Paris Couture: Why Lacroix? More on Dior!

Christian Lacroix, in this writer's view, had the best collection of the recent shows. Why?

The answer isn't simple one. Surely the feeling that this might be "the end" of the House of Lacroix surely left moments of both joy and sadness. You may recall that the house recently filed for the French equivalent of bankruptcy protection.

Paul Poiret, the great couturier of the early 20th century, was in a similar predicament in the 1920's. Certainly the headscarves at the Lacroix show were eerily similar to those worn by Denise Poiret, the wife and muse of Paul Poiret during his heyday.

Really, the show was a moment: as if the grand ladies of Arles (as envisioned by Lacroix), with all of the regional splendor found in prior collections over the years, had become, surprisingly, Parisian in their dress.

In many ways, the show recalled those days when Lacroix was at Jean Patou in the 1980s. In sum, it was a bittersweet collection that showed promise for the future for the house, no matter how slim the actual chances for continuing may be.

--

Much has been made of the Dior collection, which, with its transparency and revealing of hosiery, felt a bit burlesque. That is, at first glance.

A closer study shows that it could be interpreted as a collection of separates. Given that today's woman does not dress in ensembles (one of couture's many holdovers from its glory years in the 1950s), it made complete sense to show the exquisite jackets and voluminous ball skirts as options to completed by the wearer - or by über-stylist Rachel Zoe.

- AP