Connect with us

Europe

‘Father of haute couture’: The man who pioneered fashion as we know it

Published

on


Paris
CNN
 — 

Over 150 years ago, rich women from all over the world came to 7 Rue de La Paix in Paris to be dressed by couturier Charles Frederick Worth, whose eponymous fashion house, founded in 1858, continued through three generations after his death in 1895. Widely credited by historians as the “father of haute couture,” Worth was the first designer to be known by his name, and not by who wore his clothes. He gained international acclaim and shaped the way fashion was marketed and worn. His legacy is now being documented in a new exhibition, “Worth: Inventing Haute Couture,” running until September 7 at the Petit Palais art museum in Paris.

A collaboration between the Petit Palais and the Palais Galliera, it is the first retrospective of the House of Worth staged in France, and the second only in the world — the last being over 60 years ago at the Brooklyn Museum in New York — and coincides with Worth’s 200th birthday this year. The Worth family’s close ties to artists during the 19th and 20th centuries and the Petit Palais’s “flamboyant architectural testament to this period,” said the museum’s director and chief curator Annick Lemoine, made Petit Palais “the perfect setting,” she told CNN ahead of the show’s opening.

The exhibition encompasses the house’s work from its inception to the 1920s — when famous actresses and singers, such as Sarah Bernhardt, Sophie Croizette and Nellie Melba, wore its clothes on-stage and off. Also on show are art and design items that belonged to the Worth family, including a black lacquer screen by French Art Deco artist and designer Jean Dunand and a series of nude photographs of Worth’s great-grandson Jean-Charles taken by American visual artist Man Ray.

An advertisement for Worth's signature fragrance,

Fragrance has also been incorporated in the exhibition, where visitors can smell a recreation of “Je Reviens,” a light powdery, floral scent by Worth. While Osmothèque, the world’s largest scent archive, based in Versailles, remade the fragrance for the exhibition, the scent itself was relaunched in 2005 by perfumer Maurice Blanchet and continues to be sold. Original Worth perfume bottles designed by René Lalique are also on display.

As some of the garments are too fragile, the show will not travel internationally, said Raphaële Martin-Pigalle, chief heritage curator of the Petit Palais’s modern paintings department.

Worth was born in England in 1825, where he trained with two textile merchants before heading across the Channel to work for Maison Gagelin, a clothing store in Paris, as a salesperson and dressmaker, eventually working up to becoming a partner. He then went on to establish his fashion house — initially called Worth and Bobergh, named after himself and business partner Otto Bobergh, a Swede.

The

Worth decided what women would wear, not by creating new silhouettes, but by changing the business model. Today, haute couture fashion shows take place twice a year as designers present the latest styles for clients to pick from. But this wasn’t always the way.

Before Worth, “couturiers didn’t have much latitude to invent looks,” said Sophie Grossiord, Palais Galliera’s interim director and general curator in charge of the collections from the first half of the 20th century. At the time, aristocratic women brought fabric and ideas of what they wanted to wear to couturiers, who would then produce those garments. But that wasn’t how Worth operated; instead, he designed looks that customers, if interested, could buy — subsequently turning the role of the designer, as someone who would merely serve the wealthy, to one of authority whom clients would look up to and follow guidance on how to dress.

“Women come to see me to ask for my ideas, not to follow theirs,” Worth notably said to Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, a literary and political periodical, in 1858.

A silk tulle dress, dated between 1866 and 1868, is one of the delicate garments in the exhibition.
This

Worth “didn’t necessarily agree with what his clients wanted,” said Grossiord. At Worth and Bobergh, the clothes were already made, but embellishments — like woven borders, lace and fake flowers — could be added. The clothing could also be modular, with interchangeable parts such as different sleeve lengths for different times of the day, as seen in the “transformation dress” from the late 1860s.

The demand for Worth’s clothes was great: During the Second French Empire from 1852 to 1870, elaborate costume balls were all the rage — and paintings shown in the Petit Palais exhibition, including Jean Béraud’s “Une Soirée” (1878), depict Worth gowns at these events.

