I would like to state some objections I have to both Rodarte's design, the marketing strategy for this line, and whoever styled these pieces for the website.
First of all, it is important to remember that this line is only shown in the junior's section of the store and on the website. Therefore, its primary marketing range, one can assume is probably 12-25 year olds (generously on both ends).
So getting into the nitty gritty:
Who the heck said- yes, this shirt, over this bathing suit bottom, with this skirt. . .Huh? It looks like a mariachi costume combined with a mesh muscle shirt. And if you knew what skirt that was you would be further confused (spoiler alert: its mostly tulle and crepe). Dear photoshoot stylist, you need a new dayjob.

Then there is this and this:

Believe it or not, this lacy edged piece is actually a swimsuit. Now, maybe I'm just an old fogey (at 23) but That is Underwear! Also, what is this dress? I get the underwear as outerwear thing but is this really appropriate to market to young girls? Why would you want your daughter to go out wearing something that looks like some sex offender's x-ray vision? And on an impractical note- what teenager is going to take the time to hand wash or dryclean a dress covered in tulle? Really Rodarte? Really Target?
Then I'd like to end on this lovely note (and this is just my opinion, so if you like this skirt, go for it, but maybe dont wear it around me, or any cat ever).

You be the judge. Did Rodarte's line for Target crash and burn? Maybe not completely. There were a few dresses that were not only apporpriate for Juniors (as they were being marketed to) but also actually pretty. And please don't think, Rodarte, that I am ignorant of your cutting edge rep, and your reference to the underwear as outerwear principle. I get it. And if a 25 year old or 30 year old wants to wear thier underwear to the pool, more power to them. But we should not encourage twelve year olds to act and dress like they are 25 or 30 don't you agree?