Vous, un beau petit bonhomme, d’un style charmant avec votre noeux de papillon et votre voix si douce et si gentille.

Quel être maléfique est venu a votre porte pour vous charmer d’un rêve qui ne peut que tâcher votre talent pour la couture?

Ce n’est pas bien. Vous méritez mieux.

20 yr old Chanel Iman is one of the most successful black models of her generation

Open up any page in any fashion magazine and you’ll see editorial spreads of teens posing as women. Having grown up in the era of “heroine chic”, followed by the increasingly super skinny and photoshopped models, it’s quite obvious that our views of beauty and normality in fashion has been skewered significantly in the age of 2010.

From Chanel products to Lanvin, I see girls – not women – marketing products aimed at people nearly twice their age. Much of the 20-somethings complain that designer goods are unreachable and unreasonably priced, and they have the right to complain. Why? Because normal 20 yr olds can’t afford real designer goods. Times have changed. Women in their 20s are no longer the grown ups of the 1950s, they’re now taking more time to finish school and develop a career than raising a family. Not to mention that many 20-somethings are already in deep debt, some reaching up to six figures in the red from student loans. So why are fashion brands still marketing to this demographic who clearly can’t afford their products? Women today won’t be settling for “entry-level luxuries” like perfume or a handbag, if that Balmain jacket is $10,000, then she’ll run off to Forever 21 and get a similar one for $40. It’s that simple.

And how does this marketing tactic make older women feel? I’ve never really noticed the difference because I was so jaded and used to the ads but as I get older, and I see models as young as 17 wear Chanel couture, it makes me ill. Sure, Vogue may have that occasional cover that says “yes we do care about women of ALL ages!” with a few editorials of women over the age of 40, but that’s hardly what I call acceptable coverage. It’s like that one off of Vogue Italia where they dedicated one issue entirely to black models, but have those black models found their ways back into the fashion editorials since? Not really.

18 yr old Karlie Kloss for Oscar de la Renta, this outfit costs over $7500.

The Millenials, as we call them, are the savviest bunch, they go to the internet to get the best deals, the best knock offs they can find when they can’t afford designer fashion. Because designers are marketing their products to them, they’re making you believe that you have access to these fantastic pieces. Until you fall upon the fine print and learn that the fabulous Proenza Schouler coat is a whooping $3100. What normal 20-something has that kind of money to throw around to “make a statement”? I don’t know any of my friends who has that kind of money to throw around for a coat unless they’ve been saving up just for that occasion, and they have normal jobs like any of us.

This isn’t to say that brands don’t have the magic to fan the desire for fashion, they do. In a big way, this desire has grown to an unfulfilled need that fast fashion brands were gladly able to offer. Get similar designs for a fraction of the price! The plan to prep the Millenials to become future loyal clients has backfired big time. Fast fashion brands have sealed this generation into an unescapable route where cheap fashion rules. Suddenly, designer brands are popping up with bridge collections that say “oh we’re kinda like the designer brand, but cheaper.” A perfect example on these bridge collections is Ralph Lauren. It took me a while to learn that what I thought was Ralph Lauren, wasn’t the Ralph Lauren Collection but Polo Ralph Lauren, the cheapest sister of the brand (there are cheaper brands still, but that’s another story).

Designer brands have clearly missed the Millenial boat, they won’t be coming back (if ever) for another 20 years when they’re older and hopefully a little wiser. But will these women wise up and come to their senses and buy higher end goods? Or will they be stuck like the older women of today, botoxing their faces to death to recall their days of youth and making a bee-line to H&M?

This is not healthy.

Fashion brands should be marketing to the proper demographics. Let 16 and 17 year olds market to teenagers, not older women. Let 20-somethings market to 20-somethings. And let 50 yr olds market to 50-yr olds. That’s how the game should be played, it’s kind of sickening to be so youth obsessed with these fashion editorials. It’s no wonder fast fashion brands are spreading like the plague, the 20-somethings aren’t really given a better alternative.

N.B.: The models depicted are indeed very talented, but as a whole, are misused to represent the correct demographic these fashion brands are aiming for.

Image credit: fluxuryb.com, Oscar de la Renta

Quite honestly I cannot find another brand that can make shoes from the same model in so many vibrant and different designs. Truly, I will be their loyal customer.

If you watched a rerun of the Sex and the City episode “Ring-a-ding-ding”, where Carrie is forced to come up with a $40,000 down payment for her apartment, she claims not to have any money while shoe shopping with Miranda.

- Miranda grabs a shoe Carrie held in her hand and says “At $400 a pop, how many of these do you have? Fifty?”
- Carrie frowns, “C’mon…” (she has way more than that!)
- “100?”
- “Would it be bad if I did?” Carrie answers coyly.
- “Well $400 times 100, there’s your down payment,” Miranda says as a matter of fact.
- “Well no, that’s only $4000.” Carrie clearly not strong in math.
- “No, that’s $40,000.”

