nyt is tired of the typical fawning mj article, takes new approach

[spaceyjacy]

I've been buying MJ clothing & bags for almost 10 yrs now (I bought my first MbyMJ jacket in the summer of '02) and I hate to say it, but there are a lot of points in that article that I agree with (sorry MJ! :shame. More specifically:
An excellent example of how true a lot of these points are, is recent activity to this MJ forum here on tPF. At one time, the MJ forum was one of the busiest and most active sub-forums on tPF. There were reveals and new topics of conversation added almost on a daily basis. It was hard to keep up with all of the topics and each time you'd log in, all of the threads on the first page would be bolded text because someone was always replying or starting a new thread. I was shocked the other day, when I was searching for a thread and noticed that there were only TWO PAGES of current topics -- everything else had been archived because of inactivity (of course, you can find those threads in a search, but they're not "live" and active within the sub-forum)
Of course, you can't blame MJ entirely for loss of interest in his brand. There have been a lot of designers who have just entered the fashion world within the last few years and as interest in those designers grow, attention to the "senior" designers who have been around a lot longer are certain to be affected. There's more variety, more designers to choose from with prices ranging from the low end all the way up to the couture & luxury lines. Not to mention, a lot more designers are putting out diffusion lines, not only within their own houses, but in larger stores like Target and H&M and Wal Mart.
While I wouldn't say that MJ is a "dying breed" I do agree that the brand isn't as "prestigious" as it once was and his popularity has definitely dropped off. At the same time, I think all it will take is that one piece - that one bag -- that everyone is talking about to bring him back to the forefront. I guess only time will tell

Wow, I'm really shocked at how harsh you are on MJ! I though you were a tried and true fan. I didn't take you for someone to get swept away by the declarations of so many seemingly-random-yet-hand-picked-for-their-common-disdain-for-MJ "fashion/business" people.

I agree with others that you can't use TPF activity as a gauge for MJ's popularity. The economy sucks. I'm making half what I made before this whole recession thing happened. I haven't been around TPF because its too tempting. I can't spend as much time obsessing about things I can't responsibly afford at the moment. Am I still an MJ fan? You bet!
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case for a lot of members all over the TPF site.

Also, do you really agree with that sad statement by Jenna Sauers? Its a sad day when we start criticizing our artists for getting healthy. MJ has a terrible disease that is very hard to deal with(I have the same diagnosis BTW and its a incredible struggle every day). Its AMAZING that he has been able to put himself into remission and stay healthy. If the result is him looking a little different than he once did I really don't think its ok to hate on him for it.

 

[iluvmybags]

Wow, I'm really shocked at how harsh you are on MJ! I though you were a tried and true fan. I didn't take you for someone to get swept away by the declarations of so many seemingly-random-yet-hand-picked-for-their-common-disdain-for-MJ "fashion/business" people.

I agree with others that you can't use TPF activity as a gauge for MJ's popularity. The economy sucks. I'm making half what I made before this whole recession thing happened. I haven't been around TPF because its too tempting. I can't spend as much time obsessing about things I can't responsibly afford at the moment. Am I still an MJ fan? You bet!
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case for a lot of members all over the TPF site.

Also, do you really agree with that sad statement by Jenna Sauers? Its a sad day when we start criticizing our artists for getting healthy. MJ has a terrible disease that is very hard to deal with(I have the same diagnosis BTW and its a incredible struggle every day). Its AMAZING that he has been able to put himself into remission and stay healthy. If the result is him looking a little different than he once did I really don't think its ok to hate on him for it.

I'm more shocked at the fact that just because I disagree with a majority of the replies here and actually agree with several points of that article that I've been "swept away by the declarations of so many seemingly-random-yet-hand-picked-for-their-common-disdain-for-MJ "fashion/business" people." In other words, I'm not capable of forming my own opinion. Based on many of the comments and replies to this article, I get the impression that dare you say anything negative about MJ/MbyMJ, you're automatically considered a "hater" or "nay-sayer." Are the only opinions that matter, the ones that are full or praise or worship for Marc Jacobs? If you consider yourself a Marc Jacobs fan, does that mean you're NEVER allowed to form a negative opinion?