Worth’s costumes ranged from the avant-garde — like an umbrella costume from 1925, which looks like a cross between waders and an upside-down closed umbrella — to those which referenced history, like the dress made for Madame Charles-Pierre Pecoul for Princess Sagan’s ball around 1893, modeled after a painting of the infant Margaret Theresa of Spain. The house only ever made one suit for a man outside of the family: It was for the Duke of Marlborough and the most expensive costume made.

Many garments in the exhibition are considered too fragile to travel internationally.

Supporters of Worth included Empress Eugénie, wife of Napoleon III and one of the leading trendsetters in Europe, who learned of Worth through her close friend, Princess Pauline von Metternich, and Valérie Feuillet (who was married to the writer Octave Feuillet), according to the show’s catalogue. As the French Empress threw her support behind Worth, he soon became the go-to name in fashion. “Worth is an authority,” French news magazine Le Monde Illustré wrote in 1868, describing him as “the absolute power in the world’s royalties.”

Worth’s atelier doubled from over 500 workers in the 1860s to over 1,000 in the ’70s, as he sought to cater to clients, several of whom were European royals from across France, Russia, Austria, Spain, Portugal and Sweden. Though, a majority of Worth’s business came from customers further afield, in India, Japan, Hawaii and Egypt. American high society, which included the Astor, Morgan and Vanderbilt families, also provided a large source of income — as was emphasized towards the exhibition finale, where scenes from HBO TV series “The Gilded Age” are projected. (HBO and CNN share the same parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery.)

As the Second Empire came to an end, so did Worth and Bobergh’s partnership — the company’s founding documents say it was intended to last 12 years. There is little known about Bobergh, so the exact reasons behind his departure are unknown. But Worth carried on, with the help of his wife, Marie, and later, his sons Gaston and Jean-Philippe.

An evening cape, made of satin and silk chiffon, dated between 1895 and 1900.
Worth is considered the first designer to sew branded labels onto his clothing, in an effort to deter copycats.

With the shift in French regime to the Third Republic, tastes changed — in fashion, crinolines were out, bustles were in. Worth adapted by bringing down the flamboyancy of his clothes. But another challenge soon emerged: In the 1890s, the US significantly raised its customs duties, creating the most consequential tariff of the 19th century and Worth’s clothes became extremely costly to export. That created an opportunity for copycats in the American market to create similar-looking pieces, for cheaper prices. “The copying phenomenon was a problem for all couturiers,” Grossiord said, noting: “the copiers pillaged their ideas.”

In response, in 1868 Worth founded the Chambre Syndicale de la Haute Couture (it later became the Fédération de la Haute Couture et de la Mode and remains France’s governing fashion body) to protect the designs of French couture houses from copying and to promote the status of Paris as the fashion capital of the world.

Worth also established practices that are now regarded as standard in fashion, such as using live models (Worth’s wife, Marie, was his first model) and runway shows to present new collections. Worth also photographed each of his looks and registered it by name or number. All of these were efforts to reduce the forgery of his designs.

The Countess Élisabeth Greffulhe, wearing a dress designed by Worth, 1886.

“There was a clientele we can’t even imagine,” Grossiord said, noting that while Worth’s own order books have largely disappeared, some records still exist from the early days of Louis Vuitton (whose trunks were used to transport Worth’s clothes) and Cartier (with whom the Worth family had two marriages). Among some of the most sumptuous dresses that feature in the Paris exhibition include those belonging to Countess Élisabeth Greffulhe, who was the inspiration of the Duchess of Guermantes, a character from Marcel Proust’s literary masterpiece “À la Recherche du Temps Perdu.”

Worth himself was such a grand figure that he, too, has been immortalized in fiction: In his book “La Curée” (The Kill), French novelist Émile Zola based the character Worms on Worth, calling him, “the genius tailor, before whom the Second Empire’s rulers took to their knees.” Over 100 years later, thousands continue to marvel at Worth’s clothes. His legacy lives on.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Europe

He was killed in a road rage incident. His family used AI to bring him to the courtroom to address his killer

Published

on


New York
CNN
 — 

Stacey Wales spent two years working on the victim impact statement she planned to give in court after her brother was shot to death in a 2021 road rage incident. But even after all that time, Wales felt her statement wouldn’t be enough to capture her brother Christopher Pelkey’s humanity and what he would’ve wanted to say.

