Olya Kuryshchuk: The shift in culture is happening so fast these days. It feels like every three to five years, a new generation emerges completely different from the last. It’s strange to witness how quickly everything evolves.
Massimiliano Giornetti: What fascinates me is how fashion has traditionally been very ego-driven and individualistic. There was little room for collaboration or a culture of supporting young talent. I honestly find this generation very different – they have a much stronger spirit of collaboration and an understanding that success isn’t just about individual achievement but something much broader. It’s not just about being appointed Creative Director of a brand; success is about an idea, a value.
I see this often at school, the way students collaborate with each other. When I was starting my career in fashion, everything was one-directional, and you were on your own. I don’t think that truly reflected the essence of fashion, which goes much deeper than garments. Society often tries to impose a definition of success based on numbers – growth in followers, turnover, double-digit increases. If you’re not growing, it means you’re not successful. But I don’t feel that this generation is as connected to that idea of success being purely measured by numbers.
How do you think they define that success? Or how do you define success for a fashion designer?
The ability to define a clear space where the container of your idea becomes valuable to others – the possibility of people sharing the same values with you – is incredibly interesting. It’s very different from the traditional idea of fashion, where success is measured by the catwalk and the moment after a show. I really feel that this generation is disconnected from big brands; they’re thinking on a much smaller scale. And to me, that feels completely new.
Maybe it’s because I come from a big brand, one that was always focused on growing – more stores, more clients, always expanding. But this generation is approaching things differently. I agree with you; they’re thinking individually, but not in an ego-driven way. It’s individualism in the sense of forming communities, where people share the same ideas and values. It’s not about becoming the next Creative Director. I sense a real discomfort with the constant speculation and rumours about who will take over at Gucci or any other big brand. I think they’ve lost trust in that system.
“[In Fashion] this constant pressure creates frustration because you simply cannot stop.” – Massimiliano Giornetti
I’ve noticed that many designers don’t have a clear vision of what success means to them. In other fields, people can define it, whether it’s a specific salary, stability, or reaching a certain milestone. But in fashion, for a long time, the only visible model of success has been the creative director, while everyone else remains invisible. As a result, it’s hard for young designers to understand the other roles, like design director. They enter fashion education, which in many countries is extremely expensive, spend five to seven years studying, and by the time they finish, they’re burned out, often without a clear idea of what they actually want to pursue.
It’s incredibly stressful. In the past, we worked on two main collections, spring/summer and fall/winter, then it became three with the introduction of pre-collections. Now, we’re delivering drops of new collections every month. But creativity needs time to digest. You need a moment to step back, be critical of your own work, edit, and refine the strongest aspects of your creativity. But there’s no time for that anymore.
This constant pressure creates frustration because you simply cannot stop. It’s very different from other creative fields. I was fortunate in my career to work with Wong Kar Wai on a film that he ultimately decided never to release. That kind of decision is impossible in fashion. We don’t have the privilege of stopping or admitting that, at a given moment, we have nothing meaningful to say. You have to keep producing, collection after collection, and the process itself can become indigestible.
Creativity should evolve, reflecting its time and space, otherwise it’s just another piece of fabric being placed in a store. It’s sad that in fashion, creativity isn’t treated as a pure form of artistic expression but as a constant business obligation. You have to keep producing ideas, and then, over time, people even forget great designers like Alber Elbaz, who passed away just a few years ago. They don’t realise how much he influenced an entire style.
I once sat with a second-year student, about six months before Phoebe Philo launched her brand publicly. They told me they didn’t know who Hedi Slimane was, and I was shocked. I said it felt like not knowing who Phoebe Philo is. But then they asked, Who’s Phoebe? Because for five years, she had been invisible. If you’re 19, she simply wasn’t part of pop culture.
If you consider Phoebe Philo’s influence on design, what I find particularly strong in her process is the way she brings the past into the present and then into the future. Her approach is about reworking a garment from three seasons before, refining and evolving it. Her creative process is deeply rooted in design, in understanding the intricate dialogue between the body and the garment. I truly believe that Phoebe, in a way, has influenced an entire younger generation of designers – Daniel Lee, of course, Matthieu Blazy, and many others.
For me, it was fascinating because it made me realise something about the conversation around relevancy: you have to be in the public arena constantly. This happens a lot in music. Rihanna is probably one of the few who can remain relevant without releasing music, but even the biggest stars can disappear, and two years later, no one talks about them. Fashion is starting to work the same way.
