London: When the Idea Is Stronger Than the Product
AI generated by Romina Tosi @steve_o_smith, @royalacademyarts.
There is a red dress in Steve O Smith’s Spring/Summer 2027 collection that, before it became a dress, was a drawing.
Not metaphorically.
Smith starts on paper and transfers the lines, the stains, even the accidents of ink onto fabric. In Fever, presented on 19 September in the Royal Academy’s life drawing studio, the inspiration comes from André Derain’s bathers. Inks that dry too quickly, crack and leave deposits become appliqués, embroidery and small clusters of glass beads. The brushstrokes are not printed onto the dress: they become part of its construction.
It only looks like a small difference.
Vogue reports that Smith has also invested in the structure needed to make these pieces: an embroiderer, a couture seamstress and a pattern cutter working on increasingly lighter panniers without corsetry. Ten looks, made to order and often as one-offs. The idea starts with the drawing, but it has to overcome quite a few obstacles before it reaches the body. Vogue: Steve O Smith Spring 2027
This is where London gets interesting.
Not because it is the most experimental fashion week. We have been saying that for years and, repeated often enough, it risks becoming the kind of line that could sit comfortably in any press release.
The real question is another one: how much of the idea survives when we remove everything else?
Remove the location. The music. The casting. The collection notes. The designer interview. The right photograph at the right moment.
Is there still something left in the product?
I call it the silence test.
A garment should be able to communicate at least part of the idea even when nobody is explaining it.
With Steve O Smith, it does. You can see it on the surface, but more importantly you understand it in the way that surface has been built. The brushstroke changes material, the material changes volume and weight, and the volume has to work on a real body.
The concept has consequences.
And when an idea has consequences for the material, it stops being simply an inspiration.
It becomes design.
That transition is less obvious than it sounds.
Because a runway can produce a remarkable image without necessarily producing an object with the same strength.
London, these days, also offers a more ambiguous version of that equation.
When the Story and the Dress Take Different Paths
For Spring/Summer 2027, Edeline Lee built her presentation around the myth of Sisyphus and the work that normally remains invisible behind a performance.
The setting was a school gym in north London. Models were dressed in front of the audience, dancers rehearsed beside the runway, a drone camera followed what was happening. Victoria Starmer also became part of the construction of the show, having her make-up done beside a football goal before putting on a turquoise knitted midi dress. Vogue: Edeline Lee SS27
The idea is easy to read: show the effort, the rehearsals, the people, the stages that come before an apparently perfect result.
But let’s apply the silence test.
Remove the gym.
Remove Sisyphus.
Remove the drone, the dancers, the backstage deliberately brought in front of the audience.
Look only at the clothes.
The message becomes much less obvious.
That does not mean the clothes are weak. Quite the opposite. Over the years, Edeline Lee has built a recognisable product, with a defined customer, international distribution and an offer that works perfectly well away from the runway. Her website sells dresses, jackets and knitwear directly, and the brand is stocked, among others, by Harrods and a number of international retailers.
That is exactly what makes the case interesting.
The product and the concept can both be valid without fully coinciding.
But then the runway is doing a different job.
It is producing attention.
And that distinction is worth making, especially now.
A collection designed for Instagram, for an online gallery or to become an instantly recognisable photograph is not necessarily a bad collection. It would be naive to think so. Fashion communicated through images long before social media existed.
The problem starts when the image has to keep rescuing the product.
When you need to know the artistic reference, read four paragraphs of notes, understand which trauma, archive, film, poet or subculture inspired the designer before you can understand why that sleeve has that shape.
At that point, the relationship has been reversed.
The garment is no longer giving form to the idea.
The text is dressing the garment.
Feasibility Is Not the Enemy
There is another word that still carries a suspicious reputation in creative fashion: feasibility.
It always seems to suggest that someone from the product department is about to arrive and ruin the party.
Cost.
Weight.
Sizing.
Industrialisation.
Fit.
Timing.
Washing.
Deliveries.
And yet these are precisely the limits that determine whether an intuition truly belongs to design or remains a good image.
In Smith’s case, for instance, turning a brushstroke into embroidery is not a dilution of the idea. It is the moment when the idea is tested.
How much does it weigh?
How does it fall?
How does it move?
Can it be made again?
And above all: what happens when a person actually gets inside that dress?
So the question I would ask of many of the collections seen in London is not, “How original is it?”
It is simpler.
What remains when we turn the volume down?
And I would add another one, perhaps even more uncomfortable: if we took that garment and made a less extreme version of it, would the idea survive?
For a brand, that is a fundamental question.
The runway almost always shows the most concentrated version of a language. The market, on the other hand, asks for translations: a jacket instead of the full look, a knit, a bag, a shoe, perhaps a detail that retains enough DNA to be recognisable without turning the customer into an extra from the show.
Christopher Kane, in his debut for Mulberry, offers a useful example from this perspective too. The collection works with the house’s heritage, with leather and the famous postman’s lock, bringing them into Kane’s far more irreverent language. It is not simply a styling exercise: the brand codes physically enter the objects.
Then we will have to see what actually reaches stores in January.
And that, not the runway, is where the second half of the story begins.
The Silence Test
Perhaps, then, it is worth keeping four questions in mind when looking at the next collections:
Does the idea genuinely alter material and construction, or does it simply accompany the garment?
Does the piece retain its character when isolated from the set?
Is there a translation of the concept that someone could actually wear?
If the product were simplified, would it still retain something that belongs only to that brand?
These are not questions against experimentation.
Almost the opposite.
Because experimenting means finding out what happens to an idea when it meets resistance. Material resists. The body resists. Cost resists. Even the customer, fortunately, sometimes resists.
London is not over yet as I write this. On Monday 21 September, the official schedule continues with more appointments and Burberry will show at 7 p.m. local time. Official London Fashion Week September 2026 schedule It would be rather convenient to pretend we already know how it will all turn out.
We will come back to that.
For now, though, one thing is already fairly clear.
A strong idea can afford to be complicated.
The product cannot.
Sooner or later, it has to stand on its own.
Romina Tosi
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article reflect my personal analysis of the information available at the time of publication. The sources consulted are publicly available and may include official documents, trade union communications, press reports and other materials accessible to the public. Artificial intelligence tools were used to support the identification, consultation and preliminary verification of sources, as well as to locate and check the links included in the article. Before publication, I reviewed the relevant sources and verified that the links corresponded to the materials cited. AI assistance does not replace my editorial judgment or my responsibility for the final text. Links were checked at the time of publication and may subsequently be changed, moved or removed by their respective publishers. I do not disclose confidential information or information obtained through privileged professional access. Facts, statements, allegations and opinions are presented according to their nature. References to individuals, companies or specific cases are included to examine matters of broader relevance to the industry. They are not intended to attribute unlawful conduct beyond what is expressly documented in the cited sources. Assessments concerning industrial strategies, financial decisions and production models represent personal opinions, not findings of fact or definitive judgments.
If you identify an error or inaccuracy, please let me know. I will verify the information and correct it where necessary.
The purpose of this article is to contribute to informed discussion, not to harm any individual, company or organisation.
Comments