Far from the frenzied crowds of the fashion capitals, journalist Angelo Flaccavento retreats from the shows to pen his analysis of the collections in the comparative calm of Sicily—a lifestyle choice that points to a character full of contrasts and contradictions. Indeed, quiet yet bold, shy yet daring, Flaccavento is known for his somewhat confrontational reviews, yet he couldn’t be more polite and reserved in person. The fashion oracle writes for heavyweight publications such as Business of Fashion and Il Sole 24 Ore, and was Dapper Dan’s very first fashion features editor. We checked in with him to take the current temperature of the fashion world and to find out whether those no-holds-barred views had been getting him into any trouble lately.
NICHOLAS GEORGIOU: How difficult is it to be part of the establishment whilst simultaneously retaining your independence?
ANGELO FLACCAVENTO: I don’t think of myself as established because when you give yourself such titles it’s the beginning of the end. I think that maintaining my independence is easier because not living in Milan or London or Paris or New York I am removed from it, so it’s just like I’m a visitor during fashion weeks and then I do my job far away, so I don’t feel like a part of the system.
NG: How did you start out as a writer?
AF: I started in 2000 at Dutch magazine, which at the time was a very hip and edgy publication. The editor-in-chief at the time, Rebecca Voight, just gave me an opportunity. I was an art history graduate with a passion for fashion who rang the office asking for the possibility to meet them and write. I was very lucky that she liked me because at the time Dutch was the magazine, so it was a form of validation. And then all the other meetings happened to work, which is what I am really proud of. It was never because I was introduced by someone or I was going out with the right people, it was just like because people read a story that they liked and they contacted me.
NG: Which collaborations are most proud of?
AF: Dutch for sure. Dapper Dan, because I had the possibility to write some really poetic stuff that was not fashion but not fiction, it was really inbetween. Business of Fashion because I can be a creative in the true sense of the term, like noholds- barred in expressing my opinions. Il Sole 24 Ore, the Italian newspaper, because I have the possibility to reach a very wide audience of non-fashion people because it’s a financial news-paper, so it’s an interesting challenge because I have to write style for non fashionistas—if I write that the women’s Prada show had a lot of Westwood references in a newspaper like this, I have to articulate my opinion in detail.
NG: There’s a quote of yours from one of your pieces for Business of Fashion, on the last collections in Paris, which I find very interesting and also very disheartening. You say, “Designers seem more interested in delivering their resistible ‘it’ product which sends you impassively to the shop than building true narrative around their brands. It’s commercially effective and as for the long run, who cares? Times change fast and consumers have no memory.”
AF: That’s very arch, but that’s what I think. I’ve been writing long enough to remember different times because I started in the noughties—it’s no longer the time of John Galliano building a whole Dior show around the narrative or a character made up in his mind.
NG: Which you miss or not?
AF: I tend not to feel too nostalgic because luckily fashion is an expression of the zeitgeist so it’s like times are different. But now sometimes you just see random stuff on the catwalk because I think that there is too much marketing in fashion and I’m really fed up with designers being interviewed and telling me that the thing is to add nothing. That’s too easy as an explanation, you know, you just throw everything on the catwalk with no particular editing and just have a good stylist, trimming up stuff in a nice way but with no sense. For me a designer creates an imaginary world through clothing and you want to belong to that world and your access is buying the clothing. Now they’re just telling you, “Buy this,” which is very urgent. Now everything is throwaway, because if you can have it straightaway, you can dispose of it just as quickly. A wardrobe is like a personal construction; it’s your own history through the clothing that you have bought over the years. While the concept of the contemporary wardrobe is selling you a pre-packed life and you have just to pick up the pieces and wear them—again it’s an easy way to try to come up with a solution for having no idea about what to design. But all the collections that I’ve seen with this contemporary wardrobe theme go from here to there with no sense.
NG: And there’s not much originality?
AF: No. Right now it is not an era of great originality. To be original you have to be fearless, and I think that our age, our digital age, is more conformist than our fathers’ age was, because we edit ourselves and if you use a channel like Instagram to showcase your personality you do that for the likes. I think that originality requires freedom of thinking, but we don’t have that much time to think. Designers used to just design two collections per year. They took exotic trips or they just went to the library in order to design a collection. Now design studios do the research online, and very quickly and it’s only skin-deep, so they rely on second-hand material because when you see something online it’s a picture somebody else took, no? And I think that that leads to homogeneity. But also if you manage to be original today you can have your voice heard wherever you want—you have the channels now.
NG: You are quite confrontational in your work, but when somebody meets you personally the first impression is that you’re very polite and reserved… How do you put these two selves together?
AF: I think that the first impression is very polite and reserved, but from my experience people that are quite shy can get very upfront when they decide to express their opinions. I am very upfront in writing because I feel that I don’t have to resist someone’s opposition to what I’m saying because it’s the dialogue with the white page and in that moment I’m alone, and I can express all the feelings and the thoughts that I have in mind. One thing that I really like is that I get a lot of feedback for what I write from people who tell me that this is what they really think and this is what other journalists are fearful to say.
NG: Do you are ever get in trouble for being so direct?
AF: I’ve never been in real trouble but I’ve had strange meetings. You know, when PRs invite you for dinner and you ask yourself, “Hmm, why are they doing this?” And in the end you just have a nice dinner talking about nothing. These meetings are a little bit pointless because in a way they are trying to intimidate you. They want to explain their work to you, but my point of view is that of course I get your work but this is still my opinion. They basically want you to change your opinion and opinions are based on knowledge and taste. That was what my mentors taught me and that is the big lesson. I don’t think that my opinion is better than Cathy Horyn’s or Suzy Menkes’, I just am fortunate enough that the editor-in-chief of the Il Sole 24 Ore or the editor-in-chief of BoF acknowledges me the possibility to express my opinion as I want to. I try as much as possible to be fair—I don’t feel bitchy because for me bitchy is like slashing someone just for the pleasure of slashing someone. I prize originality a lot so when I see rip-offs I always state it. Also the superpower of stylists working as consultants with brands for me is absolutely unbearable—there are some stylists that are like frustrated designers and they tend to manipulate the designer and make everything the same.
NG: Why do the designers feel the need for a stylist?
AF: I think it’s due to the power of press offices pressing designers to look cool and to look cool you have to work with a cool stylist. I think that there is a lot of insecurity going around, just because collections are designed randomly. I’ve been to design studios where you see one guy designing shirts, then another guy is designing skirts, so they need someone to put in the narrative. NG: They don’t design or narrate stories. AF: You can see that right away because when something is created out of a style it’s not designed. Putting three jackets one on top of the other is not avant-garde, it’s just a silly move to desperately try to have something look avant-garde when it’s not because basically it’s a coat or a jacket. I find this honestly dishonest.
Originally published in Dapper Dan magazine 14, 2016.