Simply Vera for Kohls: A High-Low Tightrope

A lot of fashionista types and sartorial snobs profess to be sick of designer/mass market collaborations, but I know personally I'm always very interested in them - if not for the opportunity to buy something created by a high-end designer for less, then for the collision of a diverse, mass-market audience with a more rarefied aesthetic. (Not to mention the class collision of the cosmopolitan luxury elite with the more economically-challenged majority of this country).

So it was with great interest that I read the long, informative New York Times article about Vera Wang's line for Kohl's, published in today's Business section. Not only did I learn some interesting facts (Isaac Mizrahi's line for Target brings in $100 million a year for them), but it was a glimpse into the process of a designer needing to think of a new customer beyond her own audience, as well as a corporation getting an education into the tricksy, flightly question of "What is fashionable?" What the article makes clear is that the venture is a huge risk for both, but with potential for great reward: Vera Wang gets her cash infusion to expand her rapidly growing brand, and Kohl's get a certain cachet and visibility that it didn't have before.

But what's really most fascinating about the article is the subtext of exactly who the Simply Vera customer is: is it the middle-American, budget-conscious, basics-loving suburban mother that shops at Kohls, or is it your typical rabid fashionista consumer, who has proven to trek almost anywhere in search of that perfect piece? The collection that Wang has designed for Kohls has generally gotten high marks by the fashion press, with WWD calling it "spectacular." (I already really adore the midnight blue chiffon dress with ribbon straps, and I know people are buzzing about the gold bubble skirt, which, by the way, will be made in limited quantities and available for $68.) And, over-cluttered styling aside, the pieces themselves have that "ballerina grunge" thing that Wang does so well in her ready-to-wear collection. The whole range promises to have a certain breadth to appeal not just to fashionistas, but to all sorts. But will Kohls' customer fall for it,or will she keep reaching for her sturdy, practical basics?

The whole thing, along with the recent Bitten range that Sarah Jessica Parker put out for discounter Steve and Barry's, got me thinking about the democratization of high-low fashion and the overall American aesthetic. The Target/Go collection have been highly successful because the projected customer for them (young women, generally) are for the most part pretty fashion-adventurous and aspirational, and their target audience already shop in the stores for daily, basic things like toothpaste, mouthwash and the like. And the various initiatives for H&M, Uniqlo and even the Gap have been aimed at gaining credibility among a very fashion-aware customer that either already shops there or shops at their rivals. Bitten seems to be successful in launching a womenswear component to a successful store that already sold men's casualwear, in part because it took no aesthetic risks but provided casual basics at a price that honestly beat all others for the most part. (I also think that a lot of people responded to its inclusive, "something for all women" democratic message.) But the Vera Wang/Kohls collaboration is interesting: it's not only probably going to get some people who have never stepped into the store to check it out, but is attempting in some way to broaden and widen its existing customers' "comfort level" with fashion, and the Times article underlines this subtext quite well. Here is an "auteur" designer on some level who wants to retain her signature while at the same time appeal to a somewhat conservative customer.

Or is she really that conservative? Fashion folks like to rank on Middle America, or rather the America that doesn't have so much disposable income at its fingertips, but the truth of the matter is that people dress like shit everywhere. And often what separates a fashionista from New York from one from, say, in some dinky town in Wisconsin are no longer questions of knowledge and information (knowing who did what dress and where to get it) but questions of actual access and price, a question which is rapidly changing with e-commerce and initiatives like this. (I was going to say the "realities of everyday life" makes an impact, but it's clear from seeing pictures of the likes of Ugg boots and winter coats in the summer that fashionistas don't let nature and reality get in the way of their outfits.) And I always keep in mind that one of the most lauded dressers in the world once said of growing up with her friends in her own suburban, blue-collar hometown, "They were really fashion-conscious because they were suburban, and that's the way suburban people are. They're more fashion-conscious, and they're more trendy." (The little philosopher's name is Kate Moss, by the way.) The truth is, the appetite for visually appealing, unique yet not stupid-looking design is strong everywhere, and the appeal and success of the Simply Vera will boil down to whether or not it looks good and makes a lady go "I want that," is of decent quality, and of a price where the old and new Kohls customer can feel like they can have a little fun and experiment without making their weekly budgets go haywire. It's a tricky tightrope to walk, but if it works, Vera Wang has expanded her brand into what could be potential Ralph Lauren territory, Kohls gets an identity facelift and everyone can be disheveled grunge ballerinas to their hearts' content.

Posted by Kat in Fashion
Permalink | Stumble This! | Digg This! | |

+ Contact Us
+ HOME

© K. Asharya, L. Barker and L. Faulds. All rights reserved. All content cannot be reproduced without prior written permission.

;