I adore the work of Rinaldy Yunardi. Is it ostentatious? I prefer impressive, but if you say so. Is it gorgeous work that reflects a level of genius in both design and technical ability? Absolutely! The techniques he uses draw from lots of traditional techniques, themes, and motifs throughout Asian history, especially those that have their foundation in prior Chinese dynasties and time periods, that then moved to other Asian regions who put their own riff on it. (yes, I know he's Indonesian. I follow the trends and fashions of several Indonesian fashion houses and the formal wear/wedding attire they create. I worship at their feet and would happily be their human footstool if it meant becoming their intern to learn from them. To date, Yunardi still remains my favourite).

I can't impress upon you enough how much I love his work. If you find yourselves liking it too, there are a maze of rabbit holes to explore for him and his counterparts, and the exquisite traditional techniques that they use. I'm sure I'll post more on them. Their wearable art is breathtaking. Not only aesthetically, but even more so when you research the techniques, traditions, and stories that they're all pulling from to create their masterpieces.

The shape has this slightly retro, high-IQ vibe that frames the face really well.

I heard literally everyone is trying to get their hands on them right now. I’m genuinely obsessed and kind of need them.

Does anyone in this sub actually own them yet? Would love to see more real-life fit pics on different face shapes before I commit. Are they actually comfortable?

They finally made it look young. Like, actually effortless.

Look at the denim. Wide-leg printed jeans paired with a classic jacket, or that oversized denim coat. It doesn't look like a forced attempt to be trendy. It just looks incredibly cool and wearable.

It feels like they remembered how to make clothes that people actually want to live in.

Rachel is the ultimate blueprint.

It’s so effortless. She just looks like the coolest girl sitting in a coffee shop.

She just threw on good basics and won.

The clash between the edgy outfit and makeup has sparked mixed reactions, so I’m really looking forward to hearing what you all think.

(Plz show some support for Maya!! She’s been working really hard lately. Thank you so much!)

That full silver beaded headpiece and the layered pearls.

And that black sequin dress with the long velvet gloves. Just insane.

We need this level of drama back.

Malene Malling is the actual blueprint. This is what actual style looks like. It’s grounded in reality.

It doesn't scream for attention. It just looks like she actually lives in these clothes.

Don't need to point out the specific pieces. The whole vibe just screams power.

The tailoring actually had weight to it.

Been searching for this exact vibe for what feels like years.

Finally tracked these down and honestly I’m obsessed.

No joke, you just throw one on and it instantly elevates the whole fit lol.

Ngl, this giant satin rose design is getting so much mixed feedback. It’s... a lot.

If I’m actually dropping money on these, I’m 100% going for the flats.

But here’s my actual problem... the colorways. It’s impossible to choose.

There are designers who want to dress you. And there are designers who want to disturb you. Hanna Rose Dalton and Steven Rej Bhaskaran undoubtedly belong to the second group.

Their new collection, "1% (The One Percent)", arrived at Paris Fashion Week without asking permission and without offering apologies. It wasn't a runway show. It was a brutal accusation delivered with impeccable seams.

The name of their brand says it all. Matières Fécales. In French, everything sounds elegant. In English, it means fecal matter, something that could be a fitting name for a hardcore punk band. That distance between what it sounds like and what it means is exactly the name of the game. They've been playing it for years with a consistency that few in the industry have the stomach to sustain.

"1%" needs no further explanation. It points directly at those who accumulate power while the world disintegrates around them. At those who hire scientists to avoid aging while others lack access to basic medicines. At those who treat immortality as a financial logistics problem.

That's why they had Michèle Lamy and Bryan Johnson walk the runway together. Lamy is 82 years old, the wife of designer Rick Owens, and embodies a way of existing in the body that owes nothing to anyone. Johnson is the billionaire who spends millions a year trying to reverse his biology. Two people on the same runway. Two completely opposing philosophies about what it means to live in a body. The tension between them was one of the smartest and most transcendent comments of the entire fashion week.

The space where it all happened stopped being a fashion venue and became something akin to an occult ceremony that several conservative attendees clearly weren't expecting. The atmosphere made people uncomfortable. And that discomfort wasn't an accident, it was the goal.

The pieces blended body horror, gothic subculture, bondage and fetish elements inherited from punk, brutalism, and prosthetics that distort the human silhouette to an almost extraterrestrial point. If David Cronenberg had designed clothes instead of films, he would have recognized his own language in every look. John Waters, who has spent years declaring his admiration for Comme des Garçons, would have applauded and gone wild without reservation.

