ACUTE and KISS enter a multi-season collaboration that bridges Portland’s exterior-focused design with a Paris-based approach shaped by structure and experimentation. On initiative Fileo Landovskythe collaboration brings together KEEN’s technical foundations and his own precise, idea-driven process. “There is a natural alignment in the way we think about design, people and purpose.” he says Nix EricksonChief Marketing Officer at KEEN. “With Philéo, this connection is based on absolute trust in his vision. Every time I work with him personally, I walk away having learned something new, renewed in my own role, and even more convinced that the future of fashion lies in more consciously created, purposeful products.”
The first result, Targher PHILEOcombines the Targhee hiking boot and the Jasper sneaker into a single form, where inside-out detailing reveals the construction through an exposed heel counter, visible leather lining and inverted stitching. The project focuses on how a shoe works, paying attention to the function, materials and logic behind each element.
In this DSCENE exclusive, Philéo talks to the editor Katarina Doric about how the collaboration evolved and why KEEN’s utilitarian language felt relevant to his work. He explains his decision to make construction readable, the role of constraint in KEEN’s technical framework, and how the Targher PHILEO sits between use and expression.
How did working with KEEN first come about and what made it feel like a good fit for you? – I started the collaboration, KEEN operates in a space almost untouched by fashion, very utilitarian, very specific in its approach to footwear. That made it instantly relevant to me. It felt right naturally enough. We speak the same language, shoemaking, but with different accents. This required some translation, but also created a productive tension.
I first encountered Jasper, but the more I explored the brand, the more I realized how dense and unexpected its design territory is.
KEEN operates in a space almost untouched by fashion, very utilitarian, very specific in its approach to footwear.
How do you decide when function becomes a visual statement in your work? – It was actually to decide what should remain hidden and what should become readable. In this project, the intention was to expose certain elements (construction lines, reinforcements) not for decoration, but for clarification. When function is made visible in a controlled way, it naturally becomes part of the visual language. But it’s never too much.
What did KEEN’s outdoor heritage bring to your design process? – For me, KEEN’s heritage is closer to use, to work, to protect, to build. There is something almost industrial in the way they conceive their products. This changed my approach. Instead of reporting the exteriors as an image, I focused on the logic behind the object: exposing the function, making the construction legible, keeping everything accurate.
We speak the same language, shoemaking, but with different accents.
Where did this collaboration push you outside of your usual approach? – Mainly at the level of limitation. KEEN operates with very defined standards, technical, operational, industrial. This creates a framework that you cannot ignore. I’m used to working with structure, but here the constraints were clearer, more codified. It forces you to position yourself differently: not by adding, but by negotiating within that system.
How do you balance performance with a strong, recognizable silhouette? – For me, a silhouette emerges from the construction itself. If the structure is clear and controlled, the form becomes recognizable almost as a consequence. So the balance isn’t between performance and shape: it’s about making sure the performance remains intact while improving how it’s expressed.
When function is made visible in a controlled way, it naturally becomes part of the visual language.
How did it feel different here compared to your previous work with other brands? – With KEEN, the function is not flat: it is the core. You can’t bypass it, you have to work at it. This creates a different type of dialogue. Less about interpretation, more about alignment, understanding how far you can push without breaking the integrity of the object.
Why was it important to make the materials and construction so visible? – Because that’s where the object is. I’m interested in making the inner logic of the shoe readable, not completely exposed, but not hidden either. There is a tension there, revealing certain elements, the shoe becomes clearer, more self-sufficient. It does not rely on external references for existence.
The ability lies in continuing to change the balance without losing the object’s integrity.
How do you see this project speaking to both the fashion audience and overseas? – The shoe is a tool. It’s made for people who are into what they do, whether that’s physical or conceptual. In this sense, it does not belong strictly to fashion or the outdoors. It sits in between, in a space where use and expression coexist.
What direction do you want to explore next in this collaboration? – This seems like a starting point, what I’m interested in is continuing to work within this tension under positive constraints. Either by pushing more on utility, or on the contrary, reducing things even more. The ability lies in continuing to change the balance without losing the object’s integrity.
