How did Burberry break free from the rigid fist with which it was held by the chav subculture?
It isn’t unknown that high street fashion brands take inspiration from subcultures and redo the aesthetic to suit their brand vision and DNA. But, the case of the ‘chav’ subculture and their significant association with Burberry has proved itself to be different from the other cases.
Now, what is ‘chav’?
Think English neighborhoods filled with kids wearing designer tracksuits (fake or real, it doesn’t really matter), caps, white sneakers, etc., who speak in a specific slang and most probably smell like beer all the time. These young men and women usually belonged to the English working class and were recognized to be brash, poorly educated, and known to have somewhat of an antisocial behavior. It is a derogatory social term that represents, most importantly, caste and whiteness, among others. The brands loved by these chavs consisted mainly of Burberry, Kappa, Nike, Adidas, and Stone Island, to name a few.
The downfall of Burberry can be associated entirely with the chavs, and a brand that once held a reputation that was so untarnished was dragged down slowly through the hierarchy of society until they reached the level of fake products that were accessible to anybody who wanted them. There was a massive influx of fake Burberry products (the replicas and authentic products were so identical, it was hard to find the difference) that came in from China and were resold in the streets of the UK at unbelievably low prices. On top of this, Danniella Westbrook, a famous TV personality, was often seen dressing in top-to-bottom Burberry check-patterned clothing. Her famous cocaine-using lifestyle did not really help the image the brand was trying to uphold. All of this led to the brand slowly losing its reputation through the years and it was no longer considered iconic or desirable.
This subculture, attributed to all things negative, came to prominence through popular British media like Little Britain (2003–2006), Shameless (2004–2013), to name a few. The term soon stuck and even made it into the front page of TIME magazine in 2008. It damaged Burberry’s brand image so much it would require years of clever rebranding and marketing to turn this situation around and call themselves a luxury brand again. And that is precisely what they did.
In 2001, Christopher Bailey was appointed the creative director of Burberry. He was given the task of resurrecting the brand, and his first decision was to ditch their infamous check print that was so loved by the chavs. I do not have to tell you just how risky it is for a brand to give up on their signature item. After this, he chose the new faces of Burberry like Eddie Redmayne and Cara Delevingne, and the most common thing between them? They were all the flagbearers of ‘Englishness,’ adding a posh and elegant touch to the brand image.
13 years later, he decides to bring back the print by reworking it to look fresher, younger, and more desirable. It ranged over various fashion garments like skirts, trenches, coats, sweaters, etc. The collection became one of the best-selling collections of all time, and Bailey finished with exactly the same element he started with as well. Surprisingly, it’s now part of the fashion system again, but I guess I should have seen this coming because the fashion system is very forgetful, not to forget fickle. What seems like the ultimate fashion suicide now tends to come back a couple of years later to be ‘edgy’ and ‘in trend.’ Today, we can find it all over Instagram because it has become contemporary now.
Of course, there was Vetements which basically revisited the chav aesthetic and put it on the runway during the Couture Fashion Week in 2017. They lifted it from a despised subculture to an elegant protagonist on the runway.
For the Spring-summer 2018 collection, Burberry collaborated with Gosha Rubchinsky, who is known to famously draw inspiration from his childhood in Post-Cold War Russia and hooliganism, youth culture, and other subcultures. This collaboration presented a subtle nod to the 90s and again had the check pattern on caps, shorts, trenches, etc. The one question we need to ask ourselves, though, is, how has this style been welcomed with open arms by the wealthier classes?
According to Kate Reardon, the editor of Tatler, posh people have always been embarrassed by being posh, and if they can wear something classless, they will embrace it with open arms. She thinks that the need to act hard and blend in is a form of defense mechanism against getting ripped off. Intentionally or not, Burberry has played right into this notion and has clearly taken full advantage of it.
Mark Ritson, the assistant professor of marketing at the London Business School, seems to be apologetic over his vocal opinion about how the hijacking of Burberry has damaged the brand irrevocably. Although many shared the same idea, now he seems to think that Rose Marie Bravo (Chief Executive Officer of Burberry) has done an excellent job of growing the brand up for the future, and he seemed to realize that she is much more intelligent than she is given credit for. She has at all times not just stuck by the brand but has been a good brand leader as well. He says the UK is not representative of the rest of the Burberry market and that the brand has continued to maintain its global strength. In fact, the brand’s strategy of not trying to fight its downmarket customers who were uprooting the brand image definitely shows character.
While it did take a while to turn things around for Burberry, it was not an easy task, to begin with. Years of clever and careful repositioning have finally helped the brand re-associate with the wealthy English people and class, which is ideal and essential for the brand to stay true to its DNA. It has become a successful global phenomenon with a carefully organized heritage that attracts millions of customers worldwide.
