oh, it really looks like that?

Anyone who bothered to do a bit of fashion-clicking here and there on the Internet would have known about the famous leak of the British Vogue April cover, with Kate Moss wearingwhat is supposedly her much-anticipated collection for Topshop.

I saw the cover a while back (then posted very discreetly, because British Vogue threatened to sue anyone on copyright grounds if the cover was posted) on another blog -

And my first thought was, "That has to be some mock-up of the real thing, because that's not a very interesting dress."

And lo and behold, here's what I saw in The Telegraph's fashion pages today -

Yep, this is really it. The article went on to describe the collection -

"A key piece in the 80-piece collection is a pretty blue and grey poppy print short silk dress (£45) inspired by Moss's vast collection of vintage dresses. A yellow and black striped busboy jacket (£65), waistcoat (£35) and micro-shorts (£30) are typical of her taste for turning masculine clothes into something incredibly sexy.

There is also a steel grey pinstripe blazer (£65) with matching boy-cut trousers (£45) and a white shirt scrawled with her friend's names that was inspired by Moss's own school shirt."

And further down -

"There are also pieces such as a tie black tuxedo waistcoat evening dress (£75) that are similar to the glamorous party clothes the model has worn over the years. Skinny jeans - a trend for which Moss was largely responsible - will come in a range of colours (£50). The most expensive piece in the collection is a soft black leather jacket at £200."

Hmmm, sounds like stuff the Topshop design team is perfectly capable of whipping up themselves (but then again, given that their current stock seems to consist ENTIRELY of smocks, maybe not), and this part of the article completely confirmed my thoughts -

"Moss may not have actually designed the collection personally (she has taken her own clothes and other vintage finds into a design team for "inspiration") but there is a very clear Kate Moss signature throughout the line."

I see. The article seems very gushy and defensive of Ms Moss's work (I don't know if you could call it that, I'll like to know more about the whole process) for Topshop -

"While some pieces may not look extraordinary, Moss's selling power is well-documented. She has a talent for kick-starting fashion trends, popularising everything from a Balenciaga handbag and Diesel denim hotpants to Wellington boots by Hunter. When the model was photographed carrying a £2.99 charity bag from Superdrug last year sales increased 10-fold."

That's enough to justify a rumoured £3 million paycheck? Ms Moss always looks very cool and everything, but this whole Topshop deal seems more like a publicity stunt than anything. The clothes sound nice, but not particularly exciting, and certainly you don't need to hire Ms Moss to come up with it. It's a very commercial attempt at trying to profit from the Kate Moss mystique.

Designers are inspired by Ms Moss all the time, but it's really about the attitude, not actually duplicating pieces from her wardrobe. In our hands, hotpants will be hotpants, and probably ill-advised for most not-skinny people. Besides, the cool thing about Ms Moss is that she wears whatever she wants. It doesn't really have anything to do with the item of clothing. We've all seen Wellington boots before.

This whole circus of selling style is seriously reaching a ridiculous peak. Unless the collection turns out to the absolutely brilliant, it's boo to Vogue for even bothering to put it on their cover.

The only one to benefit, is of course, Ms Moss herself -

"It's so weird selling my own clothes," the model tells the editor of Vogue, Alexandra Shulman. "Who'd have believed it?"

Yeah, and getting paid gazillions for it. Nice one, Kate Moss.

Pictures and article excerpts from www.telegraph.co.uk; double picture from http://www.fashionologie.com/fashionologie/2007/01/index.html


Popular Posts