Style.com
Subscribe to Style Magazine
3 posts tagged "Chantal Thomass"

You Don’t Need a Lover to Love Lingerie

-------

Horst P Horst

I can’t deny it, I love lingerie. I do. I have drawers full of the stuff—saucy bras, basques, corsets, skivvies, you name it. I usually buy my extravagant unmentionables on a whim—not for some romantic occasion—and I’ve never given it a second thought. So naturally, I was very excited when The Museum at FIT announced its current exhibition, Exposed: A History of Lingerie (on view until November 15). However, the news of the show broke at a time when a new wave of feminism seemed to be at the center of most of my conversations. Prada’s feminist Spring ’14 was in stores (“I want to inspire women to struggle,” Miuccia Prada told Tim Blanks after her powerful show), as was Rick Owens’ sporty Spring range, which was presented on muscular American step dancers. And, of course, there was Anja Rubik’s Free the Nipple campaign, as well as the fight against Instagram to allow women to proudly display their breasts without being banished from the social platform. So after pondering all of the above, I, a woman who considers herself to be a feminist, suddenly thought, Good God, I’m a terrible hypocrite for loving sexy, lacy lingerie.

To be sure, there’s something empowering about secretly donning ornate underwear and thigh-high stockings beneath my boxy Comme des Garçons frocks. But lingerie is often thought of as appealing to the male gaze. And you can’t tell me that crotch-less panties, sheer lace bras, and little satin onesies weren’t produced with the male viewer—or at least sex—in mind. Is the case of my lingerie the same? Do I love it only because I’ve been trained to love it by watching old Sophia Loren films and reading too many magazines? Can I be a feminist and embrace delicate underpinnings?

Red Corset“Absolutely,” offered Colleen Hill, the curator behind the FIT show, which includes everything from 18th-century corsets to Hanky Pankys.”I think that nowadays, particularly since we have options—we’re not forced into wearing a corset or a push-up bra or anything that may have been somewhat more dictated in the past. You can absolutely love to wear basically any item of clothing for yourself and be a feminist.”

Let’s explore those corsets and things of the past. Something about a garment that suffocates a woman—often to the point of fainting—in order to enhance her bust and taper her waist seems pretty antifeminist to me. But perhaps that’s because the corset could be qualified as antifeminine. That is to say, it was originally designed for men. “Men had been wearing corsets for hundreds of years before women,” explained Carlis Pistol, the go-to couture corset-maker for everyone from Oprah to Sarah Jessica Parker. “It started in the medieval period, and when the 16th century came along, they began making corsets for women. I think women were looking for a new silhouette, and in wearing corsets, it showed that women could do what men could do.” Wait, so does that make the corset the ultimate feminist garment?

Ferris Corsets

According to Hill, corsets were often worn for medical reasons (actually, one of the sexiest corsets in the show, a bright red number from 1889, above, was marketed as a health corset), particularly to correct one’s posture. Because of that, they were initially quite plain. “They were modest garments—a lot of them during the 19th century were just white or black or brown. It wasn’t until the late 1800s that you start to see colors and decorative elements,” said Hill. It was at that time, too, that “the idea of beautiful undergarments in relation to a happy marriage began to be talked about a lot more.”

There it is. The shift. The point when men took away our lovely lingerie. It wasn’t until the mid 1970s that Chantal Thomass, the queen of contemporary French lingerie, brought back the concept of decorative underthings for her, not him (below, right). “It was actually really unfashionable at the time,” said Hill of Thomass’ more traditional styles. Indeed, Thomass’ aesthetic was a strict departure from the ’60s feminist movement’s “burn the bra” mentality. In fact, when Thomass introduced her line, the unstructured “no-bra bra”—a sheer brassiere designed by Rudi Gernreich, the same man responsible for the monokini—was all the rage (below, left). But in the end, Thomass prevailed (and her brand still exists today). “I think by the 1980s, this idea that you could embrace this really feminine style of lingerie as a way to please yourself as a woman was finally accepted,” Hill added.

Chantal

“In the ’60s, women were like, ‘I’m tired. I’m not even going to wear a bra. I don’t want to feel like I have to be a slave—like I’m bound,” said Jennifer Zuccarini, a Victoria’s Secret alum who cofounded Kiki de Montparnasse before launching her current lingerie label, Fleur du Mal. “Then you get to the ’80s, when fashion was all about lingerie. It was like [women] really took it back. We made it our own, and that was very empowering.”

But what about the Victoria’s Secret fashion show, where supermodels strut down a runway wearing next to nothing? Where does that fit into lingerie’s girl-power narrative? “That’s a tough one,” Zuccarini told me. “It is male-oriented. And you know, there’s a conversation about women wanting to see real women…I don’t necessarily buy into that. I want to see an idealized version of something. That’s why I like fashion. And there’s something about those supermodels and the image Victoria’s Secret puts out there that women do like. They continue to shop there—it’s the most successful lingerie brand ever created. So the show definitely appeals to men, but VS is a company led by women, and when I was there, no one ever said, ‘Are guys going to like this?’ It wasn’t even part of the conversation.”

