For anyone who cares about my thoughts as to the actual collection: I thought it was superb. (I'm sorry that it's hard to make out from the pictures, so hit up style.com)
Jacobs, in the wake of the September New Yorker profile that pitched a meta-superficial gymhog with a newfound admiration of tattoos ("bros before hos," really MJ?) showed a decidedly un-glamorous, circus folk meet Ms. Hannigan look (my co-worker called it Harriet Tubman-Chic) that seriously breaks with his own images and reverent aspirations of beauty. And I love that. Also the man is brilliant. He imposes plaid on taffeta, atop chinoiserie prints, swaddled in double breasted fitted blazers, metallic sheen-y obi's and prancing on espadrilles. So basically he's covering the market on what anyone might want to incorporate into their wardrobe--though perhaps not all at once. But moreso, his deepest talent lies not be in his craftsmanship, because I don't think anyone would argue he's a Valentino--his clothes are not that well-made or architecturally groundbreaking. But they are so prone to editorializing--Jacobs lures us with his poignant and ubiquitous referencing. His greatest skill is that of a stylist. He plays with what women want (unapologetic, near-Lolita like girliness), what we don't (dirt, grunge, ugliness), and who we want to be (one of his muses, obviously).
But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what I think. It matters what she thinks:
(Can you spot all the eds in this picture?)