My opinions and agreement with some of the points in the article are MY opinion and thoughts. I've been thinking these things LONG before this article was published. In fact, I voiced a similar opinion to one of the people who replied to this thread earlier this week, BEFORE this article was published. My opinions have not been influenced by anyone (I rarely read these columns anyhow -- I wouldn't have even seen this article if tad hadn't posted it here). I have been feeling the pull away from MJ for a while now. I'm not dismissing the designer entirely, but I also don't have the same genuine love for what's out there now compared to what was out there 7-8 years ago.

IMO, I prefer the MJ of 2002-2004 -- that's the MJ I fell in love with. The workmanship and materials were impeccable. There wasn't this need to be the most outrgeous or "loud" designer on the runway. His styles were understated and simple. They weren't overblown pieces of art. It's just not my personal cup of tea. I don't want to carry artwork on my arm -- I want bags that are functionable and user friendly. I don't need all the bells and whistles. This is one reason why I'm excited about what I've seen for F/W -- there are several bags with simple styles, clean lines that appear to be made from nice leather. It's also why I've been drawn to other deisgners such as Celine and Lanvin. There's a simple elgance and sophisitication to those bags. They're made with the best leathers and are designed to last a lifetime. I haven't felt that way about MJ's bags for a while now. As far as durability goes, MJ bags are no where near as durable as they used to be (and I'm not talking cost vs quality -- I would absolutely pay a couple hundred $$ more for the bags IF they were as well made as they used to be)

Bags like the Gilda and the Pendant Bags and all the "fur balls" that came down the runway last year aren't for me. The glitter bags, sequence Singles and Stams -- I don't like or need (nor want) that kind of stuff. Bags from 2002 may be simple and boring, but they were work horses and were made to last.

And in no way am I criticizing ANYONE for getting healthy. That is not what I meant and that's a horrible accusation to make (I can't believe that you would think I would ever wish that on anyone). Of course I want the man to be happy and healthy and in a good place. I think what he's done as far as his personal life goes is incredible and brave and I respect and admire him for getting the help he needed and rebuilding his life. That doesn't mean that I can't miss the shy, quirky, almost nerdy man from 10 yrs ago -- his clothing and accessories were a reflection of him in that they weren't the most fashionable pieces on the market, you didn't see them coming down the red carpet and they weren't being seen and carried by every diva and "it" girl on the Hollywood and/or Fashion scene. MJ clothing and accessories in 2001-2003 were like the misfits of the fashion world -- almost like MJ the person was.

I can't think of any other way to explain it, except like this: it's like Princess Fiona from SHREK -- back then, MJ things could be compared to Princess Fiona as an Ogre, nowadays, they are the beautiful princess on the outside, but underneath all that beauty & radiance is the ogre that it used to be. I want the ogre to come back. I'd like to see him pay less attention to the outrageousness and get back to the basics -- making classic, usable, durable handbags using the finest leathers and materials.

(and if I'm really being hoenst here, I get the feeling that a lot of times MJ fans are far more influenced by the name behind the merchandise rather than the merchandise itself. Take a lot of his creations and remove MJ's name and put Prada's name or Coach or Dooney & Bourke on there instead -- then tell me whether or not people would react and/or love those same things as much as they did when they saw it on the MJ website or during his runway show. I guarantee that if a lot of the bags he's put out there over the last 1-2 yrs were sitting on the shelf at Macy's with a Dooney & Bourke tag hanging from it, no one here would give that bag a second glance. Yet, when MJ did it, they were considered "fun" and "quirky" and "pieces of art")

 

[mjsmurf77]

First of all let me say that this article makes me question integrity of this particular journalist and of the times for publishing it. I suppose I should get used to it. As much as I love the NYT they let some pretty ridiculous stuff slip through the cracks.
The sources were quite obviously picked to discredit and obscure the truly news worthy event: MJ receives a lifetime achievement award! Yay for him! Yay for his hard work! Yay for how much joy and happiness he has brought into my life with the designs he presents every season! He deserves it!