It’s very strange because this younger generation of creators is also fascinated by independent designers like Rick Owens, people who have never been part of the revolving rumours of creative director appointments. His evolution as a designer is deeply connected to his personal life, and that relationship is reflected in his work. On the other hand, what’s illuminating for students and young designers is that they see figures like him as truly independent, far removed from the political dynamics of who-knows-who in the industry.
“Looking at the success of Italian fashion in the ’70s and ’80s, it was closely tied to the strength of the Italian textile industry, which actively supported young designers.” – Massimiliano Giornetti
Even when it comes to competitions, many young designers are sceptical. They don’t fully trust some of the big international contests because they feel these competitions are still controlled by the major fashion groups. There’s a fear that true independence is incompatible with the influence of these powerful organisations.
That’s why I often try to imagine new ways to support young talent, because the landscape is becoming increasingly difficult, not just in terms of business, but also in terms of production. Where to produce? How to produce? The minimum order for some fabrics is 300 to 500 meters. If you’re an independent designer, how can you afford that for just one material in one colour?
Looking at the success of Italian fashion in the ’70s and ’80s, it was closely tied to the strength of the Italian textile industry, which actively supported young designers. Last night, I was speaking with a close friend who runs a small group of independent suppliers working together to create a stronger production network. He told me that today, launching a brand requires €100 million. Wholesale is no longer viable, retail is the only real option. Then there’s production, events, communication – it’s overwhelming.
And that’s the scary part. How do you go back to a classroom and motivate students when you already know that the required investment to succeed is around €100 million?
It feels like most people in the industry have just given up and accepted that the giants have won, that this is how things are, and that individual voices don’t have much influence anymore. There’s little room to start something new. But education is the only thing that can still drive real change in the industry. What is Polimoda’s role in this? What kinds of conversations do you have with students? Are you preparing them for this reality?
I see this as part of my responsibility as the director of the school. I’m still actively working in the industry, bringing in my personal network – professors, investors, suppliers – because I truly believe there’s still a blue ocean of opportunity. Even though, at this moment, fashion feels like a toxic environment, with big brands having immense financial power, making smaller players nearly invisible, I also sense that things are shifting.
Everything has been moving in one direction for so long that I feel even consumers are starting to disconnect from fashion. We talk about making fashion more democratic, but in reality, it’s the opposite. When a white shirt that costs €27 to produce is sold for €1,100, people start asking why? Even those who can afford it recognise the absurdity, it begins to feel like a joke, a sign of disrespect toward the final consumer.
It’s not an easy industry, and success is very personal. Being able to work well in a team under strong leadership doesn’t mean you lack individuality – it means you understand the broader ecosystem, from communication to distribution. Of course, you’ll always collaborate with others, but your vision and identity still matter. It’s natural that some people will always need guidance, just as it’s natural that only a few will emerge as solo leaders with the ability to oversee the entire creative process.
In the last five to 10 years, increasing limitations have been placed on educators regarding how much pressure they can put on students, softening both communication and feedback. I personally feel that fashion students today are overly coddled – as if they’re wrapped in cotton to prevent any discomfort – how do you navigate that, and do you see it as a problem?
Sometimes, in our reviews, people say the school is tough and that professors are demanding, but it’s not about being unkind. If we want to see real results, we have to push students and challenge their limits. Studying here is a privilege; it means investing your family’s resources in a unique environment where you’re surrounded by people from all over the world, immersed in both business and design, each stimulating the other and creating new opportunities. But if students aren’t pushing themselves – if they’re just here for the beauty of Florence and the social life – then what are they really investing in? If we overprotect them now, what happens when they step into the real world? The workplace won’t shield them in the same way.
Maybe schools should introduce an additional course, one for those who want a pleasant few years in Florence, studying fashion and experiencing museums, and another for those who understand the industry’s hardcore competition. Like athletes, they’ll be trained at the top level. I think mixing these groups limits both and leaves everyone frustrated.
I completely agree that one group can limit the other. Sports are a great metaphor for life. If my competition is too slow, it’s hard to truly push my limits. The same applies to fashion schools, where there’s often a romanticised idea that fashion is a beautiful, glamorous industry. But what does that really mean? Watching the Oscars or the Met Gala isn’t fashion – that’s a small, exclusive side of it. The reality is that fashion is competitive and challenging, which is why some students, when faced with difficulty, quickly decide that school isn’t right for them.
