CHLOE.
French deluxe
ready-to-wear house
Style, modernity, and a strong sense of femininity have been the key elements of Chloesince
its inception. It has maintained a quiet confidence among the Parisian ready-to-wear
houses, relying on the abilities of various already-established designers to produce fresh and
vibrant clothing which reflected and, in the high points of its history under Karl Lagerfeld,
defined the Zeitgeist.
|
|
Riding the wave of pret-a-porter companies set to challenge couture in the 1950s, Chloe was keen from
the start to produce wearable clothes which conveyed the immediacy of modernism in clear, strong
styles. The house's identity remains true to the design tenets of its early days, producing simple
garments made from fluid fabrics. These promote a sense of elegant movement, enlivened by the artistic
sense of colour which distinguishes French fashion; a constant feature at Chloe, despite the varied
nationalities of its designers.
Chloe and its peers provided a lively, frequently directional alternative to haute couture,
whose dictatorial status was diminishing. It was able to headhunt inspirational designers with
the talent to translate the Chloe design image into clothing which would remain distinct to
the label, while consistently evolving to embrace contemporary styles.
In the 1960s this meant keeping pace with the youth-orientated look in London, with clothesimbued with a futuristic vitality. In 1966 this sense of freedom through technology was assimilated
into Jeanne Do's design for Chloe of the slim, straight-falling Empire line dress in stark white.
This was decorated with metallic geometric shapes which marched down the dress, seeming to emanate
from the slatted silver squares that made up the shimmering cropped bodice. This modern armour
as eveningwear was a current fashion trend, picking up on the sci-fi trend of this early period
of space exploration. The dress also pinpointed the introduction that year of maxi skirts,
reinforcing Chloe's place at the cutting edge of fashion.
Indeed, it has continued to occupy this place, rarely absent from the fashion pages, despite
temporary dips in status due to a loss of direction between designers. This reliance on
different names to pursue Chloe's viability has, however, enabled a chameleon-like adaptability
to the contemporary fashion temperature, calling upon such catalytic freelancers as Karl Lagerfeld,
at the height of his creative powers, to invigorate the house's image.
From the late 1960s Chloe's name became synonymous with Lagerfeld's, as he gave their line
strongly conceived evening- and daywear of modernity and direction without compromising the
supple femininity of the luxury fabrics employed.
The house style remained pared-down sheath dresses, hovering around the figure, adorned with
minimal decoration, which distilled the late 1960s fashion directive. Under his guidance, the
label moved with ease into the pluralistic 1970s, absorbing and refining the myriad of reference
points with which fashion toyed. He was as adept at witty reinterpretations of the multi-ethnic
gypsy look of pop festivals, referred to in patterned bordered skirts, as the more artistic
classics popular the following year, when he turned two poster-paint bright patterned circles
into versatile skirts and shawls which emphasized movement as they swirled onto the figure.
The success of his work for the label is indisputable, reinforcing its ready-to-wear dominance. It
is unsurprising that Chloe languished after his departure. Having spent the previous decade
pushing fashion forward, the label could only mark time until Martine Sitbon was chosen to
reinject a sense of originality and verve in 1988.
Sitbon embodied facets of Chloe's style which had been established in the 1960s: uncluttered
designed, which drew on popular culture to provide distinct themes for each collection, translated
into classic shapes for women confident of their own identity.
Sitbon toned down the more overtly 1970s rock-influenced styles of her own named line to produce
masculine tailored suits. These were softened by a dandyish swing to their cut and by delicately
coloured silk chiffon blouses which blossomed into curving frilled collars. Site defined Chloe's
look during the 1980s, rounding the edges of the decade's often over-extravagant silhouette with
well placed decoration and rich fabrics that drew on the glamorous mood which spilled into the
first years of the 1990s.
In fall/winter 1991, shortly before she left the label. this sense of feminine swagger was
shaped into scarlet textured silk evening dresses, cut short to mid-thigh and standing out from
the hips to add a mobile swing from the fitted high collar bodice. The bold impact of the
dress was tempered by the tantalizing gold bead strands, which hung in a bunch from the back
fastening zip.
The desire to remain in the forefront prompted the return of Lagerfeld in 1992, when he
captured the mood for unstructured, easy-to-wear styles in his fluid slip dresses in faded
prints which harked back to the heights of his Chloe collections of the 1970s and tapped the
nostalgia for the flower child look upon which they drew. He adorned them with dressing-up-box
flair; throwing long strings of beads around the models' necks and silk blooms in their hair.
Although the initial reaction was uncertain, Chloe had judged the fashion moment for change well,
and Lagerfeld continues to fit comfortably into their mould.
Chloe's place in pret-a-porter history has been ensured by the house's ability to allow designers
to flourish under its auspices. Lagerfeld, particularly. has encapsulated its ideals of femininity
and sophistication through pure distinct designs which enhance the figure in a contemporary way,
-Rebecca Arnold
Extract from “Contemporary Fashion”, written by Richard Martin. Detroit: St. James Press, 1995.
|
|