The fact that the writer had to resort to quoting students(who BTW probably have pretty big chips on their shoulders to begin with, sort of comes with the territory, like to see them design a RTW collection like Marc can) just screams of desperation. Ruth is really reaching here. Quoting a youth marketing consultant who works for Coca-cola and Disney?? Come on Ruth, you can get a sound bite from someone more relevant in the fashion world than that right? Or maybe everyone else just had too many good things to say.

I'm a journalist and have seen editors tell reporters to write stories from a devil's advocate perspective many times, and given Cathy Horyn's usually glowing reviews of MJ's shows, I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case here. It's a "talker," as editors like to say--look at the discussion we're having!--but the timing of it is catty and sensational, not what I expect from the NYT. Makes me want to support MJ even more though--I pulled out my beautiful ruffles bag to take to dinner tonight and enjoyed the racket it made as I walked to the restaurant!

 

[Mina_Elina]

Who knows really... During his nerdy, mousy-looking dude years, MJ might had been wishing and wanting to be more extroverted and crazy and one fine day he decided to change... and along with his makeover came a different attitude and that reflected in his work?...

Change is good

One can't stay being the same, same, same thing forever and ever.

...

@Iluvmybags: Your opinion is completely valid, but I'm a bit confused now in re to how you keep buying his products many years after your last fave collection by him? I'm not being sarcastic, that was a true earnest question!

and if I'm really being honest here, I get the feeling that a lot of times MJ fans are far more influenced by the name behind the merchandise rather than the merchandise itself. Take a lot of his creations and remove MJ's name and put Prada's name or Coach or Dooney & Bourke on there instead -- then tell me whether or not people would react and/or love those same things as much as they did when they saw it on the MJ website or during his runway show. I guarantee that if a lot of the bags he's put out there over the last 1-2 yrs were sitting on the shelf at Macy's with a Dooney & Bourke tag hanging from it, no one here would give that bag a second glance. Yet, when MJ did it, they were considered "fun" and "quirky" and "pieces of art"

Being a fashion ignoramus I can tell you for sure that I only started paying attn to bags recently... I have other bags from previous years and none of them are designer bags... I bought those because of their colours and the design, etc... because I like them, that's it. That's basically the same guidelines I used earlier this year when I started looking around for a new bag. No logos, no monograms. I just wanted a blush-coloured bag, preferably quilted, with gold hardware cause it makes the colour pop even more - ta dah! I found MJ! I knew who he was I've seen his stuff before, but I never paid attn. As I never pay attn to anything super pricey that I know I couldn't really afford. Things have improved economically for me and with that came one of the bestest super heroes ever: Super Acquisitive Power! - I was able to buy my dream blush-coloured, quilted bag with gold hardware.
Not because it says MJ on it, or if it was a Prada, because it say Prada on it, etc. but because I loved it when I saw it and was able (most important thing here) to afford it. Had Dooney & Bourke or Coach put a bag out there like that, I would have bought it even sooner than I was able to buy the MJ - cause those are cheaper than MJs. But one thing to note here is that most of those designers you mentioned, don't do what I favour, all in one bag!: quilted, real leather, chains, chains with leather, gold hardware, little padlocks, and variety in colours. Now because of that I'm a fan
Because of the product and the lack of 'in-your-face' advertisement on the product, that's why I've started collecting some of his stuff now that I'm (thankfully) able (economically).

 

[iluvmybags]

@Iluvmybags: Your opinion is completely valid, but I'm a bit confused now in re to how you keep buying his products many years after your last fave collection by him? I'm not being sarcastic, that was a true earnest question!


.

