Fashionable London: The Glamour of Italian Fashion vs The Fashion World of Jean Paul Gaultier

For my birthday, The Bloke (yes we're still a thing, believe me we're as surprised as you are) got me a couple of exhibition tickets. When I say 'a couple', I mean single tickets for me to go to two exhibitions I'd been talking about seeing. On my own. He thought they looked boring. Romance.

Anyway, unencumbered by a bored and complaining middle aged man (love you baby) I headed off for a very fashionable Easter Saturday taking in The Glamour of Italian Fashion 1945 - 2014 at the V&A and The Fashion World of Jean Paul Gaultier: From the Sidewalk to the Catwalk at the Barbican.

The Glamour of Italian Fashion is, as the name suggests, an overview of the work of the Italian design houses in the post-war period. And it's a comprehensive overview with menswear and womenswear, couture and ready to wear and shoes and accessories all covered. Set out chronologically, the exhibition is well curated and the explanatory displays throughout the rooms are really informative and accessible (trans: idiot proof).

It's impossible to leave the exhibition without a sense of the enormous debt that fashion in general, and couture in particular, owe to the Italian fashion industry. Some of the pieces are absolutely stunning. The 1950s couture displays were my favourites - the craftsmanship is mind blowing and they're just beautiful to look at. Seeing some of Liz Taylor's favourite Bulgari jewels is a thrill too.

That said, I felt like there could have been more. Yes, the clothes were beautiful but when you consider all that Italian fashion has done, all the drama and the innovation, the exhibition just felt a bit lacking. Good, not great, but worth seeing.

Across town, and the Barbican's Jean Paul Gaultier exhibition is another kettle of fish altogether. The Fashion World is a restrospective of the career of Jean Paul Gaultier. Spread over two floors of the Barbican's art gallery, it covers everything from his couture gowns to stage costumes for the likes of Kylie and Madonna to his corsetry work to his ubiquitous Breton striped tops.

And it's absolutely fantastic.

I don't think I've ever seen an exhibition that I genuinely think is a must see before but this is definitely one. Even if you're not interested in fashion, you should go.

It's not just the breadth of work on display - and how stunning it is - that makes this exhibition something special, though that alone is certainly special. It's the innovative way it's presented. In contrast to the traditional 'here are some things, they're in case or behind a rope, don't get too close and don't even think of taking photos' approach of most exhibitions (The Glamour of Italian Fashion included), The Fashion World shows its pieces on animated mannequins that talk and sing to you. There are no cases or ropes. You're encouraged to get up close and take photos (as long as you don't touch or use flash).

Here's the man himself welcoming guests to his exhibition:

Jean Paul Gaultier greets you in room one of The Fashion World

It's hard to pick a favourite piece from this exhibition, but for me the pieces from JPG's mermaid collection were definitely up there.

Marion Cotillard wore the white version of this stunning gold and black gown to The Oscars a few years ago:

And the detail on this corset is breathtaking:

Detailing generally is one of the things I loved most about all of the work on display. And because the display is so cleverly done you can actually get up close and fully appreciate it - none of the photos in this post were taken with a zoom of any kind. Here are a couple of my favourite bits of detailing:

Jet beading on a denim evening gown

'Pin stripe' made of buttons

Leopard 'skin' made of beads with rhinestone 'claws'

That beaded leopard 'skin' with rhinestone 'claws' has to be seen to be believed.

And of course no Gaultier exhibition would be complete without some of his trademark cone bra corsets, as worn by Madonna:

I really can't praise this exhibition highly enough. See it, see it now.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Book review: Alison Weir - The Six Wives of Henry VIII

I'm not much of a history buff. Like most people of my age who dropped history before degree level and went to state school I know a lot about the two World Wars, a bit about the Suffragettes and not a whole lot else. And when I use the word 'know' I of course mean 'have forgotten'.

Back in the bronze age when I was in primary school we also did a bit about the Tudors. Or to put it more accurately, we also did a bit about Henry VIII. I remember being fascinated then, and a raft of excellent BBC documentaries in 2012 (I think) rekindled that fascination. Last year I also devoured Hilary Mantel's amazing series of historical novels - Wolf Hall and Bring Up The Bodies - that tell the story of Henry's marriages through the eyes of his right hand man Thomas Cromwell.

