Is Hedi Slimane Leaving Saint Laurent for Dior or Chanel?

As usual Paris Fashion Week was not only busy due to all the shows, but the rumor mill also kept press, designers and other spectators on their toes. Next to Raf Simons making a possible move to Calvin Klein in the near future, rumors about a possible departure of Hedi Slimane from Saint Laurent were among the most talked about. Why the designer would be leaving Saint Laurent after having so successfully turned the brand around is not clear, but the main reason for the rumors to come up in the first place was the cancelation of the Saint Laurent show in Paris and the announcement that it would take place in Los Angeles instead.

If Slimane would leave YSL, then only for something better or bigger. What else is there? Raf Simons just left Dior, that could be an interesting move for Slimane. He has pretty much single handedly build up Dior Homme over a decade ago and would return to take over the entire brand. The other big speculation is Chanel. Of course Karl Lagerfeld is not going anywhere for now, but he is not the youngest anymore and he will for sure be looking around already for a suitable successor. It is known that Lagerfeld has a lot of respect for Slimane, so this could be an interesting move as well.

None of the brands has commented on any of these rumors yet, but with the women’s shows just around the corner, Dior and Lanvin will certainly need to announce something. Hopefully we know more soon.

Hermes Birkin: The handbag that is worth more than gold

Broadly speaking, the world is divided into savers and spenders. There are those who gen up on pension plans and ISAs and always have something “put by” and then there are those who will blow a month’s salary on a designer handbag.

But is it ever possible to be both? In fact not only is it possible but in the current economic climate it is the handbag-splurger who turns out to be the cannier investor.

Of course it depends on the handbag but if you are lucky enough to own a Hermes Birkin you are in the money. That’s not just marketing hype but the considered view of investment analysts.

Consider the evidence. Since Hermes created the Birkin 35 years ago (naming it after English actress Jane Birkin who inspired its design), the bag has gone up in value by 500 per cent, which is a far better performance than the stock market and even gold, the quintessential investment commodity.

One analysis showed that between 1980 and 2015 gold returned an average annual increase of 1.9 per cent. The stock market returned an average increase of 8.65 per cent but Birkin bags trounced them all. They increased in value each year by 14.2 per cent.

Jane Birkin asks Hermès to remove her name from iconic bag...
And, unlike the gold and stock market, the value of the bag never fluctuated but kept increasing with each year and is expected to double over the next decade. The Hermes Kelly bag (named after Grace Kelly, the Hollywood actress who became Princess of Monaco) is equally covetable.

The only other luxury brand that holds its value as well is Chanel. The price of a secondhand classic, medium-sized Chanel bag with a flap has doubled in the last five years.

All of which makes a designer bag with the right label a better investment than gold bars. There is certainly no pension fund – and probably never has been – that could deliver anything like the same return.

If that stretches credulity bear in mind that last June in Hong Kong, a Birkin bag made of pink crocodile skin sold at auction for an astonishing £156,000. In 2014 a model known as Himalaya, made of pale crocodile skin described as “almost albino” with diamond embellishment, sold at auction for £129,000.

The price of a new Birkin bag starts at around £9,000. A plain black crocodile version currently goes for more than £26,000. But the resale price is always higher than the original. The online resale site 1stdibs offers a blue Birkin in matte alligator skin for £61,634 and a beige version for £65,374.

Eva Longoria with a Birkin handbagGETTY
Eva Longoria owns a Hermes Birkin handbag
On the online auction site eBay sellers are even asking upwards of £1,000 for a canvas Hermes bag.

Suddenly reality star Kim Kardashian’s collection of Birkins, kept in a glass case, doesn’t seem quite so frivolous but utterly credible as the investment she claims them to be.

But what makes a Birkin bag so very desirable and valuable?

Quality is obviously important. “Hermes is the only luxury company that has not moved into mass production,” says Sabrina Sadiq, head of pricing and authentication at Designer Exchange, a company which buys and sells used designer handbags.

With its 19th-century roots in saddlery, Hermes uses only the very best animal skins. Each bag is hand-made by skilled artisans in France who can easily spend 18 hours stitching together each one. Fancier versions with diamond decorations take even longer.

Nicky Hilton with a Birkin handbagGETTY
As does Paris Hilton's sister, Nicky Hilton
They are impervious to passing fashion trends and Hermes also offers a lifetime repair service, meaning the bags can be passed down as heirlooms.

But far more crucial to the brand’s popularity is scarcity. Hermes bags are in a perpetual state of “sold out”.

The company only makes a certain number each year and it is never enough to satisfy demand, which drives up the price and leads to waiting lists – currently six years for a Birkin.

The fact that celebrities such as Victoria Beckham always seem to have a Birkin dangling from an arm every time they venture out in public conveys status for the celebrity (because they have got round the waiting list) and makes the bags even more covetable for everyone else.

Those who can’t wait (and the super-rich never have to) simply hire someone to source a bag for them.