Just because his older bags and styles were my favorites doesn't mean I don't appreciate his new things. I did stop buying MJ for a few yrs -- when he introduced the stam and the quilted lines, I was very turned off by that and wasn't a fan of a lot of the styles from around that time. Later, as my taste in styles changed, I came to appreciate the stam and gave it a try and ended up loving the style.

But his original bags -- those thick calf leather bags, lined with suede with heavy duty brass and later nickel plated hardware? IMO, those were MJ's best bags. I've had many of them over the years (if you look at my RIP photo album, you'll see a lot of older styles -- I had even more that aren't included there). In fact, there was a bag on ebay this week that I have wanted for years and years -- it's from F2002. I would have bid on it had it been in better condition, but the inside was just horrendous!. They don't come around too often, but I'm hopefull that another one comes along someday. None of his bags in recent years compare to those as far as quality goes. Compare a Blake from F09 to a Blake from F04 and you'll see what I mean

 

[ashleekieu]

Interesting article, and thanks for sharing.
I've always bought MJ things because I like them, not because the name behind it. I kid you not when I tell you my family are brand name addicts; chanel; LV; Prada; Hermes; you name it they have it. However, they do not buy MJ because no one would know what it is. This is why I tend to go back to MJ; it's simple; fun and because no one really know what they heck I am carrying. I like the fact that years after years he adds a few "wild" items to the classics. To me a designer sticks to what he knows but also know how to add some substances and move outside of their normal realm. As for whether MJ is prestigious or not one has to define it; if you refer to prestige as being something that is expensive than I say MJ fits in that category; However, if you define prestige as a well known brand; such LV or Chanel than MJ doesn't fit into that category. My family tells me that Chanel is prestigious; to me it's for old people
As for quality control issues; every brands have them; do a search on tpf and hundreds of threds pops up. MJ has kept the prices pretty consistent or even reduce when the quality is not the same or made else where; take the zip clutch for example it was reduced about 100. Honestly, how many brands have done this? Take LV; who raised their prices twice in the last 5 months even though have have quality control issues.

 

[iluvmybags]

Interesting article, and thanks for sharing.
I've always bought MJ things because I like them, not because the name behind it. I kid you not when I tell you my family are brand name addicts; chanel; LV; Prada; Hermes; you name it they have it. However, they do not buy MJ because no one would know what it is. This is why I tend to go back to MJ; it's simple; fun and because no one really know what they heck I am carrying. I like the fact that years after years he adds a few "wild" items to the classics. To me a designer sticks to what he knows but also know how to add some substances and move outside of their normal realm. As for whether MJ is prestigious or not one has to define it; if you refer to prestige as being something that is expensive than I say MJ fits in that category; However, if you define prestige as a well known brand; such LV or Chanel than MJ doesn't fit into that category. My family tells me that Chanel is prestigious; to me it's for old people
As for quality control issues; every brands have them; do a search on tpf and hundreds of threds pops up. MJ has kept the prices pretty consistent or even reduce when the quality is not the same or made else where; take the zip clutch for example it was reduced about 100. Honestly, how many brands have done this? Take LV; who raised their prices twice in the last 5 months even though have have quality control issues.

but have you seen the recent zip clutches? slightly smaller and made with lower quality leather & materials (and I believe they are no longer made in Italy) -- I appreciate the effort to reduce prices, but not in exchange for lesser quality. That is one of the points I believe is correct within the article. Why sacrifice quality for cost? If MJ wants to appeal to a wider audience, then I'd rather see him produce an entirely new product at the lower price point, not lower the price on an established SLG that's been around for years, but at a much lower quality than it was when it first introduced. While the lower price point is great for buyers who are new to brand, those who have been around for years and have come to expect the same quality are left disappointed

 

[spaceyjacy]

I'm more shocked at the fact that just because I disagree with a majority of the replies here and actually agree with several points of that article that I've been "swept away by the declarations of so many seemingly-random-yet-hand-picked-for-their-common-disdain-for-MJ "fashion/business" people." In other words, I'm not capable of forming my own opinion. Based on many of the comments and replies to this article, I get the impression that dare you say anything negative about MJ/MbyMJ, you're automatically considered a "hater" or "nay-sayer." Are the only opinions that matter, the ones that are full or praise or worship for Marc Jacobs? If you consider yourself a Marc Jacobs fan, does that mean you're NEVER allowed to form a negative opinion?