Carrie gasps. And so do I.

This episode ran during the 2001-2002 season, and 8-9 years later in 2010, the inflation of designer shoe prices have since risen from $400 to $600. Women could only wish designer shoes were $400 “cheap”. Nowadays, $400 can get you a pair from designer bridge collections like Miu Miu, Marc by Marc Jacob, or brands like Diane von Furstenberg. But for couture houses like Yves Saint Laurent,  and popular shoe-designers like Christian Louboutin, Jimmy Choo and Manolo Blahnik, you’re looking to spend at least $600 (sometimes $500 if you’re lucky) up to $1100. Designer boots? Expect to shell out at least $1200 to $2000 (for Alaïa). Recently, Bloomberg wrote that the shoes are the new “it bags”, where women see no problem splurging over a pair of designer sandals.

Above: Azzedine Alaïa booties for $1805 at Net-a-porter.com

Indeed price inflation seems to be inevitable, but paychecks aren’t getting bigger and prices over designer fashion are getting higher. Brands blame that production costs have risen over the years and to keep their profits, they must raise prices. It’s even harder for publicly traded brands to keep prices low as investors expect better sales than the previous year. There are a number of factors that can contribute to inflation, and though understandable, let’s not discount that greed aka profit plays a huge role in this. I don’t really believe the quality of shoes have gone up over time, in fact I think they’ve gone down and production time has gone down as well. These days, hand crafted goods are just “too expensive”.

Are we led to believe that eventually we’d have to shell out over $1000 for a pair of designer shoes by 2020? I already have a hard time paying for a single pair of basic Christian Louboutin pumps, let alone spend $1000 of my hard earned money on a designer shoe that doesn’t have a long shelf life. Is it any wonder the public is turning towards cheaper goods? Cheap fashion will still perpetuate if designer brands keep their prices high.

So, the conundrum is this: do we buy designer shoes now, as expensive as it is, in the risk to avoid paying more in the future? Or do we restrain ourselves and save up until you can afford some and/or hope to have a better salary in the future?

Montreal’s fashion darling Denis Gagnon officially launched his line for fast fashion store Bedo today. With it, a throng of black clad fashionistas showed up, a type of crowd I have not seen since my foray into Fantasme the previous year. Here the hippest and savviest of them all sip on white wine and nibble on hors d’oeuvres as dozens more sift through the racks of Gagnon’s Fall 2010 collection.

Fashion editors who have had the chance to preview the collection weeks before its launch, noted that the collection was more of a review of previous Gagnon collections than fresh ideas. There were loads of signature zipper-clad jackets, skirts and mesh dresses, and funky white t-shirts with Gagnon’s portrait in black ink outlines -  a kind of commercial gimmick Karl Lagerfeld normally pulls off. Most of the studded pants, dresses, and sweaters were left untouched, people were going more for the zipper jackets and ruched dresses. And boy was it crowded.

Gagnon was already swarmed by acquaintances and a media crew, with Yso standing nearby observing the madness around them.

I had the opportunity to snag two dresses I wanted to try on that was still in my XS size: a long sleeved black batwing dress that had a deep cleavage, and a navy ruched long sleeved dress (pictured below).

Immediately, the clothes were not easy to put on, the long sleeves on both dresses flopped around a lot as the seams for the shoulders were non-existent. But I managed to put the batwing dress on, and felt like I was floating in it despite its snug fit on the arms. It didn’t quite flatter the body and made me look bigger than I really was. Next.

The ruched dress was a better success, but the neckline was an extreme snug fit over my head. My petite 5’1″ frame didn’t quite fill out the long sleeves but they were easy enough to push up, and because of it’s design, the dress fell decently down the back of my knees. There’s a hike off on the side showing some leg, but not enough to be indecent. Were I about 5 inches taller, this would’ve been a pretty sexy number, but it fell to a perfect length that I could wear for the office, always a plus. The dress cost $98 and made of 95% rayon and 5% spandex, machine washable.

Close up on the dress

All items are made in China and priced under $300, so don’t expect anything extraordinary in terms of materials and fit. As I was queuing at the dressing rooms, I noticed how a lot of clothes hid unwanted areas on bigger women, or were made of stretch jerseys that will mold to most types of bodies. The mesh dresses were cute but the mesh felt cheap and probably wouldn’t last in the wash or dry cleaners for long. I also wondered about the washability of the zippered numbers, were the zippers going to tarnish in the wash? Or do you have to dry clean?

As my usual self, I didn’t stick around to mingle with people. I never felt comfortable in these types of social settings and there wasn’t anything I wanted to ask Denis Gagnon that hasn’t already been asked.

The launch to the public will be tomorrow, I’m sure it will at least have some partial success, but as a one off collection, I think it will leave a lot of people wanting more Denis Gagnon but will alas not be able to afford his actual line.

Image credit: Marie-France Coallier, The Gazette