So, Wales decided to let Pelkey give the statement himself — with the help of artificial intelligence.

She and her husband created an AI-generated video version of Pelkey to play during his killer’s sentencing hearing earlier this month that read, in a recreation of Pelkey’s own voice, a script that Wales wrote. In it, the AI version of Pelkey expressed forgiveness to the shooter, something Wales said she knew her brother would have done but she wasn’t ready to do herself just yet.

“The only thing that kept entering my head that I kept hearing was Chris and what he would say,” Wales told CNN. “I had to very carefully detach myself in order to write this on behalf of Chris because what he was saying is not necessarily what I believe, but I know it’s what he would think.”

AI is increasingly playing a role in legal and criminal justice processes, although this is believed to be the first time AI has been used to recreate a victim for their own impact statement. And experts say the world will increasingly have to grapple with ethical and practical questions about the use of AI to replicate deceased people — both inside courtrooms and beyond them — as the technology becomes more human-like.

“We’ve all heard the expression, ‘seeing is believing, hearing is believing,’” said Paul Grimm, a Duke University School of Law professor and former district court judge in Maryland. “These kinds of technologies have tremendous impact to persuade and influence, and we’re always going to have to be balancing whether or not it is distorting the record upon which the jury or the judge has to decide in a way that makes it an unfair advantage for one side or the other.”

Judge Todd Lang of Maricopa County Superior Court ultimately sentenced Pelkey’s killer Gabriel Paul Horcasitas to 10.5 years for manslaughter — although the state had asked for only 9.5 years — and 12.5 years in total, including an endangerment charge.

“I love that AI. Thank you for that,” Lang said, a recording of the hearing shows. “As angry as you are and justifiably angry as the family is, I heard the forgiveness.”

Pelkey’s story was previously reported by ABC15 Arizona.

Pelkey was the youngest of three children, a veteran and, according to Wales, “the most forgiving and the friendliest” member of the family. He was killed in November 2021 in Chandler, Arizona at the age of 37.

Pelkey’s autopsy photos and surveillance video of his death were shown during the trial, Wales said. But after a jury found Horcasitas guilty of reckless manslaughter, Wales wanted the judge to see what Pelkey was like when he was alive during the sentencing hearing.

Wales and her husband, Tim Wales, work in tech — she said they’d previously created AI video replicas of former CEOs and founders to speak at company conferences — so they decided in the weeks leading up to the sentencing hearing to try replicating Pelkey the same way.

Christopher Pelkey's family members, including Stacey Wales (fourth from left), pose with a photo of Pelkey.

They used several software platforms, trained on photos and an old video of Pelkey, to create the AI replica that was shown in the hearing on May 1. And on the day before the sentencing hearing, Wales called her lawyer, Jessica Gattuso, to get her blessing for the plan.

“I was concerned, I thought we would get an objection or some kind of pushback … I did what research I could, but I didn’t find anything because I’ve never heard of this being done,” Gattuso told CNN, adding that she ultimately relied on an Arizona law that gives victims discretion in how to deliver their statement.

Like other AI videos depicting people, the recreation of Pelkey is somewhat halting and awkward and starts with an acknowledgement that it was made using the technology. But Wales said she believes it captured his essence.

“It is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances,” the AI version of Pelkey said in the video. “In another life, we probably could have been friends.”

Horcasitas’s lawyer, Jason Lamm, said the defense did not receive advance notice that AI would be used in a victim impact statement. He added: “It appears that the judge gave some weight to the AI video and that is an issue that will likely be pursued on appeal.”

Judges are increasingly facing decisions about AI’s role in the courtroom — including whether it should have one at all.

In a separate case in New York last month, an appellate judge quickly shut down an attempt by a plaintiff to have an AI-generated avatar argue his case, without first clarifying that it was not a real person. And just last week, a federal judicial panel advanced a draft rule that would require AI-generated evidence to meet the same reliability standards as evidence from human expert witnesses, according to a Reuters report.

AI’s advancement has also raised questions about whether the technology could replace human jobs in the legal field.

