100th post! all about the inadequacies of this batch of couture shows!

how riveting you say! well get over it, this shit is rubbin' me raw. so, only about 30 women in the world purchase couture, most being from european/middle eastern origin. thus, generally, couture shows are made without profit in mind. if someone wants to commission a $40,000 dress from galliano that's cool, but couture shows most often exist to put the art and whimsy back into fashion. the pure, base, sensual desire for expressing any idea you can think of; shooting for the stars, if you will. it is not practical and it is oft not even wearable without help getting dressed from a friend or two. which is why, this year's offerings were a let down. they were either unimaginative or referentially dated or even both. most veered more towards being, gasp, RTW than couture. yes, chanel showed models in flats ( quelle shoque!) and had them loping out of a giant stone chanel jacket, but the clothes looked more like they belonged on the set of gossip girl than on a museum pedestal. also, i have a problem with models in flats, why make the owners of some of the world's most unique and beautiful collection of genes look like normal women schlepping around? maybe it's to be blase about luxury, but really, those girls just look like the awkward teens they really are, which is disconcerting as i want my RTW models to be inaccessible and the clothes to be irreverently accessible and, therefore, my couture models to look like they are from an entirely different planet with clothes that are made of daydreams, dirty alleyways, and rainbow ponies! mass pictures below, form your own opinions, but mine are:
yawn chanel & lacroix (only because they look dated and done)
chanel:












lacroix:












tiiight: givenchy, dior, and galliano (he dressed coco rocha as a MERMAID! a MERMAID! how perfect is that!?)

givenchy:


dior & coco rocha as galliano's mermaid: