Images of this collection began to surface a few months ago, and the response across the blogosphere has been a real riot.
Some have called the lookbook images "cute," "adorable," "precious," "doll-like," and "girly."
Comparisons have been drawn to Lolita, Alice in Wonderland, and Eloise at the Plaza, to name a few.
Others describe the coy models posing pidgeon-toed, donning infant-blond wigs, Peter Pan collars and thigh-grazing babydoll frocks as "overly costume-y," "infantilizing," and even flat-out "insulting to women."
One person with a sharp sense of humor posted this comment on Fashionista.com: "When I want to re-create the look of a sexually precocious 11-year-old in 1967 Des Moines, I know just who I'll turn to."
Anywho, whatever you want to call it, we think there is a valid place (albeit a small one) for this "genre" of female representation within literature, film, fairytales—and yes, even fashion. But it hardly seems original or for that matter, made memorable by Fetherston's interpretation.
Personally, we don't think it's offensive or genius—more like "fun" and "playful" in a naive sort of way. Once you get past the styling, we think you'll find there are some flirty party dresses that are totally wearable and even tempting.
Of course, the true test will be seeing the line in person. Til then, watch this bizarre short film on YouTube called Dollhouse (not to be confused with Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House), costumes courtesy of Erin Fetherston for Target.
What do you think of the collection? Love it or leave it?
P.S. Last chance to shop Alice Temperley, her GO collection departs 11-17-07. >>