“It’s not going away, and we’re going to see more instances of this,” said Grimm, who was not involved with the Pelkey case. “Judges tend to be a little nervous about this technology, and so we’ll probably see initially more nos than yeses.”

Judges may be especially hesitant to allow AI-generated evidence or visual aids to be presented to a jury, which, unlike a judge in a sentencing case, hasn’t been trained not to let emotion overwhelm the facts of the case, Grimm said. There are also questions around whether AI could inaccurately represent a party to a case, for example, by making them appear more sympathetic.

Grimm suggested that, going forward, opposing counsel be given the chance to view AI-generated content and raise potential objections for a judge to review, before it gets shown in court.

Even Wales cautioned the technology should be used carefully.

“This was not evidence, the jury never saw this. It wasn’t even made before a verdict came down of guilty,” Wales said. “This is an opinion. And the judge was allowed to see a human that’s no longer here for who he was.”

Ultimately, she said, replicating her brother with AI was “healing” for her family. After it played in court, she said her 14-year-old son told her: “Thank you so much for making that. I needed to see and hear from Uncle Chris one more time.”

–CNN’s Hazel Tang contributed to this report.

Correction: A previous version of this story misstated the name of Stacey Wales’ husband, Tim Wales.



Source link

Continue Reading

Europe

Trump’s first trade ‘deal’ doesn’t bode well for the rest of the world

Published

on


A version of this story appeared in CNN Business’ Nightcap newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.

New York
CNN
 — 

OK, so! After a month of negotiations, we finally have a “full and comprehensive” trade agreement with our old pals across the pond.

Huge news! What a relief, right? Pop the champagne, the trade war nightmare is almost over…

What’s that? What’s in it, you ask? Like, what is the “deal” part of the deal?

OK, so it’s more of a concept of a deal. If a trade deal is, like, Michelangelo’s David, this is more like a block of marble. Or really it’s like a receipt from the marble guy that says we’ve placed an order for a block of marble.

Maybe put the champagne back in the fridge.

Here is what the US and the UK announced Thursday: President Donald Trump’s team took the US tax on British imports from 10% to *checks notes* 10%. Yes, it is the exact same tariff rate that Trump announced on April 2, but with some fun new carve-outs:

British cars: That Bentley you’ve had your eye on was going to be taxed at 27.5%, but now it’s only 10%. Great news for that sliver of Americans in the market for a Land Rover, Jaguar, Rolls-Royce or Aston Martin. No other consumer goods were mentioned.

Planes: British companies can now send plane parts to the US tariff-free. In return, British Airways is expected to order 30 Boeing 787 Dreamliner jets, according to Bloomberg.

Steel and aluminum: Taxes on steel and what the Brits call “aluminium” (adorable) will be scrapped.

Beef: Both countries get a bunch of tariff-free exports on commodities including beef and other agricultural products.

That’s honestly it — there are no more details, as both sides said specifics are still being ironed out. It’s not all that surprising, given that traditionally trade deals require months or even years of painstaking talks.

“A trade agreement where the details are still being negotiated is not an agreement,” said Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM, on social media. “This does not provide the clarity necessary to lift the fog of uncertainty created by a trade war of choice.”

To hear the White House announce it on Thursday, though, you’d think they just won a Nobel prize and a gold medal. In a Truth Social post, Trump said it was “a very big and exciting day.”

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer called it “historic” with what sounded like a straight face, though it should be noted he joined the Oval Office event via speakerphone, because the Trump administration cobbled this whole spectacle together at the last minute. (The British ambassador to the US even said that Trump called Starmer in a “very typical, 11th-hour intervention.”)

The Brits, for their part, said even an imperfect deal is better than no deal at all.

Asked by reporters in England whether this deal marks an improvement on the US-UK relationship of six months ago, before Trump took office, Starmer replied: “The question you should be asking is: Is it better than where we were yesterday?”

Which is a gentle British way of saying: Look, we’re all doing our little dances in the Trump show to avoid tempting the wrath of the leader of the world’s biggest economy.

Wall Street, similarly, isn’t letting perfection be the enemy of the good. Stocks rallied in the US as investors – hungry for any sign Trump is going to relent on the trade war – embraced the White House’s optimism.

