“Fashion Writer. No Experience Necessary”

And Cathy Horyn’s mother said, “You? A fashion writer?” But Cathy Horyn took the position (with a closet full of Laura Ashley dresses) at a Detroit daily in 1986 because two weeks in New York each year to cover the collections sounded good to her. Today Horyn, the New York Times fashion critic, visited Portland […]

Cathy Horyn, New York Times fashion critic

And Cathy Horyn’s mother said, “You? A fashion writer?” But Cathy Horyn took the position (with a closet full of Laura Ashley dresses) at a Detroit daily in 1986 because two weeks in New York each year to cover the collections sounded good to her. Today Horyn, the New York Times fashion critic, visited Portland for a lecture at Lewis & Clark and gave a talk at the Portland Art Institute.

Horyn talked about her luck, getting to a metropolitan daily when they still sent fashion writers to New York for the collections (before so many newspapers slashed budgets and cut fashion as a “frill”), expecting them to return to edify the lady readers as to, “how to dress well.” Now, Horyn says, how to dress well is the last thing on the fashion writer’s mind, as a “docile and complacent media” treats fashion as entertainment where the show’s the thing, fashion weeks are corporate-branded like sports stadiums, and there’s a frenzy around designers and editors. She mentioned a number of fashion-related stories that deserve further (or any) coverage, the green movement, the crafts movement, youth subcultures’ influence, the increasing US Latino population, and the near complete loss in the US of apparel manufacturing.

It’s this kind of thinking that makes a writer like Horyn matter. Sure she will tell you about a cuff or a mood in a collection, but she’s heavyweight enough to think well beyond the runway or the cash register to consider a broader swath of culture and society. She noted that one can, “use fashion as a prism to look at the world,” and referred to the ill-fitting suits of the British seamen released from Iranian captivity.

One reminder that Horyn’s prism differs vastly from that of the fashion students in the audience surfaced in response to a question about “independent designers,” where she cited the example of the legendary Azzedine Alaia, independent because he isn’t owned by LVMH. Many in the audience were probably thinking of non-corporate labels that aren’t carried in department stores.

Horyn speaks in a dry, matter-of-fact manner in the same deep alto you can hear on her recorded critiques during fashion weeks. “There is still room for someone to come along and do what no one has done before,” Horyn said, “something that makes perfect contemporary sense, and make a business out of it.” She recalled seeing early Martin Margiela shows while sitting on a washing machine in a Paris laundromat in which the garments were made of trash bags. But it is the business end that seems to interest Horyn most. She’d rather talk business and marketing with Harvey Weinstein than about which Halston dresses he’ll reissue from the archive now that he’s invested in the label. She noted that the electronic era is creating new markets and marketplaces, she shouted out Alvin Toffler’s niche and particle marketing, and spoke about future interactive possibilities in the creation and selling of fashion.

Bullish on blogging, she mentioned it numerous times, Horyn started a blog three months ago and said she loves it. “I love having another way to express myself. And I welcome the conversation, the thoughtful commentary on the blog.”

Asked about haute couture, she said, “It is dying. It will be dead.” She noted that only three designers remain alive who are “in possession of the knowledge and skilled in the techniques, and those designers are now in their ’70s: Lagerfeld, Alaia, and Valentino.” She named great designers including, “Raf Simons, Alber Elbaz, Miuccia Prada, Karl Lagerfeld, John Galliano, and Nicolas Ghesquiere,” noted about Yves Saint Laurent that, “from the most irrational life came the most coherent design.”

She used the word “contemporary” as a positive value numerous times, but noted that its definition varies. Still she says, “show me something contemporary.” In the next breath, she described the man standing outside of Stumptown with her at 6:55 a.m. in a suit that fit well, “no tie, good, and sneakers…bicycle sneakers. And that was contemporary.”

Of Portland, she said she’d never been before, but had talked on the phone with people at Mario’s regularly, checking in with how designers do there.

Fun Cathy Horyn fact: “I’m not a fan of Target or H&M,” she said, “but I am a fan of WalMart. I’ve fooled a lot of people with that.”

Style quotient of attendant crowd of approx. 120: average, but was elevated by the cute girl sitting next to me in bright, busy Nike sneakers, a red headband worn ’80s style over her shiny black shagged hair. Kudos too (for attention to detail) to the girl whose light green eye shadow matched, no kidding, the shade of her green plastic mod sunglasses.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

9 Comments

  1. eva added this comment on 19 April 2007 | Permalink

    What a good story. I read her stuff and have listened to her audio recounts of the shows. You are right - she is a little deadpan in her delivery, but maybe this is what it takes to get fashion some respect. You make me wish I had gone, which is good. Had no idea she had a blog!

  2. lisa added this comment on 19 April 2007 | Permalink

    Yes, the Washington Post’s Robin Givhan may have won a Pulitzer prize for criticism last year, but Horyn (who also did time at the Post, incidentally) is doing that level of broad cultural thinking at the Times within a fashion context. It stokes and elevates the conversation.

