Almost two weeks ago Donald Trump was elected president, much of the news surrounding his monumental win has focused on snowflakes protesting the very democracy that elected their presidential candidate of choice – President Obama – to two terms, or a “who’s who” of Trump’s cabinet.
However, The New York Times Fashion & Style section tells the story of how the fashion world was thrown into a tizzy because they would no longer be styling or dressing what they thought would be the first female president of the United States. Instead, fashion designers and stylists will have to settle for a new First Lady – the stunning and statuesque former model – Melania Trump. (Who knows? Maybe they were secretly pining to dress Bill Clinton as the “First Man?”)
In an article titled "Is Fashion’s Love Affair With Washington Over?," Vanessa Friedman recently shed some light on the fashion world freakout. Speaking about Clinton’s farewell speech, clad in one of her traditional Ralph Lauren pantsuits, this time, the color purple, Friedman believed that color not only symbolized the coming together or red and blue (Republican and Democrat), but it also symbolized “ the end of what might have been an extraordinary relationship. And possibly the end of fashion’s seat at the power table.”
That’s some pretty deep symbolism.
Friedman explains that “more than any other industry, fashion had pledged its troth to Mrs. Clintonand cited examples such as Vogue and The W magazines formally endorsing her, or how designers Diane von Furstenberg and Anna Wintour raised millions for the Clinton campaign in their swanky homes. Friedman also called out the fact that no designer has come forward to lend their services designing or styling the new First Lady – not that Melania Trump would need any help, as she seemed to have done just fine during the entire campaign.
In somewhat of an ironic twist, Friedman dumps on Mrs. Trump because, “all the clothes she wore on the campaign trail seem to have been part of a shopping spree, as opposed to a strategic plan. There’s nothing wrong with that. Arguably it is part of what makes a woman who lives in a gilded penthouse seem more normal (she buys, just like everyone else!) But it reflects her distance from the industry.”
It's the liberal media game: Heads I win, tails you lose. Whatever decision you made is wrong on some level. The fact that Mrs. Trump’s clothes came from the rack makes her relatable to the average American (or almost) – something Democrats used to pride themselves on until this past election proved to them otherwise.
Although some designers have declined to comment on whether they would offer to dress Mrs. Trump, a designer by the name of Sophie Theallet issued a letter that she and her brand would be boycotting the Trumps, and urged other designers to do the same. Theallet has dressed First Lady Michelle Obama in the past. In the letter, she writes:
“I am well aware it is not wise to get involved in politics…That said, as a family-owned company, our bottom line is not just about money. We value our artistic freedom and always humbly seek to contribute to a more humane, conscious and ethical way to create in this world.”
Perhaps Ms. Theallet should consider adding good old American democracy to her values list.
In the end, it may not even matter if a designer doesn’t offer their services to the Trump family. The incoming First Lady is a former model that knows a thing or two about the fashion world – same with Ivanka Trump, who has her own successful eponymous clothes line. (Boycott threats have led to some online retailers to dump Ivanka products.)
If anything, the decision for designers not to lend their services could backfire on them and turn out to be the greatest gift to the Trumps - by allowing them to advertise Ivanka's brand during Trump’s reign at the White House.
Rag & Bone chief executive Marcus Wainwright seemed to have the most commonsense approach when asked if he would dress the First Lady. “It would be hypocritical to say no to dressing a Trump. If we say we are about inclusivity and making American manufacturing great again, then we have to put that before personal political beliefs.”
