‘Contradiction’ and ‘Rebirth’

Fashion Review: At London Fashion Week, Christopher Bailey for Burberry

The Burberry collection for spring 2015 included abbreviated denim jackets and floaty skirts.CreditTom Jamieson for The New York Times

LONDON — The Scottish question may be the biggest question in Britain right now, but in the smaller world within a world that is fashion, another issue loomed large on Monday — one with its own set of implications and repercussions.

Could Christopher Bailey, Burberry’s chief creative officer and, as of last May, chief executive, do what no designer had done before: move seamlessly between aesthetics and accounts without sacrificing the one for the other; prove art could coexist with commerce (and, more pertinently, quarterly reports) in one person?

Little wonder Mr. Bailey said backstage when discussing his spring show, his first real aesthetic statement after adjusting to his new dual role, that he was thinking about “contradiction” and “rebirth.”

This translated as a nostalgia-infused collection of abbreviated and peplumed denim jackets, the hem finished in fringes of shearling, and 1970s suede trenches with patent collars over dégradé pleated and collaged chiffon dresses, some dangling oversize paillettes. Prints were Impressionist watercolors or snatches of titles and insects (honey bees, dragonflies) taken from the covers of 1940s books and blown up on gabardine to give strapless dresses and trenches a naïve, crafty feel. And it was all paired with leather sneakers or Birkenstocks the colors of butterfly wings, and set against a live solo performance by James Bay.

It was often lyrical, and occasionally lovely, but unquestionably repetitive; two notes, the tough and the filigree, outerwear and flower fairy dresses, iterated over and over. Granted, at least they had rhythm (except for some weird insert of “glossy leather” at the hip of a chiffon tea frock that simply weighed the whole thing down like a wedge of Edam cheese), and those coats should sell and sell, but in the end, it was limited. It lacked layers (metaphoric, not literal) and dimension. But as a statement of intent, it was a promising (re)start.


View the original article here