Hello, Open Thread. Happy Pride Month. Once again, merch is telling a pretty revealing story. For the past few years, Pride has increasingly seemed to be another product opportunity for many brands, as a way to demonstrate their values while also profiting from them. That could feel a little icky — both performative and cynical — but now, thanks to the federal government’s campaign against anything that smacks of “woke,” there has been a general retreat from the rainbow collection. According to a poll from Gravity Research, 39 percent of companies said they were scaling back their public Pride-related engagement (and none planned to increase it), or at the very least, playing it quiet (for instance, creating collections without advertising them). I haven’t received a single email touting Pride merch yet. The lameness of this was crystallized by Target, which has its own complicated history with Pride merch, and this time around is selling a line in … beige. Yup, you read that right: beige. (There is some rainbow trim if you look hard enough.) Although I have mixed feelings about the commercialization of identity without content, this seems equally cynical, just in the opposite direction. It’s still not a good look — though it has inspired a name of its own: “cowardcore.” Otherwise, the big news of the week was the long-awaited announcement that, yes, Jonathan Anderson is becoming creative director of both Dior women’s wear and men’s wear. He’s the first designer since LVMH bought the brand and turned it into a behemoth to get that combined gig. Why is this a big deal? Well, it puts a lot of creative pressure on Mr. Anderson, who will officially be designing 10 collections a year for Dior, dipping in and out of his own brand (which will no longer do official runway shows), and continuing his partnership with Uniqlo. That’s a lot of product, no matter how you slice it. The upside is it will unite the Dior aesthetic, which has always seemed weirdly disjointed, with its men’s collections (under Hedi Slimane, Kris Van Assche and Kim Jones) often on a very different track from its women’s. Designers have long chafed at the aesthetic divergence — one of the reasons Raf Simons quit as head of women’s wear after only three years was that he was so frustrated by the different messaging and his lack of control — but the pressures of being creative in public on a very tight schedule are notorious, and have often ended poorly or even tragically (see John Galliano, Alexander McQueen and Christophe Decarnin, the guy who first made Balmain hot again). Mr. Anderson is nothing if not self-confident, so here’s hoping he can pull it off. Anyway, that news kind of overshadowed two other interesting bits of information.
Despite all the trouble the mega-brands are currently experiencing and fears of a possible recession, both bits of news serve as a reminder that the appetite for the special and the specific hasn’t gone away. Finally, in a fashion-adjacent note, on Tuesday, Alex Bolen, the chief executive of Oscar de la Renta, cut the ribbon on the new Oscar de la Renta Educational Campus, a public school for grades K through eight in Inwood, one of the hearts of New York City’s Dominican community. The idea for the school name came from Representative Adriano Espaillat, a Dominican American like Mr. de la Renta (who died in 2014). Mr. Bolen, who was also Mr. de la Renta’s stepson-in-law, said the brand was thrilled. Here’s what I like about it: It frames “designer” as a potential desirable career path, even before kids get to art school. Think about that. Then read up on a rare wool mill based in America; say goodbye to Hudson’s Bay, the Canadian department store chain; and check out a really well-dressed parade. Have a good, safe weekend. Stay hydrated!
Make someone’s day and forward this email. Share your feedback on Open Thread by email. Check out our full assortment of free newsletters.
Your Style Questions, AnsweredEvery week on Open Thread, Vanessa will answer a reader’s fashion-related question, which you can send to her anytime via email or X. Questions are edited and condensed.
I am not a kid anymore and am looking for a stylish sport coat, slacks, sweater and shirt. I am a fairly conservative dresser, but I wear a 50 XL. I don’t want to shop in big-and-tall stores, nor do I have the money for a personal tailor. Women’s designers seem to have embraced size inclusivity in a way men’s designers have not. Why, and where can I go to find what I need? — Chris, BostonYou are correct in observing that we don’t talk enough about size inclusivity when it comes to men’s wear, or demand that it even exists — which is just plain old silly. I think it goes back to old-fashioned gender stereotypes and the idea that it isn’t manly, somehow, to dwell too much on your body (other than perhaps when you are working out), even though that is patently untrue. There is also a misperception that suits cover all sins; as Anne Hollander postulated in her … umm … seminal book “Sex and Suits,” the male suit as we know it was created to smooth any body into the shape of a Greek ideal. Part of the problem, said Corbin Chamberlin, a journalist who covers the issue, is that despite the recent trend toward oversize looks on the runways, much of “men’s fashion is still clinging to the outdated ideal of the slim, controlled silhouette.” Case in point: Years ago, when Hedi Slimane was still at YSL, my average-sized husband went to try to buy a suit, and could barely raise his arms in the jacket, the sleeves were so tight, and the armholes so small. When he raised an eyebrow at the salesman, the guy looked abashed, and started talking about how they could let out a seam here, another one there. He had clearly had a lot of practice with the issue. Compounding the issue, Mr. Chamberlin said, is the fact that as with women’s wear, you rarely see a larger body in an ad campaign, and “when larger bodies are left out of campaigns, runways and store displays, they’re not just underserved — they’re erased.” Still, in 2016, IMG Models established their “brawn” division (it’s the male equivalent of the “curve” division for women, a linguistic effort to move away from the ick term “plus-size”). And there are designers whose sizing extends to the larger at all price points. Ralph Lauren has a big-and-tall line. So do Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, J. Crew and Old Navy. Prada goes up to XXXL, and Gucci to a U.S. size 50. Jacob Gallagher, our men’s wear reporter, suggested looking at brands such as Todd Snyder and Bonobos — though he also pointed out that often, no matter what the line, the more expansive offerings are available only online, so they are always something of a gamble (free returns are your friend). Especially because, Mr. Chamberlin said, larger sizes are often just proportionally upsized versions of clothes made for slimmer builds, meaning the fit is not really designed for the bigger body. That’s why he recommends looking at brands such as TurnBlack, which he called both “sculptural and wearable.” I am hopeful that the current love affair between athletes, who are about as far away from sample size as you can get, and fashion may change that. Indeed, according to Vogue Business, which tracks runway sizes for both men and women, the fall 2025 men’s shows reflected an increase in midsize models — which they identify as E.U. size 48-54, or U.S. 38-44 — from the 1.3 percent of the spring shows to 4.8 percent, a fact they attributed to more models with a “muscular build.” Unfortunately, this was not true for official plus-size male models, who made up only 0.3 percent of all models. As with women’s wear, which is backsliding when it comes to size inclusivity, it seems men’s wear is reverting to — well, form. |
