Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope)

dieworkwear said:

I think you guys are reading too much into this. The management there probably just decided to expand into kids' clothes. They sent it to the design team, who made some basics that fit with the overall Everlane aesthetic. Then that gets sent to marketing and copywriting, who are just used to churning out the same copy for everything ("ditched the embellishment," "essentials," "simplicity," etc).

I mean, writing about clothes is a huge pain **********, and you end up relying on the same cliches over and over. You work on weekly deadlines; sometimes daily. Sometimes, depending on how annoying your bosses/ editors are, hourly. From the copy they presented, it sounds like they just took their standard Everlane copy and translated it into something about kids. I doubt everyone there sat around a big table and thought about what kind of high-moral line can they design for 1984 children.

They made basics and copy writers wrote some crappy copy, which is what happens when you have to write a lot of fashion copy.

Click to expand...

So, I've worked on fashion copy, and I know what you mean about it being hard to do well and easy to get lazy at.

That's not what I personally objected to though. It's the stuff that was specifically written for the audience buying the stuff that made me feel gross. That someone would want a mini-me, and that it's cute that some poor kid is super careful to not spill his juicebox on his cashmere sweater, is the part that is sorta gross to me.

I quoted this specific section on purpose:

"No sparkles, sequins, or superheroes.
We think kids should have options—so
we’ve ditched the embellishments in favor
of mini versions of our most essential styles.
Added bonus: Parents can now dress their
kids like they dress themselves."

because it really takes what the kids want completely out of the equation and says "Hey bougie parents, BONUS, now you can make your kids look like you." For me, as a parent who wants to encourage his kids to express themselves how they'd like, it's completely missed the mark. I the opposite of want to impose my tastes on my children.

At least they didn't make outfit suggestions.

"Pair this sweatshirt with dried boogers and spilt milk for an off duty look, or dress it up with your brothers hand me down gingham"



LA Guy said:

because it really takes what the kids want completely out of the equation and says "Hey bougie parents, BONUS, now you can make your kids look like you."  For me, as a parent who wants to encourage his kids to express themselves how they'd like, it's completely missed the mark.  I the opposite of want to impose my tastes on my children.

Click to expand...

That just seems like the kind of copy you'd turn out if you had a quick deadline and have to market basics that, frankly, kids probably don't want to wear because they don't have cartoon characters or whatever. And the design team there just made smaller versions of their basic clothes because making SpongeBob tees would be weird for Everlane.

I don't know what else you could say about super basic clothes for kids. "Here are some luxurious, basic cashmere sweaters to help add that subtle background to your son's Batman pants?"

Or "here's that simple t-shirt you'd typically buy for your son at a luxury store, but we've cut out the middle man to bring you lower prices?"

dieworkwear said:

That just seems like the kind of copy you'd turn out if you had a quick deadline and have to market basics that, frankly, kids probably don't want to wear because they don't have cartoon characters or whatever. And the design team there just made smaller versions of their basic clothes because making SpongeBob tees would be weird for Everlane.

I don't know what else you could say about super basic clothes for kids. "Here are some luxurious, basic cashmere sweaters to help add that subtle background to your son's Batman pants?"

Or "here's that simple t-shirt you'd typically buy for your son at a luxury store, but we've cut out the middle man to bring you lower prices?"

Click to expand...

How's this:

"If Peter Parker were to wear his Spidey suit to meet Aunt May, she'd probably pass out. Help your son avoid sending his grandmother to the hospital right before her Christmas party by getting him his own version of grown man pants."

or more seriously:

"Give your some something seriously confortable to go underneath that Superhero costume he insists on wearing. After all, even Superman needs choices. Bonus: grey goes with blue, red, and yellow, just fine."

The point is, the copy could have been written with a lot more humor and sounded a whole lot less douchey. I know a fair number of tech company copywriters, and they are, to the person, young, single or newlywed, without kids, and really urban. Maybe the issue here is the emotional disconnect between the copywriter and his or her audience.

I think the "dress your kids like you dress yourself" thing is kinda weird - like American Girl dolls, but for adults and with your own live children - but don't kids generally have two sets of clothes? I know I had stuff with dinosaurs and superheroes that I wore when I dressed myself and some more subdued and logo-free stuff that I'd wear for church, dinners out or at other peoples houses, orchestra concerts, &c. No cashmere 'cause I'm from non-baller stock, but sweaters and trousers and stuff like that.

There is an entire tumblr universe dedicated to dressing your kids like yourself (it seems to be dominated by parents still on the hipster- urban lumber jack train though).

I agree with fok though, there's nothing wrong with making basic clothes for kids that fit your aesthetic, and like msg said its been done by many people, many times, but the everlane one makes it sound incredibly douchey. My 4-year old wears basically 90% h&m, because it's cheap and simple and he'll grow out of it long before it goes to ****. The other 10% is random things he likes (mostly cars and dinosaurs and foxes) with a few things I've made for him, not because I'm trying to dress him in certain things but because it's easier and less wasteful to make a small, kids version than going straight to an adult sized pattern.