I noticed in Mantel's bibliography that the name Alison Weir kept cropping up. She'd also cropped up as an expert in some of the BBC docs. So when I spotted The Six Wives of Henry VIII, her collective biography of the six unfortunate women who married Britain's most infamous monarch, on a trip to the massive Foyles on Charing Cross Road I decided I'd give it a go.

My motivation in buying it was largely as a companion piece to whichever Mantel book I was reading at the time. I was interested to know how much of her narrative and her characters were fictionalised. But that does Weir's work a disservice. It's an excellent book in its own right and well worth reading whether or not you've read any of Mantel's books (and if you haven't then why the hell are you wasting your time reading my blog?!)

Everyone knows the story of Henry VIII and his succession of wives - divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived. I imagine/hope most people know the story of Henry divorcing Katherine of Aragon in favour of Anne Boleyn and the resulting split with Rome and religious strife it caused. I guess most people won't know much more than that.

Weir's book concerns itself with telling the stories of all six of the women's lives as well as that of Henry himself and other key figures in the story, including Cromwell. It's told chronologically (so Katherine and Anne do take up more of the book than the other four wives) and researched from contemporary sources.

The quality of the research, to this untrained eye, is impeccable and the analysis offered - informed and balanced, particularly on the more divisive figures involved such as Anne and Mary Boleyn - is one of the major things that makes the book so good. It's also written in an incredibly straightforward and accessible way so that even an idiot like me can follow the story, with its huge cast of characters, and understand the analysis. There's also a refreshing lack of moral judgement of any of the characters too, something that the BBC documentaries and many of the articles analysing Mantel's books suggest is pretty rare on this topic.

For me, the book is at its best when talking about some of the lesser known wives. I particularly enjoyed the chapters about Katherine Parr (who I think is my favourite wife) and Catherine Howard who I didn't really know anything about before reading the book. Mary Boleyn also emerges from the book (and Mantel's) as an amazing character and I've bought Weir's biography of her too.

Overall it's a great read. Did I enjoy it more because of my love for Wolf Hall et al? Probably - it's fascinating to see Mantel's characters as real people, especially as many of the ones I assumed she'd made up are in fact real, especially Thomas Cromwell.

Is it a brilliant book anyway? Yes: it's accessible, interesting and I genuinely learned lots. Highly recommended.

Review: A Small Family Business

Alan Ayckbourn is one of Britain's most prolific playwrights and yet I'd never seen one of his plays until last weekend. Weird. He's also one of those playwrights who doesn't explicitly 'do' politics, and thus does it much better than many who do.

A Small Family Business, playing at the National Theatre, is one of the moral comedies that Ayckbourn is famous for. It tells the story of Jack McCracken, a straightforward, honest family man who takes over his father in law's struggling furniture business with the aim of making honesty the central principle of the way it's run. It's not long until he discovers that his entire family, who all have stakes in the business, are on the take and even have connections to the Mafia. The story tracks the hugely likable Jack in his descent from being genuinely outraged at his family's actions to ultimately being complicit in, and reaping the rewards of, them.

The plot is admittedly slightly predictable. In an early fit of outrage at his family for apparently thinking that stealing is acceptable, Jack says the line: "Thou shalt not kill. What about that then? Let’s have a crack at that one next, shall we?" From that point on, you know where the play is ultimately headed. But for all that it's still supremely - and darkly - enjoyable.

Nigel Lindsay stars as Jack and he is superb. His early play Jack is a lovable, funny and slightly bumbling character whose warmth and energy make him hard to dislike. By the end of the play he has transformed into a Mafia Don-esque figure, sinister and ruthless. Lidsay's performance makes the transformation subtle and believable, something you only really realise is so shocking when reflecting on the play after it's ended. The supporting cast are uniformly excellent too - I particularly liked Debra Gillett as Jack's scatty-but-actually-quite-manipulative wife and Stephen Beckett as his wideboy brother-in-law Cliff.

The staging here also deserves a special mention. Set on the Olivier stage's famous revolve, the NT have built a house. A lifesize, depressingly anonymous house with working plumbing in some rooms. This one house set serves as all of the different character's houses and is the only scenery in the production. It's fantastically effective - both as a feat of scene building and a way of conveying the sameness of the Thatcherite dream that all of the characters aspire to.

Because ultimately that's what this play is about. Jack is seduced and corrupted by the 'greed is good' mentality of that period of history (the play was first performed - in the Olivier - in 1987). He is prepared to overlook and then participate in his family's actions because they make money and enable them all to live the lifestyle that they so covet. 

