Urban Outfitters opened in Brighton back in November taking over the old Borders bookshop (R.I.P) space in Churchill Square. I’ve managed to avoid thus far as that particular entry point to Churchill always makes me feel like a salmon swimming up stream, but with such a big retail space and hoards of people coming out clutching bags I couldn’t avoid having a peek and seeing a) what they’d done with the interior and b) what lines they’re carrying.

My UO days date back to the 90s visiting the stores in NYC, particularly the one in Seaport. I would describe it’s early incarnations as a sort of trendy Ikea with clothes. A place for college students to get discount candles, throws etc and inexpensive vintage looking T-Shirts and cool sugary pink Korean pop-culture nic-nacs. When the brand came to the UK and I lived in London, I found myself drifting into the one in Covent Garden and Oxford Street  for a window shop. I understood the market for the stock, but didn’t want to be charged the  inflated U.K prices  for things I’d pick up myself in charity shops and on holiday.  TBH I was staggered at the price hike and rebrand into a self consciously hip fully signed up member of the high street. #avoid.

The company also now own the more sophisticated Anthropologie of which we’ve only one in the UK on Regent Street. The home ware is gorgeous, although the clothes are a tad conservative for my taste, think Boden on acid, Laura Ashley on speed. They also own the clothing label FreePeople which produces divine L.A hippy /West Coast-chic stuff. I think ASOS stock a bit and I like a lot. I’m especially fond of the catalogue photography and aesthetic but have never bought anything as it’s a tad over priced.

But what’s going on with the designer lines in Brighton’s U.O? I saw A.P.C Madras (worship!), Chloe , Vanessa Bruno, t.b.a and Vivienne Westwood on the rails. These are v grown up brands and stocked else where in the city in smaller boutiques in the lanes. Paradoxically the OU Brighton store was totally chokka with under-25s. In fact, on the day I went in I’d say the average age of shopper was 19. Are people getting a lot more pocket money these days?

If want A.P.C I don’t want to buy it from a shop full of local teenagers and be served by yoot with a dreadful A-symmetrical haircut in treggins who know nada about grown-ups fashion. I want to go to the nice small boutique and feel I’m buying a piece that half the student population of Brighton isn’t wearing. What are A.P.C thinking? What are U.O thinking?

I’m sure the store overall will do well as it presents an accessible  and neatly packaged version of the vintage second hand aesthetic that was so popular last year. The trend has truly filtered to the high-street and for the brand, I guess it’s a case of right time right place, but I for one, am very confused about who Urban Outfitters is.

The next day I dragged a friend in to a branch to show her and we both came out with a pair of these (£25).

Cue facebook update to spread the word, followed by derision and scoffing by my following that M&S are not trendy; I’m just getting older.

M&S have done so well building a myth of sensuality around their food product line and as for the clothing, have enjoyed the Twiggy effect. They now have a new million pound campaign with Mylene Klass, VV Brown, Danni Minogue and Lisa Butcher. The message is glamorous and glossy, yet with connotations of bland Saturday night family entertainment and a Daily Mail readership it’s confusing to me. It’s not fashion. They traverse all demographics offending no one with their middle ground signification; not exactly edgy and definitely not style. And yet M&S have collaborated with the likes of fashionista favourite Patricia Field in the past ( 2008 I think?) and attempted brand synergy through their association with Vogues Fashion night out in September. I do wonder about this? What do regular M&S shoppers make of it all and is the brand mediating confusing mixed messages?

I had a quick scan on the interweb of dreams and found folk think of M&S as the grande dame of the high street. It carries connotations of heritage, britishness, value and quality. All good. However, Per Una is loathed by stylists. I read a few scathing comments about how in the wake of the Madonna effect on the 50+ market M&S should just do away with it. “Oh look there’s Twiggy, aww love her” can’t sustain the brand forever and one camel coloured leather skirt does not a new myth make.

As for me, am I get older? Of course. Less stylish, mais non!  And as Coco Channel once said “style never goes out of fashion”.

Alas, alak, been super busy at uni with the 3rd year dissertations, marking, and an in-house post-grad conference so no time for blogging recently. I’ve had a paper accepted for The Transforming Audiences conference in September, at Westminster, and although I was accepted into The Emerging Scholars programme at the IAMCR in July in Mexico City, (and totally stoked about it), after a long, hard think I decided enough is enough, and I’m not going to do anything this summer which deviates from sitting my viva. Even more good news, although I must remain schtum, I think an external examiner has been identified. So watch this space…

A topic which I meant to write something on about 6 weeks ago is an article which appeared in The Sunday Times Style supplement back in April called “The rise of the Aldirati”.

They’re affluent, middle class — and shop in discount stores. Meet the new breed of savvy consumers who are turning belt-tightening into a fine art

I love the word Aldirati and ’The Italian’ told me the other day to update my blog because American Apparel is no longer his favourite shop. Apparently his favourite shop is now Aldi, followed closely by the pound shop.