Woman carrying a Birkin handbagGETTY
Hermes offers a lifetime repair service, meaning the bags can be passed down as heirlooms
This is not simply a matter of going into an Hermes stockist. For a start the shops don’t carry much stock. Hermes also likes to see some evidence of brand loyalty before parting with a Birkin or a Kelly.

The only quick way to get one is at an auction such as the regular sales of vintage bags held by French auction house Artcurial in Paris and Monaco, where the customers are mostly super-rich Russian, Chinese and Middle Eastern women.

Rare colours and materials, such as ostrich, clasps and buckles (collectively known as “hardware”) in precious metals and personalised touches all add to the price tag – and to any eventual resale value.

Why bother with a pension plan which could easily turn out to fall short of what you need? When it comes to investing perhaps it really is in the bag.

Why Fashion Models Don’t Smile

It’s almost fashion week season, with events in London, New York and Paris all coming up, and I have one pretty sure prediction: the models won’t be smiling. In spite of some hasty claims that happy faces are now de rigeur, a blank expression is a perennial trait of model behaviour.

Detractors of fashion often complain about the convention of the non-smiling model and the industry’s love of a surly pout has even been lambasted in films such as Zoolander. Catwalks have long been a smile-free zone – well, you can smile at the end when the designer pops up to present you with a bunch of flowers, but during the show, the smile is a no-no. In fashion editorials, too, smiles are like steak and chips on a model’s plate: very rare.



The other thing that has always troubled me about this is how tiresomely predictable it is. Being predictable is great if you are a bus or an excellent cup of coffee – but surely the essence of fashion is to push aesthetic boundaries, to welcome change for change’s sake. So why do they pull the same miserable faces at every single show, every single season, every single year. Stupid, isn’t it?

Haughty Couture

Or maybe it isn’t. The still expression of the fashion model is actually saying a lot of things. There’s an interesting heritage to it, too. It comes from the look of aristocratic disdain we see in centuries of royal portraiture which informed the 19th-century cartes de visite – society calling cards complete with what we might now term a ‘profile picture‘.

Photographer: David Wood, 139 Clarendon St, Emerald Hill [South Melbourne] [1873-1883]
Source: Flickr
Fashion photography – think Horst P. Horst in the early to mid-20th century – has also long used the haughty look to suggest the status that the right clothes could bring to the wearer in a more socially mobile society. Essentially, this look says: “I am better than you,” because it refuses to offer the open, smiling face of welcome that we conventionally use to engage someone we wish to interact with. It also conveys the self-control, stiff upper lip and nonchalance of the European upper classes – ‘civilised’ qualities which the “jolly old working classes” in those days supposedly found hard to convey.

To be emotionally controlled also suggests elevation above earthly concerns, access to higher knowledge and – in the modern world – an ability to be ‘unshakeable’. This is even more impressive in what theorist Erving Goffman called “fateful situations“ – situations in which you or your dignity and composure are at greater than average risk.

Tricky Business

This is why we are impressed by steely faced fighter pilots and nonchalant thieves – think Alan Rickman as the deadpan European super-villain Hans Gruber in Die Hard. Actually, Goffman was interested not so much in the control of emotions as he was in the control of the body, through which the ability to move smoothly and to appear unflustered became a much-admired trait. Fashion models on the catwalk may not seem to be in an especially ‘fateful’ situation but in fact, fashion and being fashionable is an extremely tricky business.

Let’s imagine that I decided one day to turn up to work in a completely new look – a gold onesie, say. It’s an unsettling thought, isn’t it? All of us position ourselves somewhere in relation to trends, because trends dictate what it is acceptable to wear. My new identity would be considered in relation to this ‘new’ look by those who see me and how it relates to the trends of the day.

The more my look diversifies from what is currently within the range of the ‘norm’, the greater the threat to perceptions of me as 1) tasteful, 2) my own person, and 3) sane. Your look, literally, can generate reverence – or ridicule.

A model in a catwalk show has not personally chosen the clothing – in a sense their composure stands in for that of the designer. They must look unworried, unshakeable, able to move smoothly and exert fine control over hands and facial muscles because they, on the designer’s behalf, are pulling off a confidence trick.

They must not exude personality, which would be inappropriate because it might distract from the clothes – and indeed the designer’s personality as portrayed through those clothes. They are, after all, a ‘model’. Nor must they look as if they are seeking approval because that implies a lack of conviction in what is currently “right.”

There must be an element of personal dignity at stake for a model forced to traverse the room in something that potentially makes them feel ridiculous – perhaps a traffic cone worn as jaunty hat, courtesy of Jeremy Scott for Moschino – but it is the designer who is on trial. In something outlandish, a smiling model could be seen as embarrassed or amused by the designer’s slip. If the collection bombs, the House of Whoever stands to lose not just face but a fortune.

So the models can’t afford to smile. Whatever else is going on in their heads, they’ve got to set the lips to otherworldly disdainful and unshakeable confidence – and just hope they don’t trip over.

This article is part of The Conversation’s Arts + Culture series.

Vanessa Brown Senior Lecturer in Design and Visual Culture at Nottingham Trent University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation.