I think its interesting that you compare and contrast the two. While they don't share the same aesthetic, I certainly think both are interested in the role sensuality plays in a man's life. Where Thom interests me the most is that he perhaps is drawing on the laylines and history of menswear. The board knows his clothes are up in London at the V&A: the selections are quite mesmerizing and engaging, I had my nose pressed up against the glass, the details are unreal. And yet it would be dishonest to say they weren't challenging to wear but only because they seem incongruent with the hustle and bustle of modern life (which even he seemed to recognize with the video he presented; much of what the models were doing seemed like religious ritual, they were isolated, divorced and the clothes fit those tasks). Tom's peacock (at Gucci) was much slicker...hmm. I almost want to say that even with his menswear, Tom was designing for women while with Mr. Browne, it really is a men's club. That's where he could very well be the most effective, it's his gaze, his point of view. It almost seems there are no women in that world, kind of like how people say Marc Jacobs and Marni are about women dressing for other women, not about seduction, per se. That's what feels fresh to me about it. The end result isn't always effective but its his point of view that could very well keep in the game long enough for him to...reach a balence.
