Now, there’s a picture of a lady on a bike with a fox round her shoulders on Scott Shuman’s SartoriaList blog at the moment (and when I say ‘fox’, I don’t mean ‘fox fur stole’, I mean ‘fox’. Dead. But definitely the whole fox) and it has 126 comments, not surprisingly.
What is surprising, though, is that as you read through the comments there’s an emerging consensus that she looks great, and as long as the fox is vintage, that’s OK. Nobody’s pretending it’s not REALLY CONTROVERSIAL, but the sort of people who read Scott’s blog tend to think that’s a good thing, and she’s carried it off well, and please don’t throw paint at her.
Most fascinatingly, one of the commentators – one of the few to state she’s a vegetarian and disapproves in principle – actually likes the fact that the animal still has its head and feet (which many others don’t), because it’s sort of respectful to the fox: it shows it was once an animal, and not just a piece of fabric-in-waiting.
My own feelings about fur are mixed. I loathe being out in cities where fur is unnecessary, but everyone has the latest mink because the button positioning changed last season (you know who you are, Milan). But I don’t have the slightest problem with Siberian women dressing in it from head to toe. And I have a secret yearning to be allowed to like vintage. But can I? According to this blog, I can, but I’m still not sure.
Some things are more certain, though. The lady in question is not exactly skeletal. In fact, she’s nicely upholstered, as PG Wodehouse would say. And that’s getting the thumbs-up too. This is unquestionably a Good Thing.
Everybody, by the way, loves the bike.