Absolutely not. I haven't liked any of his spring collections enough to buy anything from them for two seasons. Does that mean I don't appreciate his work? No, it just means that they wouldn't have been ME. I still think he's talented and I would totally dress other people in those clothes.

My opinions and agreement with some of the points in the article are MY opinion and thoughts. I've been thinking these things LONG before this article was published. In fact, I voiced a similar opinion to one of the people who replied to this thread earlier this week, BEFORE this article was published. My opinions have not been influenced by anyone (I rarely read these columns anyhow -- I wouldn't have even seen this article if tad hadn't posted it here). I have been feeling the pull away from MJ for a while now. I'm not dismissing the designer entirely, but I also don't have the same genuine love for what's out there now compared to what was out there 7-8 years ago.

IMO, I prefer the MJ of 2002-2004 -- that's the MJ I fell in love with. The workmanship and materials were impeccable. There wasn't this need to be the most outrgeous or "loud" designer on the runway. His styles were understated and simple. They weren't overblown pieces of art. It's just not my personal cup of tea. I don't want to carry artwork on my arm -- I want bags that are functionable and user friendly. I don't need all the bells and whistles. This is one reason why I'm excited about what I've seen for F/W -- there are several bags with simple styles, clean lines that appear to be made from nice leather. It's also why I've been drawn to other deisgners such as Celine and Lanvin. There's a simple elgance and sophisitication to those bags. They're made with the best leathers and are designed to last a lifetime. I haven't felt that way about MJ's bags for a while now. As far as durability goes, MJ bags are no where near as durable as they used to be (and I'm not talking cost vs quality -- I would absolutely pay a couple hundred $$ more for the bags IF they were as well made as they used to be)

I guess I'm just confused as to whether you are actually a fan of MJ. If you haven't loved his work for the last 7 or 8 years then why have you continued to purchased his pieces? Thats a long time to consider his bags overblown pieces of art and still purchase them.

(and if I'm really being hoenst here, I get the feeling that a lot of times MJ fans are far more influenced by the name behind the merchandise rather than the merchandise itself. Take a lot of his creations and remove MJ's name and put Prada's name or Coach or Dooney & Bourke on there instead -- then tell me whether or not people would react and/or love those same things as much as they did when they saw it on the MJ website or during his runway show. I guarantee that if a lot of the bags he's put out there over the last 1-2 yrs were sitting on the shelf at Macy's with a Dooney & Bourke tag hanging from it, no one here would give that bag a second glance. Yet, when MJ did it, they were considered "fun" and "quirky" and "pieces of art")

Well I hope you don't think the only reason I love MJ is his name. I am by no means label obsessed. Half my clothes I've made myself, they don't even have labels !
My response to MJ lies much more in my artistic admiration of him and his ability to continuously turn out interesting evocative work.

 

[spaceyjacy]

I'm a journalist and have seen editors tell reporters to write stories from a devil's advocate perspective many times, and given Cathy Horyn's usually glowing reviews of MJ's shows, I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case here. It's a "talker," as editors like to say--look at the discussion we're having!--but the timing of it is catty and sensational, not what I expect from the NYT. Makes me want to support MJ even more though--I pulled out my beautiful ruffles bag to take to dinner tonight and enjoyed the racket it made as I walked to the restaurant!

Yes, I understand the concept of the article. I just thought, as you said, the timing was catty and poorly done IMO.

Who knows really... During his nerdy, mousy-looking dude years, MJ might had been wishing and wanting to be more extroverted and crazy and one fine day he decided to change... and along with his makeover came a different attitude and that reflected in his work?...

