08th May 2007
Narciso Rodriguez and the case of everywhere
Send to a friend:
The news spread through the wires almost as fast as the one about the hotel heiress going to jail for 45 days. Liz Claiborne buying Narciso Rodriguez for the sum of $12 million has become the story du jour that’s lasted for a whole lot more. Name it and the fashion blogs and press found a way to cover it, delve through it, analyze it and regurgitate it. One article in particular in the New York Times caught my attention because the writer went through the various reasons why the deal occurred as it did. More so than anything, the quote that stood out in particular came from Ralph Lauren when speaking to Rodriguez. I block quoted the whole thing to give context:
They sat in Mr. Lauren’s Western-appointed office, amid the photographs and vintage car memorabilia, and, Mr. Rodriguez said, Mr. Lauren told him, “First of all, you shouldn’t be struggling. That’s just not possible.â€
Mr. Rodriguez added, “That’s been a constant in all the conversations: ‘Women love your clothes, so why are you struggling?’ â€
I wondered, why wasn’t it possible? There are lesser-known designer whose clothes women absolutely adore. Yet they still have trouble getting off the ground. In a sense, it’s a modified application of that nefarious bell curve. A small number of designers will do really well, a small number of designers will do really poorly and the majority of the rest will do just well enough. If I had to create this modified Bell curve at the really well end there’d be Ralph Lauren, Marc Jacobs and Donna Karan. The middle of the pack would be a Malandrino, Tuleh and near the bottom would be Narciso Rodriguez. The caveat here is that it has nothing to do with quality and more to do with general success. Reading the New York Times article it is evident that everyone believes Rodriguez is an amazing designer (that, or they’re all good liars). But I will have faith and go with the former rather than the latter.
Women may love his clothes, but maybe and quite possibly, his lack of business acumen led to the precarious position of bankruptcy. He is, after all, a gifted designer and not an accountant. But maybe the lesson here (if there is one to be had) is that being a designer means wearing many hats even some that may not fit you well (to use a clumsy analogy).
links: New York Times article | photos from his Fall 2007 collection (Style)
Posted by Eva @ 8:19 am
May 8th, 2007 at 9:26 am
[...] post by Eva [...]