Dior in Transition: Who Is Anderson’s Woman?

• There’s a salad called vinaigrette. Its name is often used to describe something that has no cohesion whatsoever. That’s how this collection felt — lacking a unifying theme and instead splitting into three or four directions. With 74 looks, the “too much” outweighed the “not enough” — contrary to one of the core principles of luxury marketing. On the one hand, it’s a safe approach: something for everyone, catering to different clients. On the other hand, it leaves us wondering: who exactly is the Dior woman in the vision of the brand’s new creative director? I tend to think this vision will crystallize in the following collections.

  
  

• A good number of the looks had already been worn by celebrities and influencers long before the show. As a result, the presentation didn’t spark strong emotions — whether positive or negative. And that’s precisely the missed opportunity: in luxury communication, emotion is power. Perhaps it was a clever strategy by the communication team to “take the temperature of the room.” But more likely (as is usually the case), these were uncalculated steps rather than a deliberate plan.

  
  

• I’ve heard there’s currently a quiet power struggle happening inside the brand (which is hardly surprising — I don’t really believe in the absence of competition in any team of more than three people). The peak of this tension was the children’s campaign, as well as Rihanna’s appearance with her sons in mini versions of the runway menswear. This lack of synergy, even between departments, could explain some of the PR missteps.

  
  

• In luxury, the client feels like they’re leading — while in reality, it’s the brand. In mass-market, it’s the opposite. Yet in recent years, luxury has started to resemble mass-market in many ways. Endless copying of each other’s designs (and I’m not talking about experiments worth observing and sometimes worth adopting, but about actual design repetition) has made fashion at times dull and uninspiring. Dior, among others, has been guilty of this repetition. In this new collection, however, there’s a noticeable wind of change — and that alone is positive, as it reignites interest.

  
  

• Now to the design itself. Dior is a celebration of the cut and the female form — highlighting rather than hiding it. Some design choices I find questionable in principle, and some simply don’t feel “Dior,” even when presented as a “new interpretation.” I’m puzzled by aspects of the technical execution. It definitely warrants a closer look.

  
  

• A closer look is also needed for the details. I’m sure the collection will reveal new layers upon inspection, as Jonathan Anderson has previously established himself as meticulous with embellishments. Ideally, I’d love to try everything on for 2Jour-Stylist.com’s lookbook — the sheer number of looks and the lack of focus on a single through-line leaves one with the impression that “everything is clear, except nothing is.” Still, it’s too early to think about fittings, since what we see on the runway doesn’t always make it into boutiques, or not in the same form.

  
  

• Which brings us to what really matters — at least for LVMH: the numbers. Dior is the group’s second-highest-selling brand. I expect shoes and bags to perform well (I’ve personally added a few pairs to my wish list). As for how RTW will be translated into merchandise, we’ll have to wait and see. Most likely, we’ll see countless variations of bow blouses, capes, and the bar jacket reimagined. But beyond that — what else?