Wren designer Melissa Coker designed this British 60's style A-line dress --and its at Target for $79.99
What's strange is upon seeing an email from the Wren team this AM, is that this was actually the first I heard of the collaboration. Don't designer deals usually come along with a huge marketing push?
Upon further investigation, as much as I could at 6:00AM, trying hard to focus my gummy eyeballs on miniature iPhone type, I noticed that Wren only has one dress available at the super discount retail chain.
A real journalist would've done more to investigate. I simply checked Target's press release section--and still found nothing to answer my question as to why one dress only as opposed to a full collection. If I did not have to go to Lond Island City and assist on a shoot for a foreign language Vogue perhaps I could fire off an email to Wren and ask just that, "Why one lone dress for Tar-ghey?" Early morning incoherence on my part? Perhaps.
But I did gather this, from another blog...that the dress is part of the Target Red Hot Shop Online...for another blog. So this blog...has no new information, but hopefully a dash of entertainment value. It will be interesting to see which other designers we can get a piece of via Daily Candy's co-branded Red Hot Shop for Target. It thrills me to see that it supports smaller designers as well.
About Wren:
Wren is named after Jenny Wren, a character who makes dolls in Charles Dicken's Our Mutual Friend. The company was founded in 2007 by designer Melissa Coker, an Illinois native who interned at Helmut Lang, then when on to work in editorial at top fashion magazines such as Vogue, W and Details. Her career in design launched when she was asked to consult on corporate apparel.
Since, Wren has remained a bit under the radar but has a steady group of devoted fans who love the feminine and playful sophistication of the designs.
Lanvin's collaboration was a trending topic on Twitter when it was announced. News and retail blogs were all over it, as were fashion blogs with headlines like "Holy crap! Lanvin for H&M," Lanvin for H&M, Yes Please!" and "Lanvin for H&M...EEEK!"
Many of the stories read like the press release put out by H&M. Alber Elbaz's carefully worded quote was in every article (including this one) “When H&M approached us to do this collaboration, they asked if I could actually translate the dream that we created at Lanvin to a bigger audience. It wasn’t a project about a dress for less ... I loved the idea that H&M is going luxury rather than Lanvin is going public.”
Why Lanvin would want to be synonymous with a passing trend de la creme baffles me. I would argue that this deal is more beneficial to H&M than Lanvin. How many of the masses remember that the fast fashion chain did deals with Viktor & Rolf, Karl Lagerfeld and Stella McCartney? Perhaps the hardcore fashion fans, but if I ask my cousins who shop Americas malls on occasion they may respond: "Who?"
Supposing that the gains for these designer luxury brands is a lust for the label and a little bit of change, I'm not so sure this works. Perhaps for new or emerging designers, it may.
So, Is it dramatic to call Lanvin's decision couture "suicide"? I'm not announcing this as the fall of the company, but rather, a stray from the fundamentals of what founder Jeanne Lanvin intended. She made high quality unique garments for those willing to pay the asking price. Does mean Lanvin has plans to depart from soley lux to the masses? And with that is the company about the bottom line (much like other labels) an no longer about the tradition?
Success for such brands like Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Hermes is simply that you cant have it (unless you want to fork over $8,000 for a handbag.) How many of the flock of shoppers will actually plop down a credit card for the real deal Lanvin, just because they were introduced to it at H&M? From rumors of unsold merchandise being incinerated, to frivolous law suits to keep others from even mentioning the brands, to Chanel's list of approved celebrities and prohibition to lend to television shows. They don't sell to you or I and they are not trying. When you save 4 years salary to buy a piece, then the idea is that it will mean more than Chanel for X discount chain.
H&M's genius marketing may have us believing that the fast-fashion retailer is parlaying into "affordable luxury. " Though, if all of us fashion fiends can just come down for a second and think about what that really means: If shoppers think they are going to get a Lanvin quality dress for $19.99, I'm willing to make the declaration it wont be the case. More as, the line for Lanvin will probably cost more than H&M's normal racks of merchandise, much like when Jimmy Choo for H&M sold $100 pieces in the fashion chain.
Its not that I'm against design for all. Rather, in the past when this blogger became excited, I was left disapponted. The collections usually fail to resemble or even capture the essence of the designer's aesthetic. It was always the same quick stitch cheap fabrics. The designs always differ just enough to remind us that we are not actually buying Proenza Schouler, but Proenza for Target. Alas, I hang my head as I grab a pack of chewing gum and batteries at the moving belt check out line, and depart. Did I really think Jean Paul Gaultier would let me purchase a Madonna quality lingerie suit for less?
Though, that is why Lanvin and H&M carefully calculate these collections to be in select stores, for only a one time run. According to H&M's site, the company currently has 2000 stores, only 200 of which will be carrying Lanvin for H&M.
With no plans to continue to sell "commercial" why should people care? For a minute we do care -- can you resist what you think is exclusive? Sneak peak videos, press releases and other hype.
