Just four months after her wedding, the Duchess of Sussex yesterday carried out her first solo engagement. (Yes, the Hubb Community Kitchen feast last week was her event, but it was still a joint appearance with the Duke of Sussex.) Last night, however, she was all on her own, marking yet another milestone in her new royal career.
The event was the Oceania exhibit at the Royal Academy of Arts, the first of its kind to appear in the UK. One of the countries’ art featured was New Zealand, which Meghan will be visiting next month during her first long-term tour abroad.
On her way in, Meghan shut her car door, a moment picked up tongue-in-cheek by a royal reporter as being notably down-to-earth. This spawned a series of shared videos on Twitter of the Duchess of Cambridge shutting her own car door during engagements. Le sigh.
Meghan chose two signatures – Givenchy and the color black. As we’ve seen time and time again, Givenchy is the designer the Duchess is choosing for her “big” moments, from her wedding to her first engagement with the Queen to, now, her first appearance on her own.
The dress featured sheer long sleeves, velvet across the bodice and a velvet belt. While I like the elements of it, all together I was underwhelmed. There was a lot going on and it was just a tad too long on Meghan’s frame, but she does seem to personally favor her clothing that comes just a touch close to drowning her.
Regardless, she looked lovely and she paired it with her handy Aquazzura heels, which I’m going to go ahead and label her version of the nude LK Bennett heels Kate favored so much in 2011 and 2012. The clutch is also Givenchy and the earrings are Birks.
It’s unclear when we’ll next see Meghan before the entire Royal Family turns out for Princess Eugenie’s wedding on October 12, BUT Kensington Palace did finally announce Kate’s return from maternity leave. October 2, ladies and gentlemen, which officially beckons what will prove a busy, busy autumn before the end of the year.
Tomorrow I am going to try and compile a post covering the last few days of the Duke of Cambridge’s working visit through Africa and I have a few historical posts I’m trying to wrap up for over the weekend, so tune back then.
When did women in symbolic public roles (royalty, US first ladies, etc.) become obligated to provide an endless fashion show to the public? Was it when Jackie Kennedy was in the White House? These women must be spending millions of dollars on clothes that they almost never rewear. Why do they feel obligated to do that? And what would happen if they didn’t? Even if they love fashion, keeping up has got to become a never-ending chore, not to mention a huge personal expense. Is this going to continue? I’d like to see a US first lady or queen of some country dare to start wearing her garments multiple times, just like the rest of us. It would make a real public statement to see a prominent woman refuse to comply with what seems to be an expectation of obligatory consumerism.
Hi Christina – thank you for your comment. The focus on what women in the public eye are wearing can certainly become tiresome, but it’s also nothing new. Royal women have been setting fashion trends since the Middle Ages – think Eleanor of Aquitaine, to name one. Or Anne Boleyn and her French hoods. Margaret of Denmark and her huge wardrobe. The money spent by Marie Antoinette pre-revolution. It’s an extension of what “consorts,” or high-ranking women have historically brought to public life, which is setting the fashion and culture and rounding out the private aspect of the public institution. As for women today, part of this whole deal is that they’ve inherited an evolved role that is in many ways outdated. Another part of it is the intensity of the public’s fascination with the glamorous aspects of it all. And another is that the interest lends itself to serving as a national brand ambassador. When Kate, for instance, wears a new British label, it’s instant public attention the likes of which most independent designers could never otherwise generate. The silver lining is that most, if not all, of them frequently recycle these items.
Ah yes, history. I forgot! Still, with the growing interest in sustainability in many industries and awareness of how much pollution and waste the garment industry causes worldwide, I’d love to see some very prominent woman set a different model for how to assemble a wardrobe and present oneself.
I’m of two minds about royal fashion. On the one hand, yes I often take a look. I like to see pretty clothes. At the same time, I feel bad when I see close-up photos of the DOC’s/DOS’s ears (the earrings!) and feet (the shoes!). I’m thousands of miles away, yet I can examine various parts of their bodies in detail if I want to. It’s creepy and unfathomably intrusive. I could never tolerate that level of scrutiny. (Luckily for all of us, no one is looking at me.) I admire the poise of the royal women. All those high-def cameras with telephoto lenses would send me screaming into the woods.
Definitely agreed – I find it to be a balancing act on how to cover it here. It’s fun, for sure, and I do enjoy watching the style, but I try to avoid going too far down a rabbit hole on it. If every outfit I chose for work pre-coffee was analyzed I’d 1) lose my mind and 2) probably be on a lot of style “miss” lists! 🙂