Change is good

Actually, as I mentioned before, he was very very ill. His change in appearance was a result of him working very hard to get healthy and beat a serious disease. Go Marc!

 

[iluvmybags]

Absolutely not. I haven't liked any of his spring collections enough to buy anything from them for two seasons. Does that mean I don't appreciate his work? No, it just means that they wouldn't have been ME. I still think he's talented and I would totally dress other people in those clothes.




I guess I'm just confused as to whether you are actually a fan of MJ. If you haven't loved his work for the last 7 or 8 years then why have you continued to purchased his pieces? Thats a long time to consider his bags overblown pieces of art and still purchase them.



Well I hope you don't think the only reason I love MJ is his name. I am by no means label obsessed. Half my clothes I've made myself, they don't even have labels !
My response to MJ lies much more in my artistic admiration of him and his ability to continuously turn out interesting evocative work.

I never said MJ wasn't talented, never said that I didn't appreciate his work, never said that he shouldn't never had gotten help for his disease -- I simply said that I agreed with many points in the article, which obviously touches a nerve with you and others who have posted replies to my initial comments.

I don't have to like everything a designer does to be considered a fan of theirs -- I'm my children's biggest fan, but I don't like and/or approve of everything they say or do -- I don't have to believe that a designer is on top of world to appreciate what they're creating. Do I respect MJ as a person and a designer? Yes. Do I appreciate the effort and work he puts into his runway shows and seasonal lines? Yes. Do I like everything he's been producing over the last few years? No. Do I believe what he's producing are of the same quality as the items that he was creating 8-10 years ago when he was first starting out? No. Am I buying fewer MJ items than I was 4-7 years ago? Yes. Do I think MJ's popularity has fallen further down the "popularity scale"? Yes. Do I think the younger generation is as interested in MJ as the same generation was when he was just starting out? No. Do I believe that MJ is deserving of the Lifetime Achievement Award being bestowed upon him this year? Absolutely.

There was a point in time where I bought almost nothing else but MbyMJ clothing. That isn't the case any more -- I'm buying less & less MbyMJ (and MJ) clothing. There was a point in time where I never even LOOKED at the handbags created by other designers and was only interested in Marc Jacobs. That's no longer true -- MJ's making fewer and fewer bags each season that are the type of bag I need, the type of bag I like, the type of bag I want to carry and I'm finding that other designers are creating bags that are more along the lines of what I want and/or need. That doesn't mean I'm never going to buy another Marc Jacobs handbag or any more MbyMJ clothing, but I'm aware enough to know that I'm moving further away from the MJ brand and that I'm more likely to find what I need from another designer and less likely to rely on MJ as I have in past seasons.

Comments have been made that this article was published just as MJ is set to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award at the CFDA awards this year and that this is just a way for the haters (which appears to be a term often referred to ANYONE who ever speaks a negative word about MJ) to rip him down and take away some of the prestige that comes with receiving that award. Those are some sour grapes there -- questioning the integrity of the author of that article just because you don't agree with their opinion? I consider myself a fan of Marc Jacobs and believe I always will be (that doesn't necessarily mean I have to like and/or buy everything from him), but I also respect the opinions of other people and realize that not everyone is going to like or approve of the same things I do. I'm not going to rip a person to shreds or question their motives when they voice an opinion that's opposite of mine. I may not agree with everything that someone else says about something I like, but just because I disagree or disapprove of someone else's opinion, I wouldn't question their motives or accuse them of being malicious just because I don't like what they have to say or that their comments are the opposite of mine.

I happen to agree with several points this author made. I respect their opinion and don't believe there's any hidden agenda behind the article. If that makes me a hater or any less a fan of MJ than any of you, then so be it -- I'm entitled to my own opinions and don't have this insatiable need to put MJ on a pedestal or protect him from the "naysayers" or interrogate anyone who dare say anything that might be construed as criticism, disapproval or dissatisfaction.

