On the contrary - I think the lack of Britishness has been, in large part, THE problem facing Burberry since Bailey’s departure.
Maybe the issue should be how to define Britishness in the 2020´s.
I found Riccardo’s vision of Burberry quite fitting in essence to the spirit of London. It wasn’t necessarily British but very London to me. Even if it lacked a focused vision, it was always about the duality of formality and streetwear. That’s what for me London is. That was maybe a representation by LFW’s biggest brand of the essence of British fashion.
I think Lee’s vision of Burberry was very British. It’s not what aspirational fashion from a British brand meant in the 2000’s and 2010’s but it’s utilitarian, it has that spleen, that quirk and that freshness that I find is quite British.
And in reality, Burberry under Bailey wasn’t really British from the moment he presented in LFW. The romantism of his work that people like to associate to Burberry died with fall 2009. He definetly had hits at LFW but it was also at that time that his vision was challenged and felt redundant. The formula of belted jackets, seasonal prints, platform shoes and all felt tired.
He then after the merging of all the lines, went for a more casual route, streetwear inspired and Burberry became more of the big advertiser show to go than the leading fashion and retail voice it was.
I think Bailey’s vision of Britishness wasn’t the moment anymore. Suki watherhouse, Cara Delevigne, The Eddy « I don’t remember his name » kind of aesthetic didn’t match with the Zeitgeist of a Britishness that was pushing forward a more diverse cultural scene…
You’d sweat your t*ts off wearing anything from this collection during the s/s months
The good thing is that it arrives in stores in February so it leaves 4 months before the « swearing your t*ts off » days starts, to wear it.