So taken was I with this word, that I decided to use the article in a discourse analysis workshop I ran the following Tuesday.  My own analysis is that the article is full of brand names and marketing lingo that construct a lifestyle than is quite the opposite to belt tightening and the term actually plays out through the cultural codes of fashion. I’m also fascinated by  how legitimacy is given to the notion of no frills affluence by consistent reference to marketing institutions and consumer experts.Not quite an echo chamber, more a small voice shouting into a bucket. So are the Aldirati just exercising common sense, or is there something more along the lines of ‘ironic consumption’ going on? It is something to do with what Bourdieu calls the ideology of natural taste. Why are the middle classes obtaining gratification in low end consumption habits? Ironic distance allows the Aldirati to buy cheap parma ham whilst avoiding  dirtying themselves with the cheap food = obesity = lazy citizen , helpless poor person who can only be saved by Jamie Oliver or a reality TV program that convinces them towards their better selves, whilst not killing their children sort of thing.

In 2009 Vogue started up the more dash than cash  feature  again after a break of many years and what with the net-a-porter.com team  launching theoutnet.com (love love love!!!) there is something very interesting going on  with clothing and economics, and  I hope to be examining the relationship between the fashion industry and the more cultural manifestations of the recession soon.

Good ones to be found on Almost PhD,Media @LSE &social sim

Here’s one from mine. It’s only one chapter, more to come I’m sure.

Love wordle.

From the time I began my own research in 2005 this is one of the most engaging titles I’ve read, perhaps since Health and Potters Rebel Sell. I’ve found it very useful in considering the responses to the consumer interviews I conducted and the practice of what I’m calling double distinction, drawing on Bourdieu’s seminal theory. I’m looking at how participants justify their consumption through individual lifestyle practices, and through passing judgement and distancing themselves from other peoples consumption. More of this one day, but lets wait for a successful viva, before I spill.

Not really to do with my research, but I found the discussion of ethical consumption, worthiness and moralizing particularly interesting and loved the case study ?of US clothing label American Apparrel in the book. I’ve been a tentative fan of American Apparel for some time, but being in my 30s I find some of the lines a little bit too nu rave /juvenile for my own taste. However my boyf who I shall refer to as The Italian here on in in this blog is 5 years older than me and he declared it his new favourite shop the other day. American Apparel use non-model models in their campaigns and the images are often sexual in a readers wives, 70 soft porn kind of way. This allows for an ironic consumptionvia the brand, and for them to move away from the stuffy connotations of worthiness and yogurt weaver fashion slow mo remit of most ethical labels. Really interesting to me as I’m often moaning to my fashion friends that most ethical fashion I’ve come across, offends my style sensibilities.

As I’m on a fashion tip today I wanted to share this beautiful print on my new Echo scarf. I was out scouring with my fashion friend The Forbes, last Saturday and we came across a load of gorgeous scarves in local boutique Sirene. Echo are a family company based in NY, and these prints are from their archives from the 1920s.

Accessories are brilliant for updating an outfit without spending very much money, so it’s no surprise given the current climate that scarves are going to be a big thing. Not everyone can afford an Hermes so a find like this ‘lovely’ from Echo makes my day.

Remember a while ago I mentioned a blog post and a comment about “I don’t want to have a conversation with my toothpaste”? Well I’m preparing to give a lecture on branding and web 2.0 to a group of university students and when I was putting some thoughts together yesterday I came across it again.
Here’s the link.
I was reading through the Forrester social media report from February and it got me thinking once again about the use of the term conversation and the marketing industry employing certain words and phrases to constitute a discourse. Coincidently I am working on a chapter at the moment about consumers and producers or rather consumers as producers. I’ve been nurturing this idea for some time, but approach it with my discourse analyst hat on. Discourses I believe are something we do, they are performed and as such have an effect because they shape the way we think and act, but there is a metaphysical paradox, because they are self fulfilling. After all if we say something is being talked about – it’s being talked about. I’m arguing consumers as producers constitutes a discourse in its own right.

Because I am so busy writing it up, I’ve decided to pass on submitting a couple of abstracts for upcoming conferences in the Summer, which is a bit pants. I simply don’t have the time at the moment. Boo. However the end is in sight now and, my supervision meeting last week gave me a lot of confidence that the work is up to speed and meeting the right standards. I have agreed to the lecture though and am REALLY looking forward to it. It’s been a while since I’ve had the opportunity to speak in front of a large audience and, undergrads first thing in the morning can be challenging. It’s going to be a lot of fun.

Finally, an oldey but a goodey. At the beginning of my PhD I cam across a short article by David Gauntlett about completing a PhD, so I reread it last week. There are loads of guides on the market on how to survive, or how to write a thesis and, I’ve had a flick through a few. In retrospect none hit the mark as far as I’m concerned, but David’s article is pretty spot on.