Nowadays, the Lanvin man, as created by Alber Elbaz and matured by his men’s wear designer Lucas Ossendrijver, swings like a pendulum between opposites. Volumes are boxy then slim, waistlines are high then low, materials are natural then technical, tailoring structured then deconstructed.
“It’s about creating tension between something traditional and something futuristic and technical. It is important to create that sort of clash, for where there’s a tension there’s an interest in fashion,” the Dutch designer, who previously designed for Kenzo and Dior Homme during the Hedi Slimane years, explains backstage after the Parisian défilé of his latest spring/summer 2013 collection.
While the autumn/winter 2013 collection (shown here) redesigned the figure through high-waisted trousers and voluminous shoulders, the summer continues this trend. “The group in the beginning was linear and graphic, black and white; those were actually the most tailored pieces. We introduced a new shoulder; we have one boxy, oversized jacket with a double shoulder construction, one slightly dropped, and one raised seam, almost like a second sleeve – that was new. Then we had the same sleeve construction but with an extremely fitted jacket. Again, it’s about opposites.” In one of the show’s highly original combination of materials, python snakeskin and hi-tech nylon, used in a button-down shirt, are bonded together to feel like silk.
Sneakers, which have long been a Lanvin cult item and feature prominently within the autumn/winter collection, have been ditched for the summer. Instead, Ossendrijver presented sandals. “I felt like [creating an] easy feel this season. And again, contradiction. Hard, sturdy workwear shoes designed with a raised heel and on the other hand, I wanted sandals that were open, light, summery. The construction is quite special, with different layers of materials covered in python. Very luxurious.”
The result, as has become the norm at Lanvin, is a wardrobe of real clothes for standout men. “Our job is to go for more and not less, it’s about proposing different elements and options. It’s not about being uniform.” It’s a very Modernist interplay of opposites and the result, in Ossendrijver’s hands, is essentially the definitive end of the age of the “total look”.
