Standing out at Paris Fashion Week has never been harder, yet every house this season found its own way to try. The Spring/Summer 2026 shows in the French capital leaned into emotion, experimentation, and spectacle. Creative directors reinterpreted archives, played with presentation, and used theatrics to make their mark. The result was a week defined by individuality and risk, where each debut reflected a different vision of what modern fashion can be. Let’s take a closer look at this season’s Paris Fashion Week debuts.
Dior by Jonathan Anderson – October 1st 2025
Siena: Jonathan Anderson brought his signature volume, architectural silhouettes and playfulness from Loewe’s menswear to Dior’s womenswear for his debut. The attention to detail was exacting; Anderson wove classic house codes (think: bows, Bar jackets, bees, La Cigale waistlines) into his surrealist approach to fashion. Some saw a revolution in the making; others felt his hand dominated the house. If there is any criticism, it is to be directed towards the headpieces. They presented shock value over storytelling, lacking meaning whilst taking up space. The absence of a clear colour palette was also distracting. The collection’s dresses were standout, however, showing that there is strong promise in his appointment.
Mae: Jonathan Anderson’s debut at Dior wasn’t entirely convincing. His aesthetic, which felt effortless at Loewe, didn’t translate as naturally to Dior. At first glance, the collection seemed too heavily marked by his own style. It left little room for the house’s identity to shine through. However, if examined more closely, his respect for Dior’s heritage becomes clear. He revisited the Bar jacket, reworked in Donegal tweed, and modernised silhouettes inspired by the 1949 “Junon” gown and the 1952 “La Cigale” dress. The references were thoughtful, but Anderson’s bold style often overshadowed Dior’s softer refinement. The exaggerated headpieces didn’t help either; they drew the attention away from the looks. It was an ambitious debut, but one that made it difficult to see Dior without looking past Anderson first.
Alexia: Jonathan Anderson’s female debut was a notable improvement over his underwhelming men’s collection – yet, it left me conflicted. All the way to the venue, where a film was projected, the designer showed an honorable dedication to reconnect with the archives. Nonetheless, in a Maison with such a rich legacy as Dior, a creative director’s role is to design for the house — not to craft pieces merely inspired by it and label them accordingly. Here, Anderson’s vision at times tipped the balance too far toward his own aesthetic. The collection felt less like “Jonathan Anderson at Dior” and more like “Jonathan Anderson x Dior.” Every designer leaves their mark, naturally, but when that signature begins to eclipse the spirit of the Maison itself, one can’t help but wonder, “is this really Dior?”, a question whose answer, in a house like this, should be self-evident. Another interrogation which inevitably emerges, considering the significant style rupture with Maria Grazia Chiuri’s era: will the clients follow? MGC may not have dazzled critics, but it sold, tripling the house’s revenue. Will her clientele adore Anderson’s more conceptual territory? A bold pivot, yes, but one that risks alienating the very audience Dior has cultivated.
Final Verdict: KILL!
Mugler by Miguel Castro Freitas – September 2nd 2025
Stephanie: Featuring sculpted silhouettes, corsetry and sharp tailoring, Mugler SS26 collection fully embraces the brand’s identity. Miguel Castro Freitas, just like Thierry Mugler, celebrates the women’s body through designs that feel both sexy and powerful. The designer uses 1980s silhouettes embracing the golden era of Thierry Mugler. Yet, his special touch remains in the contrast with the sheer gowns that create a form of intimacy, but still embraces the women’s body.
Mae: Miguel Castro Freitas’ debut collection at Mugler made a bold statement, not through colour but through silhouette. It picked up on Mugler’s legacy of sculpted and sharp lines, reviving the hourglass tailoring, corseted dresses, and feathered drama that defined the archives of the house. The focus on power dressing felt timely, aligning with the broader return of office wear and strong tailoring across the industry. Overall, the collection was solid, but didn’t bring as much awe as some of the other collections this season.