 

[tadpolenyc]

(and if I'm really being hoenst here, I get the feeling that a lot of times MJ fans are far more influenced by the name behind the merchandise rather than the merchandise itself. Take a lot of his creations and remove MJ's name and put Prada's name or Coach or Dooney & Bourke on there instead -- then tell me whether or not people would react and/or love those same things as much as they did when they saw it on the MJ website or during his runway show. I guarantee that if a lot of the bags he's put out there over the last 1-2 yrs were sitting on the shelf at Macy's with a Dooney & Bourke tag hanging from it, no one here would give that bag a second glance. Yet, when MJ did it, they were considered "fun" and "quirky" and "pieces of art")

wow. okay. i can say this about any fan of any designer's, but that's quite a charge to levy at anyone's personal preference. i'm not here to make generalizations and form assumptions about people i've never met.

Comments have been made that this article was published just as MJ is set to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award at the CFDA awards this year and that this is just a way for the haters (which appears to be a term often referred to ANYONE who ever speaks a negative word about MJ) to rip him down and take away some of the prestige that comes with receiving that award. Those are some sour grapes there -- questioning the integrity of the author of that article just because you don't agree with their opinion? I consider myself a fan of Marc Jacobs and believe I always will be (that doesn't necessarily mean I have to like and/or buy everything from him), but I also respect the opinions of other people and realize that not everyone is going to like or approve of the same things I do. I'm not going to rip a person to shreds or question their motives when they voice an opinion that's opposite of mine. I may not agree with everything that someone else says about something I like, but just because I disagree or disapprove of someone else's opinion, I wouldn't question their motives or accuse them of being malicious just because I don't like what they have to say or that their comments are the opposite of mine.

I happen to agree with several points this author made. I respect their opinion and don't believe there's any hidden agenda behind the article. If that makes me a hater or any less a fan of MJ than any of you, then so be it -- I'm entitled to my own opinions and don't have this insatiable need to put MJ on a pedestal or protect him from the "naysayers" or interrogate anyone who dare say anything that might be construed as criticism, disapproval or dissatisfaction.

explain to me how this works: you've stated that you have a right to your opinion, yet somehow i don't have a right to mine? i absolutely think this article is ill-timed and mean spirited. the author purposefully - whether at her own inclination or the behest of her editor - sought out comments of a negative nature. so when i express my dismay at this, it's "sour grapes" while you frame your opinions as objectively voicing fair, valid displeasure with a designer and the direction of his business. that's quite the double standard you're applying to my views. that's fine. you don't have to agree with me, you don't have to take stock in anything i say. no one here does. just expect to have your viewpoints summarily dismissed when do you do the same to others.

as for the perceived slights, which is causing you to be so defensive, i'm not really sure how to respond to that. i don't see it. i don't see anything that can be construed as an attack to warrant such a reaction. no one said you were a hater. no one said you were less of a fan. i see earnest questions/reactions because your viewpoints provoked a good debate, but like you said, you are entitled to your opinions and thoughts. i'll sit here enjoying my sour grapes.

 

[kmroboto]

wow, hot topic indeed!

i agree that this article is really quoting some random people. i don't really know that much about fashion and don't pay much attention to the names behind the scenes, but even i can tell that this author didn't pick many relevant people to quote. and like jacy said, it feels like the article is mostly about the diffusion line, mbmj. actually, i find the article really vague - it simultaneously compares all of mj's lines to long-standing brands like chanel and gucci to brand-new, hip, small lines like a. wang and rag & bone. of course that is the competition for mj but to generalize all of his brands and to randomly compare them to these totally different brands as they suit your argument makes no sense.

the author is all over the place. her point of view seems to only be to criticize mj right as he's about to receive a prestigious award. it feels like mj is expected to be all things to all people: the clothes should feel "designery" and on the minds of the high-class for both everyday wear and red carpet events but at the same time be constantly hot and hip to the latest generation of youngsters fresh on the scene. that sounds like an impossible task to me! are his clothes the best fit for mariah carey or missy elliott? no. but they never really were, right? who does the author think that the clothes should appeal to? i can't tell, one person says they're too avant-garde but another says they're too commercial.

