Yesterday, the collection was released. The audience sat in shipping containers as the first look came out to Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave’s Where the Wild Roses Grow. If Vivienne Westwood’s bridal gown is what everyone is after, then Martens’s opening look, a full-length, long-sleeved gown with a translucent face covering, waving and folding through shimmering fabric, is mine. The theatricality of Margiela sang through, as always, with complete elegance. It was both haute couture and ready-to-wear, designed to exist harmoniously.

Like so many of the greats, designers like Margiela and Rick Owens, or Alexander McQueen during his anarchist reign at Givenchy, can harness and break the historical rules of fashion, while still falling back on their ability to dress the body. For garments to sit, to hold, to be tailored in a way that makes high fashion worthwhile. Owens exemplifies this through his ability to drape textiles in a way that flatters outside of a traditional lens, while Martens approaches it through minimalistic clothing that becomes an effortless vessel of luxury.

A quarter of the way through the runway, we see a gold gown, bubbled and embellished with licks of textile. Like his debut haute couture show last July, Martens finds a way to make art wearable, to present a design almost as sculpture, something that could sit beside Louise Bourgeois or Anselm Kiefer. A gown to admire through glass, but one that, on this runway, can move into the real world.

Whether through the opulent gowns or the enlarged tailoring, the show holds the essence of 18th-century silhouettes and trimmings: sheer lace shirting under silk-lapelled suits; gowns corseted at the waist, then pushed and contoured outwards. It all felt very Sofia Coppola’s Marie Antoinette, whilst honouring Margiela’s house codes, the tabi, bianchetto, four stitches, and numeric coding.

But for all the awe the show has brought, the question still remains: why China? Some may say the OTB Group has shifted to broaden a Chinese audience, an attempt to bring the cult label into the mainstream. And considering the time we’re in, these niche houses are having to let go of what was once strictly part of their identity to bring in more sales. More pressure is being put on creative directors to sell, to create clothes that can be bought by the masses. After all, Margiela is based on identity, conceptualism, and minimalism, and that isn’t marooned to just a Western audience.

And at a time where creative directors are leaving left, right, and centre, most recently Matthieu Blazy exiting Chanel after what seemed like an incredible start, although Martens at Margiela feels steady, you never really know. Bigger juggernauts are getting their fingers into a game that was once art. For Margiela, change for the sake of growth is not needed to make the brand relevant. Its history and what it continues to do is enough.