Alexia: Miguel Castro Freitas opened his tenure with a poetic study of the nude, where muted tones and skin-like materials sculpted and exalted the female silhouette with architectural precision. In true Mugler fashion, the waist was cinched, the hips accentuated, and the shoulders sharply defined. The designer offered the audience a glimpse of the original Mugler spirit we’ve longed to see return. With his intimate and purified aesthetic, Castro Freitas reignited the drama that once defined the Maison – a long-awaited moment for the fashion world. A standout feature was his integration of the nature motif into couture: a monumental lion headpiece and bird-inspired forms declined in skirts, tops, and coats. Sparkles, corsetry, and meticulous embellishments paid a beautiful homage both to Mugler’s legacy and to the art of body adornment itself. Mugler’s theatricality was admittedly more subdued, however unexpected revelations were part of the show: dresses slightly too transparent, necklines plunging a bit too low, and fringes swinging enough to bare the model’s anatomy. A collar was even reversed, surprising us with a sensational open back. In spite of these striking elements, the collection suffered from a certain sameness. Opening and closing with near-identical looks, it lacked the wow-factor, the sense of wonder. The structural essence of the Maison was beautifully restored, a commendable achievement. Yet, the overall restrain of Miguel Castro Freitas left us wanting more.
Final Verdict: (small) KISS!
Loewe by Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez – September 3rd 2025
Stephanie: In Loewe SS26 by Lazaro Hernandez and Jack McCollough, the accessories are the main character: the bags and the shoes caught my eyes before anything else. The color palette felt very Spanish, warm and vibrant like the house itself. The clothing appears simple at first but the beauty lies in the details: the layering, texture and the shapes. The structure and the energy of the clothes were unmistakably Loewe coded, making the collection an overall success.
Mae: Succeeding Jonathan Anderson was never going to be easy. Under his eleven-year tenure at Loewe, the brand’s revenues rose from the low hundreds of millions into the near-billion-euro range and it became a cultural powerhouse. Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez stepped in acknowledging that legacy. Their debut collection leaned into Loewe’s core strength by focusing on exceptional leather work and artisanal craftsmanship while injecting fresh energy. That being said, it didn’t particularly stand out when compared to other debuts.
Siena: Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez did a fantastic job filling in Johnathan Anderson’s rather-large shoes at Loewe. They kept the Anderson-era strengths and layered in their own signature — New York, street-inflected polish — without a jarring break. The transition felt assured, with continuity in cut and craft. It was a confident debut, rightly so, yet one that left customers expecting more. We are still waiting to see if McCollough and Hernandez will manage to transcend Anderson’s long shadow.
Final Verdict: KISS!
Maison Margiela by Glenn Martens – September 4th 2025
Alexia: Following his phenomenal Artisanal collection, a modern take on all eras of the brand, Glenn Marten’s ready-to-wear debut for Maison Margiela left me perplexed. The show went viral for the mouthpieces worn by the models, a rather awkward nod to Margiela’s iconic “Four Stitches.” Originally conceived as a discreet alternative to branded labels, those stitches were a code decipherable only to those who looked closely… an idea of subtlety entirely lost here. In an industry driven by visibility and loud buzz, Martin Margiela embraced absence and anonymity, shunning the spotlight in favor of research and innovation. In the same way he did not appear on photographs, he covered the models faces to center the garments. For SS26, attention was drawn instead to their mouths. Still, Martens remains one of the few designers genuinely pushing material boundaries, like Margiela himself did. For SS26 he experimented with plasticization, transparency, and liquidity, while considering functionality. The children’s orchestra — a brilliant inversion of Margiela’s 1989 show where children watched the models — also showed that the house’s intellectual spirit endures. The famous photograph by Jean-Claude Coutausse “The Children Play for the Models” became “The Children Play for the Models”, a poignant metaphor for legacy and renewal. Yet, despite its conceptual intelligence, the emotional core felt distant.