the comments that relate to his health are pretty low. i understand that ms. sauers is missing mj's more "vulnerable moments" but a true artist must constantly change and being nostalgic for how you perceived him in the past is ridiculous and doesn't belong in this article especially when you preferred him when he was essentially sick and unhealthy. i guess we all love a struggling and anguished artist!

i personally think that mj has done a fantastic job of being an artist in the fashion world. it is no small task to come up with an interesting and directional show twice a year for both his main line and mbmj line. he's constantly changing but i still see his point of view in most of the clothes and bags. do i like it all? no, some of it are misses in my opinion. but some are amazing and i sort of prefer that there are a lot of styles out there so that even among his fans we can all have different looks. a lot of what he does just isn't my style but my style is evolving so there are bound to be times when i don't care for his stuff as much as other times. and as for the quality, i think it's still there. i like that some of the newer versions of classic styles aren't as thick and heavy as they used to be. at least my back thanks him for it!

 

[iluvmybags]

I'm still looking for the place in the article where Ms. Sauers said that she preferred a sickly, unhealthy Marc Jacobs over the healthy one? where she criticized him for getting healthy -- I've read that article 4 or 5 times, and I can't seem to find that comment or quote anywhere

 

[spaceyjacy]

Comments have been made that this article was published just as MJ is set to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award at the CFDA awards this year and that this is just a way for the haters (which appears to be a term often referred to ANYONE who ever speaks a negative word about MJ) to rip him down and take away some of the prestige that comes with receiving that award. Those are some sour grapes there -- questioning the integrity of the author of that article just because you don't agree with their opinion? I consider myself a fan of Marc Jacobs and believe I always will be (that doesn't necessarily mean I have to like and/or buy everything from him), but I also respect the opinions of other people and realize that not everyone is going to like or approve of the same things I do. I'm not going to rip a person to shreds or question their motives when they voice an opinion that's opposite of mine. I may not agree with everything that someone else says about something I like, but just because I disagree or disapprove of someone else's opinion, I wouldn't question their motives or accuse them of being malicious just because I don't like what they have to say or that their comments are the opposite of mine.

Hmmm. seems you didn't understand what I was trying to say. I'm questioning the authors integrity over publishing a poorly sourced article for the sake of playing devils advocate. I wouldn't have made such comments if we were hearing these comments coming from people with their fingers on the pulse of fashion. Roboto said it better:

i agree that this article is really quoting some random people. i don't really know that much about fashion and don't pay much attention to the names behind the scenes, but even i can tell that this author didn't pick many relevant people to quote. and like jacy said, it feels like the article is mostly about the diffusion line, mbmj. actually, i find the article really vague - it simultaneously compares all of mj's lines to long-standing brands like chanel and gucci to brand-new, hip, small lines like a. wang and rag & bone. of course that is the competition for mj but to generalize all of his brands and to randomly compare them to these totally different brands as they suit your argument makes no sense.
the author is all over the place. her point of view seems to only be to criticize mj right as he's about to receive a prestigious award.

 

[spaceyjacy]

I'm still looking for the place in the article where Ms. Sauers said that she preferred a sickly, unhealthy Marc Jacobs over the healthy one? where she criticized him for getting healthy -- I've read that article 4 or 5 times, and I can't seem to find that comment or quote anywhere

It was a part you had bold texed:

" Jenna Sauers, who writes about fashion on Jezebel, the feminist blog, would happily trade in the streamlined, preening Mr. Jacobs, for the older, apparently gentler model. “There was something about him that was so endearing,” Ms. Sauers said in an interview. “He was kind of a schlub, and you felt he loved his work. I have a lot of affection for that Marc. I’m missing those vulnerable moments.” "