they’re too forced. He was so much better with simple shots done beautifully like no one else could do them.
Speaking of beauty-the Balmain, Balenciaga, Patou, Dior, and Gres dresses to name a few, so so amazing, and models Suzy Parker and Dovima from the 50s made them look like perfect specimens of cut, line, drape, fit, and creativity.
Another model however was a total dud, Sunny Harnett. The commentary discussed that the Harnett images were to evoke travel, desire and wealth but they looked cheesy and forced. She didn’t have that special quality the others did and her images looked just like all those terrible 80s perfume and jewelry ads. Why would later advertizing copy his worst looks and images of Dovima and Dorian Leigh cannot seem to be touched with a ten foot pole? Must be a sign of how great the latter were.
Regarding Dovima, any shot she was in jumps off the page. Her arched eyebrows, curved figure, dancer’s posing and grace, and striking features made her images a true professional peak for Avedon. He found his perfect muse.
My mom noted that the man in many midcentury photos was Garder McKay from the TV show Adventures in Paradise. She kept saying how gorgeous he was at the time and he did in fact stand up to the quality of some of Avedon’s best female icons.
Does anyone else thing the 1959 shot of socialite Herietta Tiarks in a coat by Cardin looks very strikingly like the image Bjork put together for her Homogenic album cover? That image is already a copy of a Devon Aoki magazine shot if I remember correctly, but now I think both are Avedon rip-ffs. I could not find the Tiarks image to show you, but perhaps you know it?
In the 60s there were many shots of celebrity women that were quite good. Portraiture done in a similar style to the early fashion photography. The commentary discussed that he liked unusual women, with unexpected features and proportions. This type of sentiment logically grabs my attention.
One of my fav shots was the one that was used for the billboards all over Detroit of Dovima and an afghan dog. The commentary brought to light ideas that it could be an aesthetic visual challenge placing them at the same level, or perhaps it’s a joke on the fashion industry that both so beautifully represent. I decided I couldn’t live without at least the postcard of this one. Beauty and humor. Fabulous.
One panel heading into the 60s briefly discussed Avedon’s breaking down racial barriers in the fashion industry in that time period. I would have loved more chat on this, and I think the crowd would have as well since there was a life-sized blow up of hometown icon Donyale Luna and patrons noticeably noting the oversized afro fashion shot. Also, his frequent 50s model, China Michado was of Asian descent so it seems breaking down racial barriers was a concept he explored earlier than the 60s.
In the 60s Avedon seemed to hit the same stride he did in the 40s and early 50s. He seemed inspired again and didn’t need to fabricate so many lame scenarios to showcase beauty. The youthquake themed photos highlighting designers such as Rabanne and were amazing against the stark sets. Plus, it was a glorious time for models who could knock your socks off including Verushcka, Donyale Luna, Penelope Tree, and Jean Shrimpton.
The 60s magazines featured were cool to see up close. The famous Bazaar image of the pink space helmet being constructed with paper glued on to a shot and notes about color choice felt personal and I always enjoy some behind-the-scenes. This was enjoyable earlier in the exhibition as well with a room of engraver’s prints with captions and notations from famed editor Carmel Snow. Some of the ready-to-publish shots were also blown up in different ways by Avedon for gallery showing. Seeing them side by side was a unique display of the relationships and differences between editorial/ad with art.
Finally, the shots form the 70s & 80s lost something in being the firsts we saw in color, especially in 70s/80s with clothes being so boring in that era. My mom had been asking for color shots all through the exhibit, and then when presented with them we both agreed they were far inferior to the brilliant B&Ws. His 90s work thankfully remedied that as the shots were back to the themes he did best and 90s designers like Chalayan and Galliano utilized some of the architectural cool and innovative forms of beauty that harkened back to the 40s best while looking completely fresh.
In closing, I think it was a lovely exhibit that was amazing in its size and scope and had something for everyone. More commentary through panels or the audio tracks would have enhanced the appreciation as that which was provided would toss at you fascinating concepts that I’m anxious to explore further. But for my $12 I think it was a great afternoon and a visual treat above any other I’d recently experienced. I guess if I splurge the $100 for the book I can dig in deeper.
, “Between 1930 and 1933 the smart ski silhouette for men and women was long and narrow. Waists were accentuated by short, double-breasted, boxy jackets with the broad shoulders introduced by Schiaparelli, and wide lapels worn with Norwegian-style trousers with gathered hems (the precursor of plus-fours).” 
, and be sure to check out 
from Amazon would have saved me even more money. Today’s price for the title: US $47, plus free Super Saver shipping. Not bad for a book weighing more than 2 kilos. Alors, c’est la vie, I have a wonderful addition to my library, and a treasured souvenir to help me expand my French vocabulaire de la mode. If you would like to purchase your own copy in French, the museum shop’s site does not appear to offer online shopping, but here is a link to it on 
(ACC Editions, January 16, 2010). An eleven-page foreword succinctly tells their story, while the rest of the book is rather cleverly organized around three interviews Webb had with Marion Foale and Sally Tuffin. Interspersed between these interviews are short one or two page interviews with thirty-seven characters connected with their company and the period.
. London: Mitchell Beazley, 2003.
. London: Michael Joseph, 1973.
. London: Comet Books, 1983.
. New York: Broadway, 2003.
. London: Ballantine, 1967.
. London: Victoria & Albert Museum, 2006.