Stephanie: The SS26 show of Maison Margiela left the crowd more stunned about the logos than the clothes itself. I actually liked the idea of the logos on the mouth, it made models literal products of margiela. However, the clothes were less impacting. I appreciated the use of leather coats and certain suit pieces but the rest didn’t really leave a mark.
Mae: Glenn Martens’ debut at Maison Margiela was memorable for its presentation more than for its clothes. The models walked with mouthpieces that held their jaws open, a strange visual that became the focus of the show. It fit within Margiela’s history of anonymity and disruption, but at times it felt like shock for its own sake. Martens is known for deconstruction, from ripped denim and twisted silhouettes at Y/Project to distorted tailoring and oversized leather at Diesel, so this kind of experimentation wasn’t surprising. Although these mouth accessories aren’t my cup of tea, I must say they do make the collection stand out in a unique way.
Final Verdict: KILL!
Balenciaga by Pierpaolo Piccioli – September 4th 2025
Stephanie: Balenciaga by Piccioli is no longer trying to raise controversy and viral spectacles. The new Balenciaga feels calmer and more timeless, a return to Cristobal Balenciaga’s vision rather than the chaotic era of Demna. Irony is not completely gone though: it is still present through the caricatural layering of all the ski jackets that keeps ties with the past. However, the gowns are classier: it’s still big and dramatic but softened with elegance. Balenciaga is on the right track to find its balance with Piccioli.
Siena: Demna’s imprint on Balenciaga defined the 2010s, with as much hype as there was criticism. Pierpaolo Piccioli chose not to extend that legacy. His debut steered the house back to high elegance whilst keeping the shift measured for an audience accustomed to Demna’s provocation. The collection was instead a gorgeous homage to eveningwear, understated yet commanding. His reinterpretation of Balenciaga’s 1957 Sack dress was a highlight. A wonderful collection and a standout debut.
Mae: Pierpaolo Piccioli’s debut at Balenciaga felt like a turning point. After years of Demna’s ironic streetwear, Piccioli brought back the house’s sculptural elegance. He referenced Cristóbal Balenciaga’s iconic 1950s silhouettes such as the sack dress and cocoon coat. I do have appreciation for the strange, oversized glasses that some of the models were wearing. Yes, they felt both futuristic and absurd, but I found them to be a great contrast with the clothes. However, it’s important to point out that, like the mouthpieces at Maison Margiela, they seemed to signal the broader trend this season: brands trying everything to stand out and be remembered.
Final Verdict: MARRY!
Jean Paul Gaultier by Duran Lantink – September 5th 2025
Alexia: Duran Lantink’s take on Jean Paul Gaultier was loud, referential, and divisive. Tattooed bodysuits like in the ‘90s, revisited submarine looks, Madonna’s conical orange catsuit, and long-sleeved Junior t-shirts – the Gaultier codes were unmistakable. But references alone don’t make a collection. Jean Paul Gaultier was always provocative, but his shock came with humor, sensuality, and affection for the human form. Lantink’s pieces, while playful, seemed ill-fitting, especially in the crotch area, and occasionally verging on mockery. Take the sumo bodysuits: in the vein of 1985 Gaultier, yet, the construction was a miss. It was a disturbing collection, that just provoked to provoked (as Lantink said himself in an interview). However, provocation without purpose is merely noise. Still, credit where due: the Enfant Terrible spirit was alive and kicking. Now it needs the craftsmanship and empathy to match.
Stephanie: Somewhere between the irony and the shock of Jean Paul Gaultier ss26, the pret-a-porter got lost. The collection represented fashion as a concept not really as clothing. What was the message behind it all? The absurdity behind the hairy torsos and exaggerated muscles seemed to mock the ideals of beauty turning the runway into a celebration of imperfections. However, the joke became the main focus and the clothes stopped being clothes.
