Can Allegra Save Versace?

Fashion has always been defined by a rapid turnover. An industry driven by a constant need to feed the hunger of the consumer with satisfactory stimuli, demanding the repetitive yet successful reimagination of a fashion house to align with the daily innovative perspective of society and its perpetually shifting socio-political and economic climate.

            The thread for Luxury-Fashion houses began with the rise of fast fashion in the 1960s, a movement which disrupted couture by sparkling the spread of the fast-fashion virus and destabilising the many heritages houses that had reigned for decades before. “Adapt or be ended” was the message loud and clear. And those who adapted in fact survived, though under the relentless pressure of constant reinvention and the shifting visions of Creative Directors caught in a cycle of overproduction. But those who resisted to the robotic ideology closed their doors for what was believed to be forever.

Yet another thread emerged, more demanding than the last: the rise of social media, the collapse the human attention span and micro-trends; what was “in” today could be out not tomorrow, but seconds later.  This is the consumer upon whom today’s fashion now depends one shaped by a society of artificiality and alteration. Yet can the human creative mind survive the un-survivable?

It is within this volatile setting that the role of the Creative Director became both exalted and expendable. From the early 2000s onward, the industry saw a revolving door of individual’s appointments, each tasked to honour a house’s legacy while reinventing it at breakneck speed. Some rose to the challenge, transforming the Parisian maisons into cultural powerhouses — think Karl Lagerfeld at Chanel, John Galliano at Dior, Alexander McQueen at Givenchy. Others, however, faltered under the weight of expectation, their visions consumed by the very cycle of overproduction and immediacy that defined the era.

Yet today, it is no longer the Parisian houses under such threat; the shifting of perspectives is something they have grown accustomed to, learning to adapt within an ever-changing industry. Now the pressure has shifted to the Italian maisons — facing a new virus of capitalisation that they must overcome, or risk, like the Parisian houses of the 1960s, being forced into pause. The giants of Milan are already passing the baton to a new generation: with the deaths of Armani and Cavalli and the departure of Donatella Versace from the house of Versace, the intersection of new Creative perspectives at the houses of Fendi and Gucci

The new generation of Creative Directors, figures like Demna, Pierpaolo Piccioli, and Dario Vitale,  have risen during a time of accelerated change. Their challenge is to reimagine and revitalise fashion houses by revisiting the blueprints of their corporate identities. In many cases, this means stripping away the imprint of their predecessors almost entirely, and instead focusing on fresh narratives rooted in heritage but told from a new perspective. This approach has allowed the sleeping houses of the past to re-enter the market with renewed clarity, speaking directly to a younger generation while reintroducing themselves to long-standing consumers.

However, a shifting perspective is unfolding; one that both enables social media while simultaneously increasingly disregards them. It is almost an antibody of rebellion against the mass media and the endless churn of stimuli. Micro-trends, once dominant over the last decade, are now in steep decline, and with them the reliance on celebrity endorsements and the spectacle of the modelling industry. This marks a generational lifestyle shift that fashion houses must adapt to: a rebellion against social media saturation, the decline of alcohol consumption, and a renewed preference for timeless classics over passing trends.

The age of soft launches is gone; what matters now are strong, distinct narratives rooted in identity. The present? Remaining true to yourself, revisiting your roots, and reshaping the corporate DNA to fit a market where consumers value authenticity above all. Today’s consumer values identity, individuality, and fashion culture itself more than ever before.

The strategies of each of the newly appointed Creative Leads varies significantly from one another:

Take Demna’s debut at Gucci. His vision leaned into the theatricality of Italian Cinema, but not without grounding it in form and structure emanating from the roots of Italian Renaissance. Much like Cristóbal Balenciaga new perspective in the 50s— who reinterpreted the silhouettes of Spanish royalty of the past to reconstruct the then modern garments — Demna revisited Gucci’s cultural origins whilst referencing the Italian Royalty Culture of the past. The high necklines, the rounded sleeves, the sculptural cuts, and materials such as fur and leather echoed the essences of Florence and Rome as well as the roots of the Gucci house itself. By doing so, he repositioned Gucci as more than a spectacle for the social media culture: a house of ultimate luxury, where classical elements met the edge of contemporary exaggeration.