What is another challenge for you at Polimoda?
Being a highly international school is both a strength and a challenge. Every day, we navigate different cultures and perspectives. I’ve noticed that this generation’s fear of cultural appropriation has become a significant limitation. Many students are hesitant to engage with certain topics or references, fearing missteps. Of course, I don’t want them to be superficial, but by definition, we are a crossroads of cultures. While Florence and Italy, in general, are not like London or Paris – historically shaped by diverse religions, politics, and cultural influences – we are becoming more international.
When I was in school, my environment was entirely Italian; we weren’t exposed to different cultures, religions, or ways of thinking. Now, students are exposed, yet many are still afraid to explore, fearing mistakes. But without mistakes, there’s no growth. Creativity isn’t just about direct references – like Yves Saint Laurent using Mondrian – it’s about emotional responses to art, film, music, and translating those into something new. While blatant imitation is problematic, what worries me is that many students are paralysed by the fear of being accused of appropriation or holding the “wrong” views. This fear becomes a creative limitation, even though, fundamentally, we are all cultural nomads.
“I’m not afraid that AI will replace designers in the future, but I do believe it’s fundamentally based on what already exists.” – Massimiliano Giornetti
Students shouldn’t be afraid to make mistakes in school. Instead of immediately posting everything on Instagram, they should experiment within the classroom, where classmates and educators can provide feedback and explain why something might be wrong. When you’re paying 50 or even 200k for an education, you should be taught and guided, even if you choose controversial or misguided topics.
We still encounter this issue today. Just last week, I was discussing with a student the use of a Japanese word that clearly originated from Chinese. This is completely natural, just as in Italy, where words evolved from Latin and spread into French, Spanish, and Italian, sometimes taking on broader or slightly different meanings. You can’t simply say, “This isn’t Japanese.” Yes, its roots are Chinese, but within Japanese culture, it has absorbed new meanings and nuances. Yet, students are afraid to engage with this because they’re told they “can’t” use certain words. I see this as a restriction on intellectual and creative exploration.
How is Polimoda engaging with AI, given its growing impact and potential challenges for the design community?
I have my own personal opinion on AI. I see it as a tool, an instrument. Its value depends on how it’s used and applied in different contexts, some of which I don’t find particularly relevant or useful. I’m not afraid that AI will replace designers in the future, but I do believe it’s fundamentally based on what already exists. It’s like making a fruit salad, taking bits and pieces of everything that’s out there, mixing them together, and presenting it as something new.
I deeply believe in the power of the individual. Not in an egotistical sense, but in the idea that everyone has something unique to express. When you create, you shape a personal space, a container that holds something intimate and singular. Of course, as artists, we eventually share our work with others, making it public, but creativity is more than just designing another collection. It’s about constructing a space, an environment where people can see themselves reflected through your vision, your perspective, and your creativity.
So, for me, AI is not a limitation on creativity – it’s simply a tool, one that may be useful in certain areas, but it doesn’t replace the essence of human expression.
“The reality is that opportunities in fashion are still limited to a select few. It’s not a hobby, and I really want to emphasise this point because many students approach fashion school simply thinking, I like fashion.” – Massimiliano Giornetti
I think the way you describe it protects the role of the creative director, but when it comes to product design – breaking down a piece into multiple variations or developing pre-collections – AI could have a different impact.
It’s not about protection, it’s about the fact that we don’t need more collections. We need true stories and true visionaries. It’s not about the garments, we already have too many. I recently travelled to Japan, and I felt overwhelmed by the sheer amount of clothing. I love Tokyo, but it felt like the entire city was packed with fashion stores and restaurants. I don’t see the future like that. In some cases, we already have replicas of replicas.
This isn’t just about fast fashion or brands like H&M, it’s about the entire system. People copy other brands, create sub-brands, and eventually, even those sub-brands become brands of their own. It’s a cycle that feels empty. In my dreams, the future is about fewer garments and more real creators—people who bring dreams to life. That’s what the industry is missing. Right now, everyone is doing the same thing, and brands are becoming more and more similar.
