The fashion lie of Ivanka Trump is over



[ad_1]

The fashion brand Ivanka Trump is in the process to close its doors. His death was pronounced Tuesday afternoon.

Over the past two years, the brand has been hammered for commercial practices that disagree with the political rhetoric of its namesake. Employees will lose their jobs. Ivanka Trump, the woman, will focus on her work in Washington. Partisan politics will roar. The world of fashion will survive.

The women's ready-to-wear brand, founded in 2011, was built around the public figure of Ivanka: the great blonde leader with her famous name, a mother of three with a glamorous lifestyle . adorably – curator for Instagram. The label was addressed to young white collar workers, and the collections were filled with sheath dresses, simple silhouettes in feminine floral prints and office shoes. There was nothing particularly unique about the products. Indeed, the company has been accused of having dropped other brands. But there was nothing wrong with the clothes either. And that, along with price and marketing, was what made them sell. The company was aiming to dress up a group of women that most of Seventh Avenue avoided, because designers love making clothes for daring hipsters and wealthy CEOs. The middle on a budget will want. The fashion brand Ivanka Trump addressed managers, bureaucrats, assistants, junior executives and others. For about $ 150, a woman could buy a perfectly fitting work dress that made her look a bit stylish. He gave her an alternative to the ghetto of Ann Taylor, a deliberately fashionable fashion break from J. Crew, a respite from the mass fiasco.

The Ivanka Trump label has sold a story about professional glamor and mothers who have … All-in-all at a Upper East Side co-op. The story told was that of an idealized female worker whose light and airy home was always filled with fresh peonies and hydrangeas and whose daily schedule was a symphony of organization of color: morning run, board meeting, parent-parent conference. The mark was Ivanka. Or at least the impeccably coiffed version of herself that she introduced to the world.


The low-priced Ivanka Trump brand was aimed at young active women. (Shannon Stapleton / Reuters)

The brilliance dissipated when Ivanka, the daughter, came to Washington as a counselor to her father, the president, who said that he wanted to put the ### America first and boast the importance of manufacturing in the United States. States. Because his brand was not a mere vanity project, and earning money was his goal, his name was licensed to the manufacturers, who did the work abroad, where the Work was cheap. Business was not good, but it was profitable. In 2017, she published a book offering women tips on how to be their best advocates and to defend their interests in the workplace, while the company that bore her name did not offer her the same benefits as his book

[ The Ivanka Board for the workers who have already done it well enough]

Politics, with all its hot air and boastfulness, has makes Ivanka Trump a marching contradiction. By extension, this made the sins of his company simple. The buyers have boycotted it. The trolls of social media have attacked him. Department stores have abandoned the brand

In truth, none of these business practices is particularly unusual in the fashion industry, although they are increasingly recognized as imperfect, unsustainable and even immoral. Consumers are also adept at ignoring the dark belly of fashion when it benefits them. Most sneakers are manufactured abroad. Fast fashion feeds on depressed wages. The dumps are stuffed with our rubbish.

What made anger about this notable brand is not the nature of its business practices. It was the hypocrisy that outraged the critics. Yet there are many fashionable too. A large number of brands that operate Americana are manufactured abroad. Many brands are accused of copying. But only the Ivanka Trump brand has Ivanka.

[Ivanka, Inc.: How the practices of the first daughter’s fashion line collide with political principles]

The political scenario was intimately linked to the fashion narrative of good-looking workwear, affordable prices, and women's rhetoric. She was supposed to be the shining beacon of women in the new administration, the voice of the family, the Trump-whisperer. It's hard to say what made people more angry: the fashion company that shunned American workers or the founder of the company that disappointed a contingent of US voters.

In the end, both grievances became one. And a fashion lie has become a political lie.

[ad_2]
Source link