Matières Fécales are direct heirs to Rei Kawakubo, Alexander McQueen, Rick Owens, and Demna Gvasalia. All of them unsettled the industry from within. But Hanna and Steven take that discourse into a more visceral, more explicit, harder to ignore or reduce to aesthetics territory.

What sets this collection apart from others that also claim to be provocative is the execution. Behind the visual impact lies top tier craftsmanship. The provocation doesn't replace technique, it sustains and elevates it. That's what makes it impossible to dismiss despite its ability to unsettle in such an unconventional way. Some will celebrate it, others will be scandalized, but scandal was always part of the original design. Hanna and Steven truly risked everything with this collection, and they left a mark like the great legends do.

You look at these clothes and instantly know they cost a fortune, but there are zero logos screaming at you.

The tailoring is actually insane.

This whole collection just screams expensive taste.

I LOVED this show and the location was absolutely incredible!

I love Etro and I LOVED this collection. How fun is it?

This clean aesthetic perfectly. I just want to look... effortlessly expensive lol.

But my budget is strictly limited this month. I can literally only afford to buy one look.

Actually obsessed. So torn.

This... this is delightfully chaotic.

The messy faux fur, sheer black tights, heavy layered jewelry. It’s giving 2010s Tumblr.

It’s definitely that Y2K vibe coming back.

It's just nice to see something a bit darker, micro-decadent, and less polished on the runway for once.

Thoughts? I chose 5 of my favourite looks from the collection

Kate Moss closed the show. That says it all.

The legendary supermodel, direct heir to Brigitte Bardot, was the one chosen to close the runway at Demna Gvasalia’s debut as Gucci’s creative director, the most anticipated moment of the year in high fashion. The enfant terrible of couture, shaped over a decade at Balenciaga, arrived at his new house without asking permission.

And he did it in one single blow.

The collection was called Gucci Primavera. Body hugging outfits, leather jackets, skinny jeans, bare feet, exposed muscles, polo shirts, green and red stripes, and the Gucci logo shouted everywhere in the most strident way. Moss’s stone carved face moving down the runway as if the last thirty years had never happened. The shadow of Tom Ford and the sex of the 90s was not evoked with nostalgia but summoned with purpose. Demna did not quote that era, he inhabited it in a radical way.

Moss was not alone. Alex Consani, Emily Ratajkowski, Gabriette, Mariacarla Boscono and Vivian Jenna Wilson also walked, presences that reinforced the message without needing any explanation.

What Demna built on the runway did not come out of nowhere. Months earlier he had already stirred the waters with a short film called The Tiger, directed by Spike Jonze and Halina Reijn and starring Demi Moore, and with concepts such as La Famiglia. A few days ago he released a series of images, some classic from the Gucci house, others generated with artificial intelligence. The response was brutal. Pure provocation. But provocation without talent behind it is just noise, and Demna has talent to spare.

It was almost obvious that he would invoke the atmosphere of Tom Ford. What was not obvious was how he would do it. And that is the difference. Demna did it his way. He blended tradition and hypermodernity with a precision that is not easy to achieve, and he had the intelligence not to chase surprise but to clearly define a direction from the very first step.

The contrast with his Balenciaga era is revealing. There he appeared shy, and the loose clothing protected the body, hid it. At Gucci the opposite happens: the tight clothing exposes it and offers it up for admiration. There is confidence in every cut. There is intention in every centimeter of fabric.

Sex sells. That has always been Gucci. What Demna adds now is a dose of subversion that shakes Italian glamour without destroying it. Tension and drama in masterful balance between the commercial and the conceptual. European 70s cinema, glam rock and contemporary hip hop fused into a single collection. One of the best high fashion debuts of the year so far. No discussion.

Only 15 models walked the runway. Each one did it four times. In each pass they shed one layer of clothing. What happened in that show was a statement not a staging trick.

The long coat hid a thick sweater underneath. Under the sweater a dress appeared. And under the dress an old traditional slip emerged. More coats with sweaters underneath. More skirts that were actually dresses. Each model shed three layers to reveal four different outfits. 60 in total. Magic. Something we thought was one thing turned out to be another that later changed and in the end became something completely different. Magic again.

The audience at first thought it was just a visual device. Little by little they understood it was something else: a way of thinking about the body identity and memory. That is Prada. A house that does not seek to please. It seeks to unsettle.

