With such a charged atmosphere in the air, it’s no surprise that Karl Lagerfeld, who famously loves to tap on the zeitgeist and turn it into a fun yet suitably edgy pastiche for his seasonal reinvention of Chanel, jumped onto the feminist bandwagon. Lagerfeld sent his models down the Spring/Summer 2015 runway—reimagined as a grubby Paris street, complete with suspect-looking puddles—in tweed suits with placards emblazoned with provocative slogans (“History Is Her Storyâ€, Women’s Rights Are More Than Alright!â€, “Ladies Firstâ€) while brandishing quilted loudhailers.
Other than its sheer entertainment value, the fashion spectacle may have soothed the ruffled feathers of some critics who took umbrage at Stella McCartney’s comment earlier in the week that “strength on its own in a woman is quite abrasive and not terribly attractive all the time.â€[1]
Except it’s not really feminist. Not because the messages are not worth broadcasting, but simply because Lagerfeld’s almost caricature-like appropriation of feminism inadvertently slaps an expiry date on it. Of course, Lagerfeld could merely be harking back to the feminist roots of the label’s founder Coco Chanel[2], who liberated women from the confines of restrictive Edwardian dress with boyish silhouettes, sporty separates and trousers. Additionally, with its significant global clientele, the label is more than capable of engaging and influencing women to think about the issue of gender equality.
However, if women are engaged in feminism based on the notion that it is suddenly fashionable, as the label has on such a huge, colourful scale, there is the real risk of interest cooling just as soon as it has been roused. This co-opting of feminism for a runway show also smacks of what Eurythmics singer Annie Lennox calls “feminist lite†and a merely tokenistic nod to feminism, which was the criticism she leveled at Knowles’ VMA performance.[3]
Two excellent articles that further reinforce this idea of “feminist lite†are “Chanel: Co-opting Feminism at Paris Fashion Week†by Rhiannon Lucy Cosslet, founder of satirical feminist blog The Vagenda and “Chanel’s Karl Lagerfeld Cheered and Jeered for ‘Feminist’ Fashion Statement†by Alexandra Topping, both published by The Guardian. Firstly, both writers rightly point out the hypocrisy of a luxury fashion house that peddles expensive goods and an exceptionally—even impossibly—high standard of beauty to women. This is not to mention Lagerfeld’s history of making disparaging comments about plus-sized women. He once called British pop singer Adele fat and made the infamous remark that “only fat mummies object to thin models†and that fashion is about “dreams and illusions, and no one wants to see round women.â€[4]
Thus, it’s unsurprising that Cosslet pointedly disagrees that Chanel’s brand of feminism signals progress and would rather the industry take more serious steps towards ensuring fairness for women on a tangible level. She writes: “The fashion industry is dominated by women. Its behaviour has enormous repercussions for women the world over, from the way it treats workers in its factories and warehouses to its impact on the way we feel about our bodies and ourselves. I would like to see fashion take that responsibility seriously.â€
Similarly, Topping notes in her article that there were negative reactions amidst the positive to the show. However, a quote from author Natasha Walter, who wrote Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism, pretty much sums up the situation. Walter remarks: “It is great to see more young women engaging with feminist ideas all the way from talking about them on social media to actually getting active, but real change requires huge social, economic and political shifts. If people start thinking that feminism is suddenly fashionable, then the danger is that the next moment they will say it has fallen out of fashion.â€
This is why Chanel’s show felt disingenuous despite the label’s significant influence with women. If anything, it underscored that the source of a message and the way this message is spread are essential. Given how the mass media has so utterly permeated our lives,  we should be so lucky if we sieve out the right messages from the barrage of information we are bombarded with everyday. Moreover, these would also have to survive long enough in news and cultural cycles to challenge and influence us in some fundamental way before they melt into oblivion.
Therefore, Lagerfeld’s savvy opportunism in capitalising on a conveniently current trope and Chanel’s feminist roots to cobble together a sugary “feminist†statement that seemingly hits the right notes might just end up undermining feminism, promoting a superficial understanding while relegating what is an extremely serious and pertinent issue to all the relevance of a single fashion season.
Of course, we probably just lack a sense of humour and irony and are completely missing the point. It’s just a mock protest, after all, a parade (charade?) conjured in good fun and that is feel-good to boot. However, the feminist movement—already embattled by those who belittle or misunderstand it—didn’t need this.
Review: Chanel’s Cotton Candy Feminism at Paris Fashion Week
It’s been an interesting few months for feminism, with the “Women Against Feminism†movement first stirring controversy with its strident dismissal of gender equality. This is not to mention the momentum that has been building since pop powerhouse Beyoncé Knowles—who once refused to label herself a feminist, calling the word “extremeâ€â€”performed a medley of her songs at the MTV Video Music Awards in August. Halfway through the slickly choreographed set, the word “feminist†flashed across a screen in bold behind her, declaring her about-turn in dramatic fashion. More recently, the impassioned speech made by actress Emma Watson on behalf of the “HeforShe†campaign at the United Nations in September has propelled interest in feminism to a fever pitch.