  3. storm added this comment on 19 April 2007 | Permalink

    I had been anticipating this talk for a while and i had wanted to ask you about your interest - but it had never seemed quite appropriate. None the less, it was great to see you there.

    I thought the talk was mild but absolutely right. Insightful yet tempered. Who would know exactly what to expect in Portland? . . .Im guessing.

    Im thankful for your own diligence and editorial as publised on this blog. I appreciate your coverage of what is going on in town - not to mention elsewhere. (you’re post on Rick Owens from over a year ago is still my favorite.).

    In any case, it was cool to encounter Cathy Horyn in person and I was captivated by her candor and knowledge at both Portland venues.

    By the way, regarding the three designers hat she felt controlled the future of couture included Galliano at Dior. Not specifically, Alaia - although it was inferred.

  4. storm added this comment on 19 April 2007 | Permalink

    You know, I recall that she put Galliano aside (in regards to couture) based on his age. So you are right in the three: Lagerfeld, Alaia and Valentino. However, its strange - because although Alaia does make his own clothing, he is not regognized as a couturier. The French system that determines such things has not found that his practice is such.

    My confusion. My apologies.

  5. Sandra Mendoza-Daly added this comment on 21 April 2007 | Permalink

    Excellent article. I really wish that the media would give Ms. Horyn the credit she deserves rather than shunning her for being honest.

    In regards to couturiers, I was under the impression that Parisians only consider Parisian houses as Haute Couture vs couture which is simply custom design. Do you think it is the simplicity of Alaia’s designs that keep him out of the club?

  6. lisa added this comment on 23 April 2007 | Permalink

    Sandra, there is a whole essay waiting to be written about the slippery use of terminology when it comes to fashion design. The term “haute-couture” is legally protected in France. Only those fashion houses that meet certain criteria are included in the Chambre Syndicale de la Haute Couture. Wikipedia has a good overview (although any link to Wikipedia has to be given with a caviat emptor) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture

    That said, I might apply the term “couturier” to one who has been trained in the techniques of the haute couture even if he or she does not currently head one of the official haute couture houses. I certainly wouldn’t apply the term to any fashion designer and I object to the use of couture to mean fashion.

    Cathy Horyn noted that Alaia was one of the few remaining who had been trained in the techniques of the couture. As to what keeps him out of the club, this is just speculation but one of the requirements is to present collections twice a year of a certain number of designs and I imagine that might be cost prohibitive. A guess.

    More on this at some point…

  7. Sandra added this comment on 23 April 2007 | Permalink

    Thanks Lisa.
    I know that we often have this discussion in the vintage and costume world about the identification of couture in vintage clothing. Then my understanding of haute couture is right.

    I think your speculation on Alaia is probably correct.

  8. storm added this comment on 24 April 2007 | Permalink

    Are you suggesting there is a difference between “haute couture” and “couture?” Because I don’t feel there is a difference other than one is the proper sense and the other is the abbreviated sense.

    On the other hand, I do think there is a difference between that which is an unquestionably French association with the word and that which is similar but not . . . a tailor from Saville Row for example. Although very much the same thing in execution and social meaning - it is not couture - as it is not French. Nor does it have the pretense to identified as such.

    I think an interesting aspect of this hair splitting, was remarked upon by Cathy Horyn when she spoke of “the hand made”. There is much to be learned about the delicate differences between a garment that is truly lighter than air - due to hand work, versus a garment that may be custom made, but relies too much on the machine. I wonder if Alaia is complicated in this way? It appears that Ralph Rucci is complicated in this way.

    Have you seen “Gosford Park?” There is a great scene among the housemaids and personal assistants, (while ironing the gowns for the evening) make comments about the “machine work” in the garments of a particular young (and less wealthy) woman.

    Lastly, I am surprised that Cathy Horyn did not regard Lacroix in the same category as the others she mentioned. I would have guessed that his practice and knowledge is formidable. Although I could be dead wrong.

    ST

  9. admin added this comment on 1 May 2007 | Permalink

    Well it took a while to get around to this, but Storm I guess I’m looking for a term that I can use for one who has been trained in and uses couture techniques but does not head an official haute couture house. For example, there is a woman just outside Portland whose custom clothing employs a laundry list of couture techniques. It is nearly exclusively hand-sewn (if not completely), she’ll use embroidery on the inside of a hem (so known only to the wearer) to weight it, I could go on. And it’s not just “lighter than air,” but sometimes structured to create form or disguise a flaw in the body. The complex interfacings, linings, etc. are just so beyond what we’re now accustomed to in ready-to-wear. And really this is an important intersection point between apparel and art.

    Re: Gosford Park…I haven’t seen it. But another interesting aspect of this is that when my mom was at college in late ’50s, early ’60s, her roommate was German. Mom marvelled that all of her roommate’s clothes were hand-stitched. But she didn’t know (and obviously didn’t ask) if it was out of luxury or necessity.

    Lisa

POST A COMMENT

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

ULTRA


the ultra fresh newsletter delivers a weekly dose of PDX fashion, design, culture to your inbox.

or go here to get on the list

CLICK

TAG CLOUD