It’s not only because creative directors, as we said earlier, are moving from one brand to another. It’s also because AI, data analysis, and algorithms are determining what colors, products, and bags will sell best. At the end of the day, you see a Prada bag that looks like one from The Row, which is already the same as another bag. The industry is being shaped by numbers rather than vision, and that’s the real problem.
That’s why, at a certain point, I stopped feeling connected to the industry. Every piece of information coming to my desk felt like a replica of something that already existed, a copy of Alessandro Michele at Gucci, a copy of Pierpaolo at Valentino. But if it already exists at Valentino, why redo the same thing at another brand? If Alessandro Michele was successful at Gucci, why create a copy of Gucci when the brand has 100 years of history to build on? It’s a wrong message to send, especially in education.
You are one of the rare fashion school directors with both deep and recent experience in the industry. Your thinking and analysis of fashion brands, production, and the industry as a whole really sets you apart from others and that’s exciting.
There’s a moment, as I said before, when you feel a true vocation for sharing knowledge. I’m still actively working in the fashion industry, and that’s a huge plus because I’m not just talking about theory – I’m dealing with these realities every single day. In two weeks, I’ll be back at Pitti Filati and Première Vision, and in a way, that’s also an advantage for the students. They’re learning from someone who isn’t just speaking about abstract concepts but about what’s actually happening in the industry right now.
When we discuss a topic in fashion, it’s still something that directly affects me, whether it’s production costs, raw materials, or distribution. And I truly believe that this connection to reality is an opportunity for the school as well.
“Fashion schools should function like a gym, a place where students can train, make mistakes, and learn how to push themselves and their limits. That, to me, is the real value of education.” – Massimiliano Giornetti
How do you think fashion education should evolve from this point forward, considering everything that’s happening? This is a pivotal moment for both the industry and education, especially since education is one of the few aspects that won’t disappear.
It’s all very connected, especially in the last five years, where we’ve seen a strong acceleration, particularly after COVID. During the pandemic, people were emotionally restricted, and with fewer opportunities for self-expression, their activities and spending were also limited. As a result, after the pandemic, there was a surge in growth for most fashion houses. With people saving money from not travelling, dining out, or spending on experiences, there was an overproduction of financial possibilities, leading to a distorted perception that this rapid 30% (or even higher) growth was normal.
This misconception also extended to families, many of whom began to see fashion as an easy industry full of opportunities – a “blue ocean” with endless possibilities for career growth, high salaries, and success. But this is extremely misleading. The reality is that opportunities in fashion are still limited to a select few. It’s not a hobby, and I really want to emphasise this point because many students approach fashion school simply thinking, I like fashion. But liking fashion—especially in the sense of shopping—is not the same as building a career in it.
Yes, the industry is dominated by big groups with a lot of money, but that doesn’t mean opportunities within these companies are widely available. Teams change constantly, and while there are openings, they exist for only a very small number of people. I don’t believe that fashion offers equal opportunities for everyone. That’s why I think we need to temper the enthusiasm of families and rethink the role of education. Fashion schools should function like a gym, a place where students can train, make mistakes, and learn how to push themselves and their limits. That, to me, is the real value of education.
And just one last question – you have heritage brands like Ferragamo quite involved in the school. What do you think the relationship should be between schools and these luxury houses? On one hand, they provide jobs for designers, but at the same time, they are also monopolising and, in a way, limiting the space for new designers to exist.
The opportunity is very valuable for students because it takes them outside of the bubble. It allows them to work on real projects rather than just theoretical case studies or fantasy concepts. Right now, for example, we’re working on a new project in collaboration with Ferragamo. But it’s not the only brand. We also collaborate with Gucci, Tod’s, and many others. The key advantage of these partnerships is that students get to apply their skills in real-world scenarios, with the industry ultimately evaluating whether their work is interesting or relevant.
For me, this approach isn’t about prestige or validation – working with Gucci isn’t some kind of royal warrant that guarantees recognition. The real value of these collaborations is that students are creating projects with the potential to drive real innovation in the industry. While brands have their own dedicated teams, true innovation requires significant financial investment. By bringing in external projects led by industry-experienced professors and young creative minds, these collaborations put fresh ideas on the table.
That, to me, is the real advantage – not just a marketing exercise, but a moment where productivity is put at the industry’s disposal to develop new projects. Placement opportunities for students come as a second step. The primary goal is to give them a hands-on, concrete application of their work, which is fundamental to their education.
