深思熟慮後,讓·保羅·高緹耶告別成衣

When Jean Paul Gaultier announced at the beginning of the women's wear season's four-ring, four-week circus that this Saturday's show would be his last ready-to-wear collection, and that he was going to concentrate on couture and fragrance and special collaborations like costumes and interiors instead, it seemed like the end of an era.

在這個輾轉四城、爲期四周的女裝季之初，讓·保羅·高緹耶(Jean Paul Gaultier)就宣佈：週六的走秀將是他的最後一個成衣系列，此後他將專注於高級定製服裝和香水，以及戲服和室內設計方面的特殊合作，感覺像是一個時代結束了。

The first reaction was shock: Oh, no! How can we imagine a ready-to-wear schedule without the one-time enfant terrible of French fashion — whose ready-to-wear shows had been among the hottest tickets in fashion week, with editors literally fighting for entree? Even if, in recent seasons, many of those same editors (myself included) had thought (or, ahem, written) that Mr. Gaultier's ready-to-wear was becoming increasingly irrelevant, relying on the crutch of old ideas that may have been sensationalist 15 years ago, but now seemed achingly familiar?

人們的第一反應是震驚：啊，不！我們怎能想象成衣盛事中不再有這個法國時尚曾經的淘氣鬼呢——在這個時裝季上，他的成衣秀的入場券最爲搶手，時尚編輯們爲了入場資格“大打出手”。最近幾季，這些時裝編輯中有許多人（包括我自己在內）也覺得高緹耶的成衣愈來愈落後於潮流，依仗的是了無新意的創意，它們放在15年前可能很轟動，今天就顯得極其平庸了，儘管如此，我們還是會搶票。

Then came sadness: Was this yet another example of commerce squashing creativity, with the Spanish conglomerate Puig, which bought a majority stake in Mr. Gaultier's company from Hermès in 2011, bloodlessly stopping support of what had ceased to be a moneymaking endeavor? (Well, it's a license business, so probably not.) Absent from the ready-to-wear schedule and all the attention it draws, would Mr. Gaultier, like Christian Lacroix, another formerly famous French name that slid off the schedule on the back of falling sales and who is now concentrating on (yup) costumes and other collaborations, fade into the ether of long ago?

隨之而來的反應是悲傷：這是否又是一個商業擊垮創意的例子呢？要知道，2011年，西班牙產業集團普依格(Puig)從愛馬仕手中買下了高緹耶公司的多數股份，它無情地停止支持那些不能賺錢的嘗試（好吧，它是一家特許公司，所以答案可能是否定的）。高緹耶離開了成衣走秀和它所帶來的各種關注，是否會走上克里斯汀·拉克魯瓦(Christian Lacroix)的老路，消失在過去時代的迷霧之中呢？拉克魯瓦也曾是一個響亮的法國名字，銷量下滑後離開了成衣走秀，如今專注於（這個……）戲服和其他方面的合作。

But then, after sitting through show after show in New York and London and Milan, I started to think perhaps we were looking at this the wrong way.

但是在紐約、倫敦和米蘭看了一場又一場的走秀之後，我開始覺得我們的視角或許錯了。

Maybe it is a much-needed public acknowledgment of a subject that has been mumbled and grumbled about in ateliers and over dinners throughout the last few weeks, as vintage this and accessible that have been regularly repackaged and presented as the Hot New Thing.

就像古董或普通的東西經常被拿出來重新包裝成流行的新玩意，它不再退出成衣系列的消息最近幾周來成爲了各工作室和餐桌上的熱門話題，而他的聲明是對這個話題非常有必要的公開承認。

Maybe this is someone finally acting on the belief that what the cycle now demands from designers — to be creative and original about every two months — is not sustainable. Maybe it is someone making a choice, and just saying no. And he is doing it with corporate support (the corporate side of things, in fashion, often being demonized as bleeding designers dry instead of allowing them the luxury of fewer products).

時裝圈要求設計師每隔兩個月都要有創意和創新，或許他相信這種事很難維持下去，於是終於採取了行動。或許他做了選擇，對此說“不”。他的做法得到了公司的支持（在時裝界，公司方面經常被妖魔化爲榨乾設計師的鮮血，而不是允許他們享有隻推出少量產品的奢侈）。

After all, when Mr. Gaultier started his business in 1982, fashion was not even an industry. Designers made two collections a year. When he introduced couture in 1997, that brought his grand total of collections up to four. With men's wear, it went to ... six!

畢竟，當高緹耶從1982年創辦自己的公司時，時裝甚至還算不上工業。設計師們每年推出兩個系列。1997年，他引入了高級定製概念，於是每年總共要推出四個系列。加上男裝，就變成了……六個系列！

Now, of course, a designer in a similar position is looking at about double that, thanks to the rise of pre-collections and occasion collections. And given that from 2003 to 2010 Mr. Gaultier was also the artistic director of Hermès women's wear, you can add a few more numbers to the list.

如今，由於預系列和臨時系列的興起，像他這樣的設計師工作量可能要翻番。而且從2003年至2010年，高緹耶還擔任愛馬仕女裝的藝術總監，你可以在他的工作列表上再添幾項。

As a result, said the designer in a letter to Women's Wear Daily explaining his decision, "Commercial constraints, as well as the frenetic pace of collections, don't leave any freedom, nor the necessary time to find fresh ideas and to innovate."

