The crazy thing is Burberry already did establish that narrative in the 00s-2010s under Christopher Bailey, it was so successful they literally snatched their brand image out from the clutches of the chavs (yes, snobby but we all know it was not a desirable association for them)
They really made themselves one of the hottest brands of that era by making themselves The Most British Brand , and they did that by envisioning British = classic but cool, a little quirky and incredibly romantic and highly desirable - you wanted to have those qualities, and the clothes could bring you closer to them. (One look at their ad campaigns from 2004 onwards should give you an idea).
I had high hopes of Riccardo Tisci but he repeatedly chose to disappoint and also to throw away the romance of that idealised Britishness that made Burberry so appealing in the first place, and Daniel Lee and his associated rebrand isn't doing much better, there's obviously an idea there but it got lost in the gimmicky prints and nasty harsh 'Burberry blue'. Though the last collection was a bit of an improvement, I get what you mean about "you're British, so what?" - Bailey-era campaigns and marketing made being British look desirable, romantic and a little cool. Now it seems like the Lee-era marketers are afraid to suggest those things for fear of thinkpieces. Which is not an attractive quality!
exactly—they approached the concept with the lowest hanging fruit. The fear—from television writing to creative direction—drives me crazy. It's placed us in this awful middle-of-the-road saying-nothing land.
The crazy thing is Burberry already did establish that narrative in the 00s-2010s under Christopher Bailey, it was so successful they literally snatched their brand image out from the clutches of the chavs (yes, snobby but we all know it was not a desirable association for them)
They really made themselves one of the hottest brands of that era by making themselves The Most British Brand , and they did that by envisioning British = classic but cool, a little quirky and incredibly romantic and highly desirable - you wanted to have those qualities, and the clothes could bring you closer to them. (One look at their ad campaigns from 2004 onwards should give you an idea).
I had high hopes of Riccardo Tisci but he repeatedly chose to disappoint and also to throw away the romance of that idealised Britishness that made Burberry so appealing in the first place, and Daniel Lee and his associated rebrand isn't doing much better, there's obviously an idea there but it got lost in the gimmicky prints and nasty harsh 'Burberry blue'. Though the last collection was a bit of an improvement, I get what you mean about "you're British, so what?" - Bailey-era campaigns and marketing made being British look desirable, romantic and a little cool. Now it seems like the Lee-era marketers are afraid to suggest those things for fear of thinkpieces. Which is not an attractive quality!
exactly—they approached the concept with the lowest hanging fruit. The fear—from television writing to creative direction—drives me crazy. It's placed us in this awful middle-of-the-road saying-nothing land.
"Creative doesn’t need to be pulled from nowhere. It can be iterative, self-contained, and result in the meaningful." !!!!!!
:)