Just for kicks, let’s say this is an actual framework for a real trade deal that will get hammered out over the next few weeks. That is better than nothing.

But it took more than a month to roll out this titanic nothingburger with one of our closest allies. An ally that, with all due affection to our British brethren, accounts for just 3% of all US trade, Justin Wolfers, professor of economics at the University of Michigan, told CNN.

That doesn’t bode well for the thousands of American businesses that are currently paralyzed by Trump’s 145% tariffs on most imports from China, an adversary that’s not so charmed by the president’s 11th-hour shenanigans and is America’s third-largest trading partner.

US and Chinese envoys are set to meet this weekend in Geneva. But American officials aren’t even suggesting a trade deal will come out of it – the best that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he’s hoping for is “de-escalation.”

Bottom line: Very little has changed about the state of the global economy since the US-UK “deal” was announced. We still have a 22% effective tariff rate today – the highest in more than 100 years – compared with 2.5% before Trump took office.

“Overwhelmingly the most important fact about today’s trade deal is that the 10% across the board tariffs are staying,” Wolfers said on social media Thursday. “Tiny tweaks here and there with some trading partners won’t change that. The US is a high tariff country for the foreseeable future, and the trade war continues.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Europe

Pentagon considers shifting Greenland to US Northern Command, sparking concerns over Trump’s ambitions for the territory

Published

on



CNN
 — 

Trump administration officials are weighing a change that would shift responsibility for US security interests in Greenland to the military command that oversees America’s homeland defense, underscoring the president’s focus on the strategically important territory that he has repeatedly said he wants to acquire, three sources familiar with the deliberations told CNN.

The change under consideration would move Greenland out of US European Command’s area of responsibility and into US Northern Command, the sources said.

On its face, the idea of putting Greenland under NORTHCOM authority makes some logical sense given it is part of the North American continent, though politically and culturally, it is associated with Europe and is a semiautonomous territory of Denmark. Some of the discussions pre-date Trump’s return to office this year, the sources said.

US Northern Command declined to comment. CNN has reached out to the Office of the Secretary of Defense as well as Danish and Greenlandic officials for comment.

Still, several US officials expressed wariness about the move because of Trump’s repeated insistence that the US “needs” Greenland and his refusal to rule out military action to obtain it.

In an interview with NBC that aired last weekend, Trump renewed that threat.

“I don’t rule it out,” he said. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything.”

“We need Greenland very badly,” Trump said. “Greenland is a very small amount of people, which we’ll take care of, and we’ll cherish them, and all of that. But we need that for international security.”

US Northern Command is chiefly responsible for protecting US territory and currently oversees missions like the southern border task force.

Trump’s rhetoric has also caused major friction with Denmark and with Greenland itself.

Putting Greenland under US Northern Command would at least symbolically split Greenland from Denmark, which would still be overseen by US European Command.

Danish officials are concerned about the message that could send suggesting that Greenland is not a part of Denmark, one of the sources familiar with the deliberations said.

Proponents of the move have pointed out that despite there being a US military base there and Greenland being seen as a vital outpost in competition with Russia and China for access to the Arctic — a major bipartisan national security priority — it sometimes gets overlooked by US European Command because of its distance from the command center in central Europe, one US official said.

For US NORTHCOM, though, Greenland is an important vantage point for any potential enemy craft coming from that direction towards the United States. The unclassified version of the US intelligence community’s annual threat assessment mentioned Greenland four times, within the context of adversaries like China and Russia seeking to expand their influence there.

The discussions about moving Greenland into NORTHCOM come amid another high-profile spat between American and Danish officials over Greenland.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said this week that he plans to “call in” the US acting ambassador to Denmark for talks after a Wall Street Journal report said Washington had ordered US intelligence agencies to increase spying on Greenland.

They were directed to learn more about Greenland’s independence movement and attitudes towards American resource extraction, the Journal reported.

“I have read the article in the Wall Street Journal, and it worries me greatly because we do not spy on friends,” Rasmussen told reporters in Warsaw on Wednesday, during an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers.

“We are going to call in the US acting ambassador for a discussion at the foreign ministry to see if we can confirm this information, which is somewhat disturbing,” Rasmussen added.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending