When I saw that there was going to be a children’s fashion week, I decided not to cover it for the fashion pages of The Independent.
I don’t really understand the want or need for children’s designer clothes, when things may only fit for a couple of months. Isn’t it a bit grotesque that children should be dictated to in such a way? It conjures images of little American girls looking like scary painted dolls in beauty pageants – wrong on so many levels. The same frivolity could be said for buying a designer handbag or an Aston Martin, say. Yes, no one needs those things, they are partly bought to display one’s wealth, but the difference is they are bought by adults who have made the choice for themselves.
It’s true designers are giving far more attention to children’s lines – Lanvin launched Lanvin Petite last year. Prices are eye-wateringly expensive and the dresses wouldn’t go down well in your local soft-play centre. Dolce & Gabbana did things differently when they launched children’s wear last season, including christening gowns. Maybe it’s not so disgusting when a beautiful lace dress is passed down through generations of the family for that special occasion.
When Stella McCartney and Diane von Furstenburg ventured into children’s wear for Gap, the prices were only a few pounds more than the store’s average children’s clothes.
Children don’t need stylists: the beauty of youth means pairing a red and white spotty dress with a pair of green and yellow striped tights looks adorable not insane.