Designer Rahul Mishra, artist Gustav Klimt, and a long tradition of art inspiring fashion

Indian Express

14-07-2025

Over the last week, several posts featuring the works of Indian fashion designer Rahul Mishra at the Paris Haute Couture Week have amassed thousands of views and likes on social media.
This has happened even as high fashion is not always considered accessible to wider audiences. It's not available to purchase on a mass scale, and the designs themselves are often more conceptual than practical.
Once in a while, however, runway designs evoke popular interest and agreement on their quality and beauty. In Mishra's case, it was not only the glittery dresses in gold and yellow hues or the floral themes that stood out, but the inspiration he took from the paintings of celebrated 19th-century Austrian artist Gustav Klimt.
The extraordinary PAINTINGS of Gustav Klimt referenced by ✨Rahul Mishra✨ in his Fall/Winter 2025 Couture collection.🪡 pic.twitter.com/WIJUlQJzyS
— La Mode Unknown (@LaModeUnknown) July 7, 2025
Fashion has long taken inspiration from the world of art, and there are reasons why the collaborations work, even as they generate debates and disagreements about the nature of art itself.
At a surface level, there are obvious similarities in the realms of art and fashion. Designers begin their work by drawing sketches as the prototype for clothes, and depictions of fashion and clothing are often central to paintings. American fashion historian Valerie Steele wrote in the anthology book Fashion and Art (2012), 'Both fashion and art are aspects of visual culture, involving form, color, and texture… Like art, fashion can be technically and conceptually rich.'
Mishra also noted this commonality, telling Vogue India in an interview, 'I kept coming back to this quote by Monet. He said, 'Everyone's trying to paint a bridge, a flower, a tree, a river, but I'm trying to paint the air—the space where the boat, the hut, the bridge and the woman exist.' And I felt like that's what I was doing, creating air, because how do you turn an emotion into something real? Into fabric, into form, into something wearable? The task was to capture emotion'.
In discussions on these connections, mentions of the iconic French designer Yves Saint Laurent frequently appear. He once called himself a 'failed painter', having often taken inspiration from his favourite works of art. The most well-known of these was the Mondrian dress, featuring blocks of white, red, yellow and blue, almost lifting artist Piet Mondrian's abstract paintings from the canvas and directly placing them on cloth.
An article on the website of New York's Met Museum says, 'The purity of Mondrian's simple lines and color blocks resonated deeply with Saint Laurent, inspiring him to create a collection of twenty-six designs… With strategic darts and seams, he transformed abstract paintings into three-dimensional cocktail dresses that maintained geometric alignment on the body.'
The article argued that not only did it popularise Mondrian's works within the cultural elite, but the designer's ready-to-wear line made the artist more accessible to a wider clientele. It also birthed inexpensive copies. 'Whether or not it was his intention, Saint Laurent expanded the reach of artworks beyond the confines of museum walls and into human lives. At the very least, he challenged perceptions by demonstrating that women, irrespective of their race or class, deserved to wear works of art,' it said.
Saint Laurent also based shirts and jackets on the works of Vincent Van Gogh and Pablo Picasso.
In Mishra's case, using Klimt as a source is, in a way, coming full circle. The Austrian painter is renowned for his detailed paintings that often captured women, with some featuring and inspired by his long-time partner, designer Emilie Floge. Portrait of Emilie Flöge (1902) shows her in a dark, loose blue dress. This was inspired by Floge's designs, which rejected the tight corsets of that era.
Where the two diverge
Not everyone agreed that the two worlds should be equated. 'A dress is neither a tragedy, nor a painting,' said French designer Coco Chanel, 'It is a charming and ephemeral creation, not an everlasting work of art. Fashion should die and die quickly, in order that commerce may survive'.
Chanel was known for her infusion of practicality into luxurious clothing, such as suits for women.
On the other hand, her contemporary, Italian designer Elsa Schiaparelli, was known for incorporating unusual motifs and styles. She was friends with surrealist artists such as Salvador Dali, even collaborating with him. Chanel once called her 'that Italian artist who makes clothes'.
Steele also noted some 'undeniable differences' in the two fields, such as that fashion has an 'obvious utility' which paintings do not. When it comes to high-end artists, a work of art may still be many times more expensive than a luxury handbag or a pair of shoes. 'Moreover, whereas the price of a work of art can escalate dramatically over time, the value of fashion almost always declines after it ceases to be new and only sometimes regains value as collectable vintage,' Steele wrote.
That is not to say that fashion doesn't occasionally aspire for longevity beyond mass consumption. The introduction of the book Fashion and Art says, 'Couture, which began in 1850s with (designer) Charles Frederick Worth is a key place to start speculating on the art-fashion nexus. It is when garments start to assume the status of substantive, sculptural objects, which just happen to have the human support to activate them.'
Couture began in France at a time when luxury was seeing a revival, and when the royals gave their patronage for the production of goods created by hand, for an exclusive clientele. Mishra's collection was also part of haute couture.
Scope for harmony
Steeler wrote that today, collaborations between the two forms' artists can 'legitimate the fashion companies' cultural credentials, while also creating buzz and sales. They are undoubtedly useful for the artist also, but primarily in financial terms.'
Which raises the question of whether fashion belongs in the rarefied and exalted world of 'art', and if it can be deemed as such. The debate about what comprises art is an old one, and is often seen as being exclusive of newer, more accessible forms of culture. On the other hand, calling everything equally significant can seem ultimately devaluing all forms of art.
Saint Laurent was clear about his position. The Met's article says, 'He never likened himself to Van Gogh or Picasso through his interpretation of their works. He was a student of culture and an avid art collector… He emphasized that his homages were the result of a profound admiration of the art form: 'I didn't copy them—who would venture to do that? I wanted to weave connections between the painting and the clothing.''
Rishika Singh is a Senior sub-editor at the Explained Desk of The Indian Express. She enjoys writing on issues related to international relations, and in particular, likes to follow analyses of news from China. Additionally, she writes on developments related to politics and culture in India.
... Read More