This evening I went to the London College of Fashion for a discussion between Colin McDowell (fashion journalist), Christopher Bailey (Burberry) and Jeremy Langmead (Editor in Chief of Esquire and formerly Wallpaper). The topic of conversation was menswear and it's liberations and constraints, hence the title. It was particular interesting discussing how fashion is becoming ageless and it is harder for the younger generations to rebel, in fact almost anything goes these days, however men who take an interest in fashion are still pigeon holed with assumptions. They also talked about why men are the "uniformed sex", sticking to black suits- perhaps for safety, power or tribalism, or that they don't want extravagance, just practicality and private pleasures, which is why the art of menswear is in the detail. But Mr Bailey argued that and said his topseller of the last year were his red and gold trench coats for men. It was brought up also that the roles reverse with time and the mood of the moment;prior to the 18th Century and the French Revolution it was the men who were all about frivolity and vanity, and it was socially acceptable to wear make up and be frou frou. And how the fact that stores like Abercrombie and Fitch have just opened up on Saville Row signals the sad reality that bespoke crafts are slowly dying as consumers are demanding fast and disposable.For added measure there was even an American PETA protester called Bruce sitting in front of me who kept interrupting and yelling insults about killing seals to poor Christopher Bailey, which had nothing to do with anything. Of course there was. Christopher was the cutest, he was tiny with a lisp and couldn't sit still he looked about 15, but seemed like a lovely fella and handled it very well. I admit I was a bit star struck!
3 comments:
I hope I'm not posting twice; it said that it worked and then it said it didn't work... Here we go again:
Well actually I didn't "ke[ep] interrupting and yelling insults." I had one exchange w/Mr. McDowell in the middle of the event (Mr. Bailey refused to answer my question) and then I had one more exchange w/Mr. Bailey after the event was over.
There was no point at which I interrupted, and no point at which I yelled (the only time I spoke at all, I had the microphone).
The way you put it here, it's as though I were interrupting and yelling through the whole thing. In fact, during the one-hour event, I only spoke that one time (when I had the microphone). And then at the end, after the event was over, I had a one-on-one with Mr. Bailey. That was a little contentious, but there was no yelling or interrupting.
I also didn't say a word about seals; Burberry doesn't use seal fur. I talked about fur farms, which are so hideously cruel that they're illegal in the UK and many other countries, yet Burberry still buys from them in countries that don't care about animals, supporting things like skinning animals alive and electrocuting them in ways that are, again, horribly cruel and illegal in countries with even the most basic laws on animal welfare.
It's fine for you to disagree with me, but it's not fine for you to say that I behaved in a way that is not at all how I behaved.
BTW, if I'd been so disruptive, don't you think they would have asked me to leave or had the security guards (they had plenty of them) remove me? In fact, Mr. McDowell welcomed me to stay once my question was over, and I was able to approach and speak directly w/Mr. Bailey at the end.
You can check out www.BloodyBurberry.com to see what Mr. Bailey is paying others to do to animals.
OK Sorry Bruce. Whichway does not support fur farming in anyway, but as Mr McDowell said, your comments were totally inappropriate and off topic for the occasion, no matter how valid your opinion, and my comments only expressed that you caused discomfort for Mr Bailey and it was the wrong forum to do so in.
Admittedly you should be thanking Whichway for the publicity you've been given, and clearly you are pleased with it, as you have obviously been googling yourself. Good luck to you and your causes.
Whichway x
Thank you for correcting the record.
What Bailey is supporting is immoral, and as I said at the event, he has lied to us before--promising to meet and then reneging. I have the letters from Burberry where they say that he will not meet with us, which he lied about at the event--again. He is an animal abuser and a liar, and he should be called out on it.
I suspect that if he were farming dogs and cats, you would have a different attitude about it, but there is no difference, morally, between farming dogs, cats, mink, sable, etc. It's hideously cruel, it's illegal in the UK, and Bailey is calling the shots, much like a contract killer who orders torture and killing while not actually doing it himself.
I love that you think I have a google alert for just my first name. :-)
Post a Comment