With such a charged atmosphere in the air, it’s no surprise that Karl Lagerfeld, who famously loves to tap on the zeitgeist and turn it into a fun yet suitably edgy pastiche for his seasonal reinvention of Chanel, jumped onto the feminist bandwagon. Lagerfeld sent his models down the Spring/Summer 2015 runway—reimagined as a grubby Paris street, complete with suspect-looking puddles—in tweed suits with placards emblazoned with provocative slogans (“History Is Her Storyâ€, Women’s Rights Are More Than Alright!â€, “Ladies Firstâ€) while brandishing quilted loudhailers.
Other than its sheer entertainment value, the fashion spectacle may have soothed the ruffled feathers of some critics who took umbrage at Stella McCartney’s comment earlier in the week that “strength on its own in a woman is quite abrasive and not terribly attractive all the time.â€[1]
Except it’s not really feminist. Not because the messages are not worth broadcasting, but simply because Lagerfeld’s almost caricature-like appropriation of feminism inadvertently slaps an expiry date on it. Of course, Lagerfeld could merely be harking back to the feminist roots of the label’s founder Coco Chanel[2], who liberated women from the confines of restrictive Edwardian dress with boyish silhouettes, sporty separates and trousers. Additionally, with its significant global clientele, the label is more than capable of engaging and influencing women to think about the issue of gender equality.
However, if women are engaged in feminism based on the notion that it is suddenly fashionable, as the label has on such a huge, colourful scale, there is the real risk of interest cooling just as soon as it has been roused. This co-opting of feminism for a runway show also smacks of what Eurythmics singer Annie Lennox calls “feminist lite†and a merely tokenistic nod to feminism, which was the criticism she leveled at Knowles’ VMA performance.[3]
Two excellent articles that further reinforce this idea of “feminist lite†are “Chanel: Co-opting Feminism at Paris Fashion Week†by Rhiannon Lucy Cosslet, founder of satirical feminist blog The Vagenda and “Chanel’s Karl Lagerfeld Cheered and Jeered for ‘Feminist’ Fashion Statement†by Alexandra Topping, both published by The Guardian. Firstly, both writers rightly point out the hypocrisy of a luxury fashion house that peddles expensive goods and an exceptionally—even impossibly—high standard of beauty to women. This is not to mention Lagerfeld’s history of making disparaging comments about plus-sized women. He once called British pop singer Adele fat and made the infamous remark that “only fat mummies object to thin models†and that fashion is about “dreams and illusions, and no one wants to see round women.â€[4]
Thus, it’s unsurprising that Cosslet pointedly disagrees that Chanel’s brand of feminism signals progress and would rather the industry take more serious steps towards ensuring fairness for women on a tangible level. She writes: “The fashion industry is dominated by women. Its behaviour has enormous repercussions for women the world over, from the way it treats workers in its factories and warehouses to its impact on the way we feel about our bodies and ourselves. I would like to see fashion take that responsibility seriously.â€
Similarly, Topping notes in her article that there were negative reactions amidst the positive to the show. However, a quote from author Natasha Walter, who wrote Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism, pretty much sums up the situation. Walter remarks: “It is great to see more young women engaging with feminist ideas all the way from talking about them on social media to actually getting active, but real change requires huge social, economic and political shifts. If people start thinking that feminism is suddenly fashionable, then the danger is that the next moment they will say it has fallen out of fashion.â€
This is why Chanel’s show felt disingenuous despite the label’s significant influence with women. If anything, it underscored that the source of a message and the way this message is spread are essential. Given how the mass media has so utterly permeated our lives,  we should be so lucky if we sieve out the right messages from the barrage of information we are bombarded with everyday. Moreover, these would also have to survive long enough in news and cultural cycles to challenge and influence us in some fundamental way before they melt into oblivion.
Therefore, Lagerfeld’s savvy opportunism in capitalising on a conveniently current trope and Chanel’s feminist roots to cobble together a sugary “feminist†statement that seemingly hits the right notes might just end up undermining feminism, promoting a superficial understanding while relegating what is an extremely serious and pertinent issue to all the relevance of a single fashion season.
Of course, we probably just lack a sense of humour and irony and are completely missing the point. It’s just a mock protest, after all, a parade (charade?) conjured in good fun and that is feel-good to boot. However, the feminist movement—already embattled by those who belittle or misunderstand it—didn’t need this.
Image Credit:
Chanel Spring/Summer 2015 Runway from Getty Images Entertainment
[1] See “Stella McCartney Celebrates Gentle Femininity at Paris Fashion Weekâ€, by Lauren Cochrane for The Guardian.
[2] A helpful profile of Coco Chanel and her feminist inclinations, read Ingrid Sischy’s “The Designer Coco Chanel†in  TIME.
[3] In an interview with GLBT website PrideSource, Annie Lennox called Beyoncé feminist values into question. Referring to the “XO” singer’s recent MTV Video Music Awards performance, the Eurythmics member, 59, argued, “I would call that ‘feminist lite.’ L-I-T-E. I’m sorry. It’s tokenistic to me. I mean, I think she’s a phenomenal artist—I just love her performances—but I’d like to sit down [with her]. I think I’d like to sit down with quite a few artists and talk to them. I’d like to listen to them. I’d like to hear what they truly think.â€
[4] See “Karl Lagerfeld Says Only ‘Fat Mummies’ Object to Thin Models†by Kate Connolly for The Guardian.
← Previous post
Next post →