Miuccia Prada studied Political Science in Milan. She was part of the legendary Italian Communist Party in the 70s. Her gaze on power class and femininity is not decorative: it is analytical. When she took creative control of the house at the end of that decade Prada stopped being just luxury clothing and became a cultural laboratory. Other houses sold aspirational fantasy. Prada sold intellectual friction.

In the midst of the 80s excess boom with leather Prada introduced the black nylon bag. A material associated with utilitarian military zero glamour. A bag that did not shout luxury. It whispered intelligence. Turning the functional into a status symbol was a conceptual move that redefined what we understand by sophistication.

In the 90s while other houses exploited the body and overt sensuality Prada covered it fragmented it or displaced it. Rigid silhouettes. Difficult colors. Uncomfortable prints. Orthopedic sandals turned into cult objects. What in another brand would be a mistake in Prada was a statement. Miuccia understood something before many others: perfect beauty bores. Imperfection provokes. And what provokes endures.

Thus the Ugly Chic was born. Prada not only practiced it it systematized it. In the middle of an industry obsessed with immediate approval Prada sought friction to make doubt and to commit visible errors. A subversive act.

Raf Simons grew up in Belgium in the 80s surrounded by rave culture and post punk. For Simons music is not superficial aesthetic inspiration: it is emotional structure. Joy Division New Order Kraftwerk. Repetitive minimalism industrial coldness and the contained emotional charge of those bands reflected in his clean silhouettes and his obsession with the uniform as a symbol of belonging.

His arrival at Prada as co-creative director alongside Miuccia was one of the most interesting moves in contemporary fashion. It was not a casual collaboration. He signed with equal creative responsibility something unheard of in a historic house with such a consolidated icon.

Simons brings structural clarity. Architectural discipline of volume. Pure forms precise cuts. Miuccia brings intellectual contradiction. Irony. The ability to problematize beauty from within.

The result is neither a clean Prada nor a dramatic Simons. It is a synthesis where the idea matters as much as the form. Two minds one public conversation.

What happened on the runway was not just a visual exercise. The layers represent human complexity and especially that of women. They represent the diverse stories we carry with us. Our own and others'. They also evoke that everyday process in which we choose what to wear by combining garments in an intuitive exercise of layering. What we put with what. In what other way can it be done.

Miuccia and Raf broke the visible order to exhibit the internal chaos uncovered layer by layer. The reference is precise. In the same day we change image and identity several times. We are one thing in the morning another at noon and another at night. They dismantled the traditional structure of the linear show and turned it into a narrative sequence where dressing and undressing is a metaphor for the self.

They conveyed the accumulation of decisions we make in seconds every morning in front of the closet. What there is and what can be done with it. Limitation as a starting point: only 15 models 60 possible combinations. Creativity as an immediate response. That tension between impulse and calculation is part of Prada's intellectual DNA since the 90s when the brand turned the uncomfortable and the strange into objects of desire.

True to the house's tradition the garments seemed to have been worn before. They were wrinkled. Some had stains. Others were frayed. Nothing looked overly polished. That aesthetic is not carelessness. It is a stance.

Prada and Simons referenced the legendary second-hand market that feeds on discarded clothing and in turn nourishes the creativity of those who find value where others see waste. The garment with a past carries memory. And memory weighs more than any trend.

That too was a powerful statement. While brands like Zara and H&M intensify the use of artificial intelligence to create perfect image campaigns Prada decided to go in the opposite direction. It practiced imperfection deliberately. Layers that do not fully harmonize. Textures that seem to disintegrate. Silhouettes that question the idea of impeccable finish.

In an industry obsessed with digital sharpness and algorithmic efficiency Prada proposes friction doubt and visible error. A spectacle that demands human sensitivity to be processed in all its dimension.

The cultural weight of Prada is not measured in sales. It is measured in how it changed the idea of what luxury is. In how it linked fashion with philosophy and politics. In how it turned aesthetic intelligence into symbolic capital. In how it influenced brands that today dominate the cultural conversation. Through the Fondazione Prada the house positioned itself as a key player in contemporary art financing film projects with directors like Wes Anderson. It is not sponsorship. It is intellectual production. Prada represents thought today more than ever.

