LOVE/HATE: The Simply Pretty Edition

Stewart Parvin, Spring 2012

This week’s LOVE/HATE featured wedding dress comes from Stewart Parvin’s 2012 collection, shown at the White Gallery London. It is, of course, one of the many short wedding dresses out there – perhaps a reception dress – but unlike most, this is absolutely basic, with no embellishments. Not a single bell or whistle. It’s certainly not going to appeal to every bride or even most brides, possibly for its plainness and possibly for its silhouette. Is it for you? Can you even see it as a wedding dress, versus a little something springy for a semi-formal function? I am going to say love, but it would have to be accessorized just right – in my mind, a silk shawl and something else that I can put my finger on. Thoughts?

11 Responses to “LOVE/HATE: The Simply Pretty Edition”

  1. Sarah says:

    I love it for a less formal wedding!

  2. Toni says:

    It looks too much like something I could wear to work for me to see it as a special occasion dress. I’m all for clean and simple, but I feel like there needs to be SOMETHING special about the dress, be it sleeve, or length, or a statement necklace.

  3. devon says:

    I think a white beaded belt with silver beads/buckle could go a long way towards fixing the silhouette and the plainness, without making it blingy. No sequins, of course.

  4. anna says:

    I *like* the fact that you will be able to wear this dress again. Any wedding dress out there can only be worn once (before you put it away? Sell it? Pack it with mothballs?). But this one you can dress up for the wedding and dress down for other occasions.

  5. Awesome thought, Anna! I wish I could have worn my wedding dress again – I’m the first one to point out that it’s a lot of dough to drop on a dress for one day. Though I also love drooling over thousand dollar dresses, so I may be of two minds on the subject.

  6. AJ says:

    If I’d have had oodles of gobs of money to spend on dresses, something like this might have been my getaway dress (that and if the wedding wasn’t in early early early spring). The fabric peaking out from behind her arm suggests a bow or embellishment in back, though? I like the dress well enough, but I wouldn’t have walked down the aisle in it.

  7. Dayton says:

    The concept is fine; I’m a big fan of clean simplicity. Maybe it’s a trick of the lighting and/or the model’s motion, but this pic makes it look weirdly baggy and shapeless around the ribs.

  8. Anonymous says:

    I think a pretty wide brimmed hat and pearls would be a nice addition.

  9. Fran says:

    A pretty lacy or sheer jacket and a small headpiece with a short netted veil would make this dress very festive looking for a small informal wedding.

  10. lali says:

    It needs a big English wedding hat and killer heels.

  11. SarahDances says:

    I don’t love it for myself, but I am glad it exists!