Guendalina PerelliWhat’s behind the ballet of fashion art director appointments, according to Alessandro Turci
The garment, the collection, the line—these now have little or nothing to do with Fashion. Especially due to the turnover in major groups focused on business and marketing. A decline in sales, even a modest one, becomes a warning sign of a more severe future default. Therefore, industry managers change the creative director, thinking they can quickly resolve the impasse and boost sales.
In reality, the creative director—version 4.0 of the fashion designer who was once the brand’s founder—brings with them the baggage of their experience, already tested elsewhere. As Alessandro Michele, now the creative director of Valentino and formerly of Gucci (where his vision tripled revenues), states: this is who I am, this is my sensibility, and I cannot distort it. Perhaps this explains why some names work in certain fashion houses and flop spectacularly in others.
Once upon a time, the creator-founder stood firmly by their vision, determining the direction and perspective of the brand—positions that were all the more solid and consistent when successful. Now, in every form, it is the assortment, not quality, that stimulates purchases. Yet, this constant merry-go-round of the same names—supposedly ensuring a revitalizing and forward-thinking reshuffle but in most cases proving useless—verges on the grotesque.
With each new appointment, which typically pairs a new CEO with a new CD (since strategies go beyond stylistic identity), the same market uncertainties and critical reception challenges emerge. But how, we wonder, can a creative director’s vision change so dramatically that they are suitable for Balenciaga, Gucci, Loewe, Christian Dior, Bottega Veneta, and Chanel? And yet, in this latter case, the absence of a strong guiding hand is quite evident!
Moreover, given the political upheavals triggered by the new Trump era, which figures will the major fashion groups—willingly or not entangled in the geopolitical chessboard—choose as the face of their prestigious collections? Pro-Russian, pro-American, politically correct, Georgian, Italian, Black, Woman, Man, Transgender? Once again, it is power—especially economic power—that dictates priorities.
What is truly in fashion is the media attention generated by communication and the unpredictability of tastes and obsessions. If, in past eras, a movie or opera star captured attention for an haute couture maison, enhancing its exclusivity and unattainable myth—Christian Dior, Cristóbal Balenciaga, Biki, Sorelle Fontana, Ferragamo—today, a viral meme from a random TikToker is enough to shift perspectives.
Authentic creative vision has gradually given way to the democratic desire for lightness and freedom, often contradictory and superficial, fueled by social media. Speed in offering and consuming, speed in reacting and resolving. Brands lose their historical character in favour of product modernity dictated by the communicative phenomenon built around them.
The post-pandemic era has revealed the fragility of the once-fundamental figure of the art director. Reassignments have become a tool for an increasingly media-driven business, using human faces and personalities for the “market of intentions.” The latest generation of artificial intelligence will soon be able to influence our decisions, shaping a market where desires will be identified and sold before they even materialize. Advanced technologies such as LLMs (large language models) and anthropomorphic chatbots, designed to appear “human” in their processes, foster a sense of trust with users—extracting valuable insights for predicting and manipulating their choices. This will also apply to other sectors, including politics.
The rapid, aimless advancement of technology consequently raises ethical debates and issues that, logically, should have been its starting point. Individual freedom is seriously compromised, along with the ability to even define it plausibly. For some, choosing among the options offered by the market may already be a concrete expression of freedom; for others, the inability to determine those options in the first place is an unacceptable constraint.
Yet collections continue to display a persistent nostalgic attitude, which has nothing to do with the perception of an alternative vision. We recall, in this sense, the warning issued by Demna Gvasalia of an “imminent crash” of the financial system (and, of course, the Fashion system) during the Balenciaga Resort 2023 presentation at the New York Stock Exchange.
If the reference point is to be a different lifestyle that generates equally different clothing needs—as an adherence to an innovative mindset—then the wait will be long. It is unlikely that we will define ourselves through a different way of dressing. At least, not yet.
The real change appears to be more intimate, not merely aesthetic, and certainly not related to clothing. For some time now, plastic surgery has provided a more radical solution to the problem of adapting to new aesthetic standards. More and more, solutions will be medical and genetic. The acceleration driven by generative Artificial Intelligence will likely focus on new aesthetic paths, where clothing might eventually play a role. For now, the emperor has no clothes.
Alessandro Turci speaking