Pierpaolo Piccioli’s strategy at Balenciaga, took an entirely different approach. Rather than trying to outshine Demna’s visual imprint, he shifted focus to another cornerstone of the house: fragrance. Alike Le Dix, by Cristóbal Balenciaga in the late 1940s, Piccioli launched one of the most talked-about fragrances in decades. In this way, he stripped away the noise of his predecessor and re-anchored the brand in its roots; replacing the over-exaggerated theatricality of the house with the simplistic elegance of white backdrops and presenting the fragrance alike an artifact from the past to be appreciate by the present.

Perhaps the most poignant example of heritage revival is Silvia Venturini Fendi’s appointment at the house of Fendi — the first family return since the 1960s. Her leadership reaffirmed that identity and heritage are inseparable from the families who built these Houses. Her collections fused precision with playfulness, incorporating some of Fedni’s original codes, alike fur and leather; whilst reconstructing them with modern cuts, youthful proportions, and vibrant contrasts. The result was inclusivity through design — garments that could be interpreted personally, worn by individuals across generations and lifestyles. In this way, Venturini Fendi’s second womenswear collection underscored the importance of continual storytelling: staying true to the corporate identity of the house while innovating boldly through materiality and technology

When it comes to Versace, the challenge is different. This is a house overflowing with visual stimuli and unmistakable codes — a brand built on character, audacity, and glamour. The role of a Creative Director here should be to consistently capitalise on current trends while weaving them into the millions of brand identity cues synonymous with Versace. And yet, in its latest presentation, that essence was missing.

The new Creative Director, the first not bound by family ties, attempted to revive the rebellious spirit of Versus Versace — the youthful 1990s energy aimed at twenty-somethings that Gianni pioneered and Donatella expanded in the early 2000s. The branding was clever: toning down the gold-and-baroque extravagance and emphasising edgier, leather-driven sexuality. But the execution faltered.

The latest collection however lacked the glamour and elegance that define Versace — the interplay of gold and black, the architectural boldness, the opulent prints. Instead, it leaned on neon colours, 1980s workout silhouettes, and palettes more suited to the 1970s than to Gianni’s empowering vision. Versace’s strength has always been its ability to celebrate the human body as spectacle: clothing as structural armour, metallics as confidence, form as empowerment. Donatella continued this legacy, proving that Versace’s essence lies in making people feel larger than life.

This most recent collection, released quietly without the drama of a runway show, stripped the house of that power. Instead of letting Versace’s codes speak, the Creative Director imposed a narrow vision aimed at youth, ayouth who does not necessarily guide the financial stability of the house, reducing the brand to overt sexuality.

But can garments truly be sold through the portrayal of a naked body — something no consumer can buy? The answer is simple: no. Versace’s survival will depend on its ability to revisit its roots, reimagine Gianni’s denim, embrace the rising presence of fur which shall be solely faux, expand on its homoerotic and sensuality of leather goods, and above all, reclaim the glamour and audacity that once defined it. Fashion is a lifestyle and a mindset to be sold, and to be embodies through clothing. Attempts to force consumers to adapt their physical appearance to fit the narrow narrative of a house have repeatedly failed — most notably with the collapse of Victoria’s Secret’s image in the mid-2010s.

Venturini Fendi’s second womenswear collection demonstrated the power of continual storytelling — remaining true to a house’s corporate identity while innovating through new technologies and materials. Her brilliance raised the inevitable question: should Versace, too, return to the hands of a Versace? Specifically, to the next generation — Allegra Versace, daughter of Donatella and niece of Gianni — who inherited about 50% of the house following Gianni’s assassination in the 1990s. Could this have been a testament to Gianni’s belief that his niece might one day carry forward the creative vision of the family?

But this shall not be considered the ending, the pressure is on, and all eyes are on Versace; but was that what its Creator Director had wanted in the first place.