其結果正如這位設計師發表在《女裝日報》(Women's Wear Daily)，解釋自己決定的信中所說：“商業的限制以及推出系列的瘋狂步調讓我不得自由，也沒有時間去革新、尋找新的創意。”

Arguably his creative famine is his own fault for having taken on so much over the years, however good the reasons seemed at the time (to support his own line; for the challenge; all of the above). But there is no greater proof of his words than his own career.

認爲他才思枯竭是自己造成的這樣一種看法——因爲這些年他負擔一直太重，不管理由在當時是多麼理所當然（支持自己的品牌、接受挑戰，或者上述全部）——是值得商榷的。不過，事實勝過雄辯。

Mr. Gaultier's extraordinary technical abilities and understanding of how to construct a garment, skills he learned in the ateliers of Pierre Cardin and Jean Patou, allowed him to turn fashion on its head, challenging such received notions of dress and society as where underwear belongs, that religious garb was a sacred cow, and that basics were — well, basic.

高緹耶非凡的技術能力和對製作衣服的理解，以及他在皮爾·卡丹(Pierre Cardin)和讓·巴杜(Jean Patou)的工作室學來的技巧，讓他可以徹底改變時尚潮流，挑戰服裝和社會的即成概念，諸如內衣的穿法，宗教服裝神聖不可觸碰的觀念，以及基本款服裝就是……基本的。

But such ideas, worked through as completely and elegantly as they were on his runways, have not appeared in a very long time. Instead we got gimmicky guest appearances by paparazzi magnets like the stripper Dita Von Teese and the drag performer Conchita Wurst, this year's Eurovision winner.

這些觀念雖然曾在他的秀臺上得以完整與優雅的體現，卻很久沒有出現了。相反，他讓脫衣舞娘蒂塔·馮·提斯(Dita Von Teese)和今年Eurovision的獲獎者、異裝演員肯奇塔·沃斯特(Conchita Wurst)這些八卦小報的寵兒們做奇怪的客串亮相。

So, whether closing his ready-to-wear business was Mr. Gaultier's idea or not — Ralph Toledano, head of the Puig fashion division, said it was the designer's decision, and given that Puig owns both Paco Rabanne and Nina Ricci, two houses that survived for decades on perfume alone before being restarted as ready-to-wear brands, you can understand why they might think this O.K. — the fact is, in taking himself off the schedule, Mr. Gaultier is putting the issue on the table.

所以，不管關掉成衣公司是不是高緹耶本人的主意——普依格時裝部門的主管拉爾夫·托勒達諾(Ralph Toledano)說這是高緹耶自己的主意，普依格還擁有帕高·拉巴納(Paco Rabanne)和蓮娜麗茲(Nina Ricci)這兩個品牌，它們都是在香水界生存了幾十年後轉爲成衣品牌的，所以你可以理解，爲什麼普依格覺得高緹耶關掉公司也不要緊——事實就是，通過退出成衣界，高緹耶把問題擺在了桌面上。

And for the first time, it is not there because of a crisis like John Galliano's implosion at Dior in 2011 or Alexander McQueen's suicide in 2010, occasions that caused momentary soul-searching in the industry, but because of a conscious, articulated decision.

這一次的事不像2011年約翰·加利亞諾(John Galliano)在迪奧期間搞出的危機，或是2010年亞歷山大·麥昆(Alexander McQueen)的自殺，那些事件在業界引起過片刻的深思， 高緹耶的放棄是出於深思熟慮，這在業界還是第一次。

The question now is whether the step back from ready-to-wear will make any obvious difference. If Mr. Gaultier can retrieve the magic of his earlier years in his couture shows — which once upon a time transformed my understanding of how clothes could transcend their antecedents (a couture fitting that involved a long evening dress that began in the form of a knit French marinière, but ended in gently wafting ostrich feathers is forever imprinted on my mind) — then the fashion world, which loves nothing more than rediscovering genius (or should I say "Genius!") will once again hold him up as an example. Perhaps even one worth following.

如今的問題是，他離開成衣界是否會造成顯著的改變。如果高緹耶可以重新得到他早年那些定製時裝秀上的魔法——那些時裝秀曾經改變了我對時裝可以如何超越先例的理解（比如有這樣一套定製服裝，包括一件晚禮服，上身是針織的法式藍白條紋，裙襬是飄飄蕩蕩的鴕鳥毛，它深深銘刻在我的心中）——時裝界最喜歡的就是迴歸的天才（我是不是應該說“天才！”），那麼他一旦歸來，是否又會被樹爲典範呢？或許這也值得關注。

If it doesn't, of course, then as is its wont, fashion will blink, and move on.

當然，如果他不能再找回那些魔法，時裝界也會像它一貫以來的那樣，眨眨眼睛，繼續往前走。

We will have to wait until next January to find out which situation proves true. But in the meantime, one thing is sure: come his spring swan song this week, Mr. Gaultier's show will once again be the one to see. Mr. Toledano says they have already been getting urgent phone calls from all over the world demanding tickets.

我們會等到明年一月，來看看究竟是哪種情況。但是與此同時，有一件事是確定的：這個星期，來看他的春夏季天鵝之歌吧。高緹耶的走秀值得一看。托勒達諾說，全世界想要票的人都忙着給他打電話。

Bring your elbow pads, and get ready to push.

戴上護肘，準備去搶票吧。