Victoria's Secret

Even so, one has to consider that the popularity of the Vicki Secret show among male viewers is just another example of women either consciously or subconsciously wearing lingerie for men. “Women love lingerie because it embraces their bodies and makes them feel good about themselves,” said Pistol. “It’s a celebration of your own body. You feel strong with it on. It’s not that women wear it for men—it’s about making yourself feel good.” But the corset-maker also raised an interesting point about ladies who do buy lingerie to impress a gentleman. “The happiness of the woman is still believable if she’s doing it for a man. It makes the woman happy, but other people are able to appreciate it as well.” Hill had some similar theories as to women’s adoration of luxe underwear. “I think lingerie tends to be some of the most beautiful clothing. When we get up in the morning, we are presenting ourselves to the world. But knowing that you’re wearing something special underneath, even if it’s not going to be seen by anyone, that’s beautiful and special. It sets the tone for the day.” For her part, Zuccarini (whose designers are pictured below) wears a little something special under her work-ready clothes on a daily basis. “I mean, I’m not wearing a garter belt every day, but everything I have is pretty nice,” she laughed. “There’s something emotional about lingerie—it inspires an emotional response and there’s almost an impulsive need to buy it. I think most real lingerie enthusiasts buy it for themselves. They get something from wearing it. And why wouldn’t you want to wear something beautiful under your clothing?” she reasoned.

Fleur du Mal

You know, despite all the expert opinions, I was, until the tail end of this journey, on the fence as to whether one could be a feminist and a lingerie lover. I wasn’t convinced that I adored wearing lingerie for any other reason than, since youth, movies, magazines, and TV ads brainwashed me to believe that lingerie was an instant and necessary sexuality enhancer. So I asked my mother, a deeply chic, incredibly modest woman who happens to be my personal style icon, what she thought. She’s been in the hospital for the last few weeks, and her only response was, “Oh, Kate. That reminds me. Can you go and pick me up some nice things to wear under my gown?” So I did (nothing too risqué—she’s my mother, after all). When I returned from my shopping excursion (during which I bought something for myself, too, obviously), she smiled the biggest smile. I had my answer. Whether or not it’s made with males in mind, today’s women own their lingerie. It’s ours. We can do with it and wear it as we please. And now, I love lingerie a little bit more.

Photo: Horst P. Horst; Courtesy of FIT; Getty Images; Courtesy of FIT; AFP/Getty Images; Joe Schildhorn /BFAnyc.com; via fleurdumal.com

Le Bon Marché, 160 Years Young

-------

As the international fashion pack makes its way toward Paris, Le Bon Marché ushered in Paris fashion week last night with a lavish cocktail party to fête its 160th anniversary, complete with Champagne, petits fours, and a gospel choir. Hosannas were far from the only celebration. The retailer commissioned special-edition and one-off pieces from 160 brands, including Aurélie Bidermann, Pierre Hardy, Isabel Marant, and Zadig & Voltaire, and debuted a short film by Loïc Prigent called Catherine Deneuve Rive Gauche, featuring the face and muse of its 160th anniversary campaign visiting some of her favorite Left Bank haunts.

Though the film, which will be screening for a limited time at the store, is a portrait of the screen icon, last night’s celebrations paid tribute to the store’s own iconic status. Although they may not realize it, shoppers around the world owe a debt of gratitude to this Left Bank institution. In addition to being the first of its kind, Le Bon Marché revolutionized the way people looked at fashion by showcasing under its glass and iron roof (designed by an up-and-comer named Gustave Eiffel) in-store fashion shows, cultural events, seasonal sales, and innovations like mail order catalogs and home delivery (they also hired women and pioneered many workers’ rights the French now take for granted). Asked what would have lured her to Bon Marché back in the day, designer Chantal Thomass replied with typical French repartie: “Mais…this store was far too chic for me when I was 18 years-old!”

At Didier Ludot: Decades Of L.B.D.’s But No Lohan

-------

For Didier Ludot’s celebration last night for the tenth anniversary of his label La Petite Robe Noire, the fountains of the Palais Royal were scented with Eau Blanche by Francis Kurkdjian. Welcome to Paris. A selection of Ludot’s archives graced the windows of the galleries, tracing the history of the L.B.D.: a Chanel number from 1927, a Lanvin from 1935, a Grès from 1942, and so on with Balenciagas, Diors, and YSLs in the mix. The sartorial timeline ended with a very recent, as in two and a half weeks ago, vintage with a Marc Jacobs Spring 2010 look.

None of these beauties were for sale. Instead, Ludot sourced some more affordably priced vintage dresses for his L.B.D.-only boutique—about 30 of them have already sold—and is concentrating on his new, accessible DL Palais Royal collection. At the party, Ludot greeted friends like Chantal Thomass, Claude Montana, and Jean-Charles de Castelbajac, while a rumored appearance by Lindsay Lohan had other guests in the crowd that included Alexis Mabille (pictured above) and former Emanuel Ungaro designer Vincent Darré, buzzing and lingering. The actress’ design partner, Estrella Archs, did show briefly. “I’m taking five minutes of air,” joked Archs. She and Lohan are still fine-tuning their process, she said, but promise a collection that draws upon the roots of Ungaro without going too literal. “We’re going for focused and purified with light dresses and a Mediterranean joie de vivre,” said Archs. “Tomorrow night’s the all-nighter.”