It's a very, very funny play, but thinking on it afterwards you realise how depressing a lot of the stuff you've been laughing at is. To use a quote that Ayckbourn himself is apparently rather fond of, overheard from an audience member after one of his plays: “If I’d known what I was laughing at when I was laughing, I wouldn’t have laughed.”

This is definitely one to put on your cultural agenda (I'm sure all my readers have such things). If you can't make it to the NT in person, the production is getting the NT Live treatment on June 12th.

Review: Another Country

Man, I am so behind on my blogging. Sorrynotsorry about that. Expect a flurry in the next few days. Sorrynotsorry about that too I suppose.

Anyway, one of the reasons I've slipped a bit is I've actually been doing some exciting things. For a change. One of those was venturing to deepest darkest Whitehall to check out the Trafalgar Studios' production (a Chichester Festival transfer) of Another Country.

I'd like to think that my blog readership is sufficiently sophisticated to know a bit about Another Country. In case I'm wrong, the plot follows a group of public school boys - idealistic (trans: annoying) Judd and ambitious romantic Bennett - through a summer term in the 1930s. Both Judd (Marxist) and Bennett (gay) are outsiders and when a fellow pupil commits suicide after being caught in flagrante (LOVE that phrase) the ensuing scandal forces both of them to face up to their beliefs and make choices about their future. Or to put it more succinctly, it's a play about how The Cambridge Spies became The Cambridge Spies.

The play - and its film version - is probably most famous for the careers it helped to launch: Kenneth Branagh and Rupert Everett got their big breaks as Judd and Bennett respectively in the original play, Colin Firth took over Branagh's role in the subsequent film. 

The young cast in this production do a very respectable job of filling those colossal shoes. Will Attenborough (Richard's grandson, if you were wondering) is good as a character who I find one of the least sympathetic in any play ever written. His Judd is suitably annoyingly earnest and stubborn, and he plays the rare softer moments well. For me, Rob Callender's Bennett steals the show. He's by turns very funny, touchingly in love and genuinely outraged. The moment when he's told that his membership of the elite '22' group of prefects has been given to a less rebellious, 'insider' classmate is particularly effective. His anger at his treatment is pitch perfect and you can really start to see how boys like him betrayed their country and became spies. 

This is when the play is at its strongest too - really dealing with the issues of betrayal and 'outsiderness' which it explores explicitly but with subtlety - rather than poking fun at public school banter. The latter is done amusingly, but is just less interesting. The pacing of this production predominantly leaves the exploration of its theme until the second act making the production feel a bit, well, wonky for want of a better word. Otherwise it's very well done - the scenery is clever in its minimalism, the lighting and sound are both very effective and the direction, pacing issue aside, is very well done. 

Definitely worth a watch then, with one health warning. The Trafalgar Studios is a small space that puts on some really interesting stuff but sweet Jesus is it uncomfortable. Seriously guys, arm rests! A bit more legroom! It's not difficult. But, yeah, go and see Another Country anyway. 

Afternoon Tea at The Dorchester

I'm a simple person with simple pleasures.

...

Lolz, just kidding. My dad likes to say of me that I should've been born rich. I try - try - to keep my wannabe rich kid under wraps most of the time (because, y'know, huge debt is bad) but I need to let it out every now and then to relieve the pressure.

My birthday was one such occasion. Now, anyone who knows me/has watched over my shoulder whilst I unlock my iPhone on public transport will know that the current major weird obsession object of my affection - the Anton du jour, if you will - is Great British Bake Off judge Paul Hollywood. Seriously, dude is hot. And has insane sex eyes. And bakes bread. Ergo, he is perfect.

He also used to be Head Baker at The Dorchester hotel in London. Swanky right? On an episode of his most recent tv series he was filmed going back there to check out the kitchen and have afternoon tea. It looked amazing and I pretty much instantly decided I wanted to do the same for my birthday. Monkey see, monkey do.

As impetuous, fangirling based decisions go it was definitely one of the best.

You all know the deal with afternoon tea right? A three tier cake stand with a handful of sandwiches, a scone and a few teeny tiny cakes. Not so in The Dorchester's Promenade restaurant. Everything - and I mean everything - was unlimited and the quality was just superb.

 

First up a round of really substantial 'finger' sandwiches. All the classics were in attendance: egg and cress, smoked salmon, cucumber and cream cheese, ham and mustard and gorgeous creamy chicken. I know that doesn't sound exciting but, man, they were amazing sandwiches.

