Contradictions and Celebrations in Thierry Mugler: Couturissime

The exhibit Thierry Mugler: Couturissime at the Brooklyn Museum harnesses the magnetism of contradiction, as the clothing featured is rooted in the legacy of womenswear while remaining provocative. In Women and Clothes, Sarah Nicole Prickett writes that “I believe contradictions make you attractive… Try on many things, and stop saying, Oh, that’s not me, or I could never. So boring! TRY. It’s fun sometimes to have on one thing that feels off or like you borrowed it from someone else. It shows you’re not that precious about yourself, and it throws the rest of you, the real you, into relief.” (p.98). Mugler’s clothing proves that contradictions are inherently attractive because they are displays of intelligence and intrigue. The exhibit is full of pieces that subvert expectations of what couture should be, for example, a red bedazzled ensemble of a corseted bodysuit, chaps, boots, and a cowboy hat is accessorized with a sequined hamburger (Image 1). The craftsmanship is exquisite— the crystals are perfectly arranged, the hips of the bodysuit flare out slightly, and the chaps make the legs look like they are engulfed in a pillars of flames. It is perhaps the campiest expression of Americana but also a beautifully crafted and architectural piece of French couture. 

The tiniest of details transform refined ensembles into subversive statements, as Mugler re-works codes and expectations that have built the foundation of women’s fashion. The most assertive embodiment of this ethos is a black sheer chiffon cape and dress set, where the cape hangs over the shoulders from a multi-strand pearl choker and the dress drapes down the body from a set of nipple rings (Image 2). The mannequin is styled with a voluminous bob, reminiscent of Jackie Kennedy, and the elegant cape and pearls evoke her iconic White House style. Any connotations of presidential grace stop at the breasts, which are openly bared and the focal point of the piece. It is a breathtaking subversion of traditional expectations of regal femininity and the viewer’s expectation of what elegance should look like. The playful attention to detail continues: on one mannequin, a beret isn’t jauntily sitting atop the head, it’s dripping down in a Dali-esque cascade down to the cheek (Image 3). A structured jacket and skirt suit is worn over a latex bodysuit, and accessorized with a twisted sculptural headpiece and a mini coffin purse lined with purple quilted silk (Image 4). These details contradict expectations that couture should be serious and instead inject a playfulness that makes the clothes not just beautiful, but interesting. Another black jacket and skirt suit (a clear favorite structure for Mugler) has panels of mesh and pointed, armored shoulders that look like exoskeleton, accessorized with a yellow and black insect headpiece, complete with reddish-green iridescent eyes (Image 5). Mugler takes a lowly insect and transforms it into a covetable piece of couture and transforms the lowly bug into a sublime piece of craftsmanship. 

Mugler also plays with the tension between the past and the future, as he transforms existing codes using forward-thinking ingenuity. In another black jacket and skirt suit, one side pocket looks like it is melting as it is weighed down by what look like tiny anvils, while one shoulder droops down as the sleeve pools around the wrist— a surreal interpretation of Dior’s Bar jacket (Image 6). It begs the questions if it is weighed down by the legacy of the iconic design that it references or if it is more brilliant because of that weight. The Bar jacket is also referenced in black jacket and skirt suit made entirely out of tires; the iconic bulbous shape of the jacket is constructed out of a whole tire wrapped around the hips (see Image 7). Simmel notes that “...fashion repeatedly turns to old forms, as is illustrated particularly in wearing-apparel; and the course of fashion has been likened to a circle. As soon as an earlier fashion has partially been forgotten there is no reason why it should not be allowed to return to favor and why the charm of difference, which constitutes its very essence, should not be permitted to exercise an influence similar to that which it exerted conversely some time before” (p.152-153). Mugler’s clothes embody Simmel’s point, as they play with the tension between legacy and futurism. This contradiction, that new fashion is never truly new, is the focal point of the clothes’ power. They toe the line between the past and the future by playing with small details, which creates a magnetism that you cannot look away from. The details throw the genius of the full look into dazzling relief. 

Prickett, Sarah Nicole. In Women in Clothes. Heti Shiela, Heidi Julavits, Leanne Shapton. Riverhead Books, 2014. p.98

Simmel, Georg. “Fashion” (1901).​​ In The Rise of Fashion; A Reader. ed. Daniel Leonard Purdy. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. p.152-153.