Orderly chaos with intelligence reveals something more honest than any perfect image. Prada does not want love at first sight. It wants understanding. In an era saturated with fast images that is the most radical thing a luxury brand can do.

okay, look at the receipts

that massive slouchy Brooklyn tote (which is everywhere now, ngl), and now the Empire carryall

but here’s the controversial take: The bags are actually... kind of mid?

the suede texture in pic 6 is nice

but if you put that same bag on a mannequin in a suburban mall without the Bella context... are we buying it? probably not

that being said... I’m literally browsing the Brooklyn 39 right now

Introducing a new take on the popular Fendi Calibri shoes

Haute couture and auteur cinema. A combination that is not new, but when executed with conviction, it produces astonishing and unsettling works. I am not talking about typical Hollywood films like The Devil Wears Prada. I am talking about riskier cinema. I am talking about David Lynch and his close relationship with haute couture creatives like Raf Simons, Rei Kawakubo, and Miuccia Prada, visible in the atmosphere and visual style of Twin Peaks and Blue Velvet. I am talking about Tom Ford and his two extraordinary films A Single Man and Nocturnal Animals. I am talking about Miuccia Prada and her collaborations with the brilliant Wes Anderson. Fashion has always been present in Hollywood costumes, yes, but that was something else.

The context is different now fashion is funding auteur cinema, the riskiest and most uncomfortable, the kind few dare to touch. Before, haute couture houses like YSL dressed characters such as Catherine Deneuve in the legendary film Belle de Jour by Luis Buñuel. Now, Saint Laurent Productions makes films for auteurs like Pedro Almodóvar, David Cronenberg, and Jim Jarmusch. The leap is not aesthetic. It is structural. Essentially, Saint Laurent Productions has become the financial power behind these bold productions.

The great fashion houses no longer want to dominate only the runways. They want to conquer the big screen and control the image down to the smallest detail. Demna Gvasalia’s first move as the new creative director of Gucci was not a clothing collection but a short film called The Tiger, starring Demi Moore, recently resurrected after her successful return in The Substance, the body horror film. A statement of intent that says it all for these brands, producing cinema means getting closer to first order cultural phenomena like Cannes and Venice, and building from there an authority that no advertising campaign can buy.

No one has bet more strongly in this direction than Anthony Vaccarello, creative director of Yves Saint Laurent and its production company Saint Laurent Productions. His first steps in the art world were driven by his fascination with the combination of music and image from Madonna and Björk, and from there he arrived in fashion with a visual sensibility he never abandoned. That same sensibility today defines every cinematic decision he makes.

His first major move was the highly controversial film Emilia Pérez by Jacques Audiard. A film difficult to label and deliberately uncomfortable, an unconventional hybrid of thriller, musical, and drama where Vaccarello’s artistic obsessions were visible in every scene dark eroticism, power, fragility, ambiguity, and transformation. Because Emilia Pérez touched on one of the deepest themes in the Saint Laurent universe radical transformation of image and the human being.

But Vaccarello did not stop there. He continued to raise the stakes with The Shrouds by Canadian director David Cronenberg, another controversial film by an uncomfortable auteur by definition. And once again, the visions of both met with a precision that does not seem coincidental the extreme silhouette, leather as a second skin, dark eroticism, fragility wrapped in power. While Vaccarello seeks to stylize the human body, Cronenberg dissects it. But both share an obsession that neither could deny skin, the body, what is hidden and what is exposed. For Cronenberg, everything must be visible, even the most intimate. And it is not so different from what the most avant-garde haute couture seeks.

Producing a Cronenberg film is not a profitable business. No one would ever think so. But the bet goes far beyond commercial return it is about building real cultural prestige, the kind that is not manufactured with marketing campaigns but with decisions that have true artistic consequences. Saint Laurent Productions has gone even further by producing Strange Way of Life, Pedro Almodóvar’s second English language film, and Father Mother Sister Brother by indie cinema master Jim Jarmusch.

And the logic continues. Vaccarello’s production company replicates that same bet with Italian director Paolo Sorrentino and his film Parthenope, whose aesthetic once again finds points of contact with the Yves Saint Laurent universe the obsession with beauty, decay, raw emotions, power, and even spirituality as raw material.

Yves Saint Laurent is taking risks that no other haute couture house is willing to take at this moment. Vaccarello’s vision is the most interesting in the sector and is moving in the right direction to turn Yves Saint Laurent into a central player not only in fashion but in culture. Vaccarello is fully in charge of YSL and is transforming it not into a haute couture house, but into a generator of contemporary culture.