After an amuse bouche of chocolate cup filled with chocolate and mint mousse came the scones: plain and fruit with strawberry and rhubarb jams and Cornish clotted cream. Frankly, we'd all overdone it on the sandwiches by this point but the scones were similarly amazing; perfectly baked and not too heavy. The jams and cream were as lush as they sound.

Finally the adorable cake selection. I forget what they all were exactly, but the highlight for me was the delicious passionfruit and mango mousse - light, fruity and perfectly sweet.

All of this was washed down with lashings of the delicious house blend tea and absolutely faultless service. And for me, the added bonus of a birthday cake - coconut crusted chocolate sponge with chocolate mousse, chocolate ganache and white chocolate decoration - with the poshest doggy bag I've ever seen to take it away in.

And which provided my breakfast the next day...

Overall it was a fantastic experience that I genuinely can't recommend enough. Yes it's expensive (£45 per head plus tip) but the food (quality and quantity), the service and the experience of being somewhere as beautiful and historic as The Dorchester makes it worth every penny. Find an excuse and just go.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Weekend Wishlist

love a leather jacket. I wear mine (which is 'leather' rather than leather because I'm poor) basically all year round and am constantly on the hunt for the perfect one.

Well, I've found it. Now if only I could afford to buy it...

Sophie Hulme leather biker jacket

I've long been a fan of Sophie Hulme's beautiful, minimalist handbags so I'm thrilled that she's branching out. This stunning blue/black biker jacket with just-the-right-amount-of-bling gold metalwork is a thing of real beauty. I love the contrast Breton stripe lining too, just to add a bit of interest. And don't even get me started on the frog zip charm!

If you're as taken as me, I spotted this beauty on Net-A-Porter for £1225. If only...

 

Posted with Blogsy

Review: Grand Budapest Hotel

Wes Anderson is one of the directors whose work I enjoy most for one very simple reason: when he makes a film I know that I'm going to enjoy it. 

A lot is written about the aesthetic of Anderson's work, about their quirky themes and messages. Me? I just like them because they're fun. 

Fantastic Mr Fox with George Clooney providing a voice-over? Fun. The Life Aquatic... with Bill Murray on genius form? Fun.  His latest work, Grand Budapest Hotel? Fun.

Grand Budapest Hotel is essentially a crime caper (love that word) that tells the story of how penniless immigrant lobby boy Zero (a charming performance from newbie Tony Revolori) becomes hotel-owning millionaire Mr Mustafa (a pleasingly world weary F Murray Abraham) with the help of the suave and sexually ambiguous M. Gustave (Ralph Fiennes on excellent, campy form), his bevvy of adoring OAPs (including Tilda Swinton in some unusually convincing prosthetics as the unfortunate Madam D) and a stolen painting. Along the way they must thwart the machinations of Madam D's deranged family (Adrian Brody and Willem Defoe, suitably evil), break Gustave out of jail and escape the advance of war.

I hesitate to use the word as it's so twee, but Grand Budapest Hotel is such a charming film. It's entertaining and funny throughout, the plot is beautifully constructed and paced and it looks and sounds gorgeous. The script is Anderson at his whimsical-but-slightly-acerbic best ("You see, there are still faint glimmers of civilization left in this barbaric slaughterhouse that was once known as humanity. Indeed that's what we provide in our own modest, humble, insignificant... oh, fuck it.") and the phenomenal ensemble cast - which also includes Jeff Goldblum, Jude Law, Tom Wilkinson, Edward Norton, Lea Seydoux and Harvey Keitel amongst others - plays it perfectly. 

I'm a bit in love with Ralph Fiennes' M. Gustave which is a shame because a) I'm far too young and too poor for him to ever reciprocate and b) he's fictional. The relationship that develops between Gustave and Zero throughout the film is genuinely heartwarming and deftly played by Fiennes and Revolori. 

Here's an increasingly rare thing too - it's not any longer than it needs to be! A huge bugbear of mine these days is the apparent lack of any decent editing on Hollywood films, but this one flies along at a good pace for just 100 excellent and entertaining minutes. I've mentioned the sound already, but the use of music is fantastic - it really adds to the atmosphere without ever becoming a distraction.

All in all Grand Budapest Hotel is a fun, quirky (as if we'd got this far in a review of a Wes Anderson film without using the Q word!) and entertaining film and well worth a watch. Go see.