Siena: Duran Lantink was distasteful and, frankly, disrespectful to women with his debut collection at Jean Paul Gaultier. Criticism of his show from the zeitgeist has been universal and exhausting. There is little more to contribute apart from pointing out that fundamentally, collections should be designed for the women who will purchase them. This one seemed to forget its customer. More damning, the clothes were poorly cut and looked cheap at a luxury price – even controversy will not sell them.
Final Verdict: KILL!
Chanel by Matthieu Blazy – September 6th 2025
Siena: Chanel was the most talked-about show in the run-up to fashion week, rivalled only by Jonathan Anderson’s much-anticipated debut at Dior. With an in-house team designing collections after Virginie Viard’s abrupt exit, the maison badly needed direction. Blazy certainly supplied it, whether or not the collection was liked. A strong departure from previous visions of the Maison, it traded femininity for utility — clothes women will actually wear. (The fuzzy accessories were the exception: dreadful as headpieces, acceptable only as bags.) Where Lagerfeld imagined the Chanel “girl,” Blazy imagines the Chanel “woman”. The result was exciting; the show was a 7/10.
Mae: Matthieu Blazy’s debut at Chanel was easily my favorite show of the season. It felt like a fresh new Chanel while still keeping a little clin d’œil to its past. The collection played with the house’s classic codes (tweed, pearls, and clean tailoring), but in a lighter, more modern way that actually felt refreshing. I loved the unusual headpieces and the shoes that nodded to Chanel’s original two-tone slingbacks from the 1950s. The decor of the show wasn’t what you’d expect from Chanel, but it fit with the clothes and made the whole thing feel alive. I never found Blazy’s work at Bottega Veneta that memorable, but this was completely different. It was elegant, modern, and exciting.
Stephanie: Between the flowing skirts and the floral designs, Mathieu Blazy found a way to make Chanel feel alive again. This show stirred a lot of controversy on social media: some people loved it while others claim “he did not respect the codes of the house”. Yet, Blazy did respect them, but with a contemporary touch. The tweed remained but instead of sharp tailoring he created fluid coats and midi skirts, flowing effortlessly with each step. The futuristic set introduced the ‘new’ Chanel that looks forward rather than back. Perhaps, some people prefer the house’s commitment to its traditional pieces and felt unease with the change. But change isn’t necessarily bad, the collection was still elegant but less traditional. The joyous ending left the crowd smiling, signalling a new era of Chanel: lighter, freer and modern. Overall, Blazy delivered a strong refreshing debut.
Alexia: The critical euphoria of this show seemed driven more by relief than by the clothes themselves. It was simply different from what Chanel has offered in recent years. Some ensembles, such as the oversized shirts paired with silk skirts or the minimal looks left open at the belly button, risked blandness. Coco Chanel was indeed the embodiment of effortless sophistication, but never of monotony. The long-sleeved tops trimmed with sparse feathers failed to evoke the luxury Chanel is synonymous with, and the disheveled, fluffy flower — an attempt to reimagine the Camellia? — appeared throughout the collection, from jackets and blouses to exaggerated headpieces and earrings. The “smashed” 2.55 bag, left open and folded, felt borderline irreverent toward one of fashion’s most historical designs. Despite a few questionable takes on the house’s codes, the pervasive sense of movement remained a true success. In particular in dresses that came alive with each step, as they recalled the fluidity of cabaret dancers, a nod to Coco’s early years and the nickname she earned in that world. The reworked, edgier tweed and the captivating energy of Awar Odhiang gave the show a sense of liberation, typical Chanel! Ultimately, this was neither a triumph nor a failure, simply an overhyped debut. One cannot shake the impression that the public, desperate for change since Karl Lagerfeld’s passing, was ready to applaud anything that wasn’t what Chanel has been lately.
Final Verdict: MARRY!
Written by Alexia Delcaire, Mae Lucie Panzani, Siena Jackson, and Stephanie Nassif