Coldsnap said:

What like major furniture store is OK? Need a platform bed stand, night stand, and dresser. Budget like $2.5k for all that.

Also, buying OK furniture sort of sucks when you're renting. But I feel like I'm done buying stuff from Ikea and would like slightly nicer furniture... Even if I have to move it a lot, thoughts?

Click to expand...

Room and Board would be my suggestion.





While we're discussing copy, is mediocre menswear content (both ads and editorial) the chicken or the egg? Is menswear today more boring than it was 5 years ago or did everyone just run out of new things to say about it?



LA Guy said:

That's first last, and deposit, though, right?  Maybe a lease break fee?  I mean, otherwise, without furniture, what else is there?  I've moved with, literally, 2 suitcases and a backpack.  I did send a few UPS boxes ahead of me, but that cost is a couple of hundred, tops.  It's not like, sans furniture, there is that much to move.

Click to expand...

Nope, just the cost of shipping 30 ish boxes worth of stuff across the Atlantic.



gdl203 said:

Well, Ralph Lauren has been making this kind of kids clothes for so long that the Everlane guys who are letting us in today on this novel idea probably had a RL kid garment when they were in first grade.

Click to expand...

Most high end clothing brands have done that since, I don't know when.

I had Lacoste polos as a kid almost 30 years ago, although I spend most of my time in a padded baby blue Disney sweat shirt and sweat pants.



iamacyborg said:

Nope, just the cost of shipping 30 ish boxes worth of stuff across the Atlantic.

Click to expand...

Did your company cover any of the costs?



OccultaVexillum said:

Did your company cover any of the costs?

Click to expand...

Only on the way out, which also cost 5k.

Find Finn said:

Most high end clothing brands have done that since, I don't know when.

I had Lacoste polos as a kid almost 30 years ago, although I spend most of my time in a padded baby blue Disney sweat shirt and sweat pants.

Click to expand...

I know - there's strictly nothing novel about Everlane kids. Yet, they make it sound like parents have been waiting for non-superhero clothing for decades and that they finally made it happen. No, there's tons everywhere at every price point for the exact same clothes (from Old Navy and Gap Kids to some silly D&G kids leather jacket). Thanks for nothing, Everlane. Adding one additional choice to 100 existing choices is not all of the sudden making sure that "kids should have options."

Tell me why your kids clothing (coming after hundreds of other lines) is worth looking at or purchasing, but don't try to tell me that this is some grand new thing. That teasing email the day before...

iamacyborg said:

Nope, just the cost of shipping 30 ish boxes worth of stuff across the Atlantic.

Click to expand...

That's a lot of my stuff. I dunno. I've always taken moving to evaluate what a I really need, which is... really little. The bulk of it has always gone into storage. Then a couple of big suitcases of clothing, and then maybe a box of accessories of footwear. I guess that there is some rather expensive kitchen stuff that is a pain to buy again. But.. that's about it? Maybe a small boxc of books that I'd like to have and have to which I have a sentimental attachment. But otherwise, there is not that much, that I can think of. Every time I moved as a single person, I fit everything into two or three boxes, and than luggage for stuff I really didn't want to lose.

I'm married with kids now, so obviously, a lot more stuff would be "necessary"

I've got a lot of records that I wouldn't be able to buy again (DMZ 002, etc), and some super limited edition books, and just general stuff that'd cost more to replace than it costs to ship, like a pc or nice kitchen stuff. It all adds up scarily quickly.

gdl203 said:

I know - there's strictly nothing novel about Everlane kids. Yet, they make it sound like parents have been waiting for non-superhero clothing for decades and that they finally made it happen. No, there's tons everywhere at every price point for the exact same clothes (from Old Navy and Gap Kids to some silly D&G kids leather jacket). Thanks for nothing, Everlane. Adding one additional choice to 100 existing choices is not all of the sudden making sure that "kids should have options."

Click to expand...

Everlane has excellent marketing, but I really, the products are nothing special. They've just created some interesting language to package up the typical kickstarter narrative, which is:

"We had been looking for X type of garment forever, but we could not find what we wanted at the quality we wanted at the reasonable price we deserved. So we did some investigation, got in touch with some amazing factories, and now we can bring you the best quality stuff without the middle man markup."

This narrative does not survive the most cursory analysis, but it's what you read on Kickstarter all the time. For one thing, you can't "get rid of the middleman" unless you are doing everything yourself, at a very small scale. Like some etsy sellers, maybe. The much maligned middleman provides a great deal of infrastructure that is needed for any amount of volume. There are some efficiencies in being vertically integrated, but anyone who says that they can sell direct to customer at wholesale is... what's a nice word for lying?