The image-makers

The relationship between fashion brands and other product categories is rather like the one between celebrities and normal citizens: they are aware of one another’s existence, they occasionally share the same space, but they rarely mingle. While other brands hire international advertising agencies such as J. Walter Thompson, Saatchi & Saatchi or BBDO, fashion brands tend to work directly with a narrow pool of freelance talents.
According to art director Thomas Lenthal, who has worked for brands such as Dior and Yves Saint Laurent, ‘In fashion, there are probably only about a dozen well-known art directors, great photographers, stylists, make-up people, and so on. You don’t need an advertising agency: you just need an address book with a handful of names in it.’
Many upmarket fashion brands don’t have a marketing department; or even a person with ‘marketing’ in their job title. The designer – often known as an ‘artistic director’ – is responsible for advertising imagery too. For instance, while Louis Vuitton works with the advertising agency BETC Luxe on several aspects of its communications, its fashion imagery is entirely under the control of the brand’s designer, Marc Jacobs.
With this in mind, a few years ago Hervé Morel set up an organization in Paris and New York called ADM – Art Direction Management. Morel does not have an agency, but he is an agent, handling a group of art directors and other creatives that includes Thomas Lenthal, Donald Schneider (H&M, Van Cleef & Arpels, Vogue Hommes International), Mathieu Trautmann (Oscar de la Renta Perfumes, Issey Miyake Perfumes, Jalouse magazine), Steve Hiett (Kenzo Perfumes), and Laurent Fétis (Cacharel Perfumes, Bless), among others. According to Morel, it was ADM that introduced Donald Schneider to H&M, which eventually led to the store’s publicity-generating partnership with Karl Lagerfeld. Morel says, ‘Designer brands may employ an agency to buy their advertising space, but they don’t work with agencies on the creative side. It’s more cost-effective to work directly with an art director, who can then bring together the other elements – the photographer, the model and so forth. Agencies tend to put forward teams that include a copywriter. But international fashion brands, which use the same images worldwide and work purely with visual stimuli, don’t need copywriters. Plus, art directors have usually gained experience on fashion magazines, so they are comfortable in that world.’ Lenthal echoes his views: ‘The structure of an advertising agency makes it an unwieldy vehicle. The one thing an ad agency fears above all else is losing a client, and in order not to do that it ensures that the creative process is as risk-free as possible. There are a lot of meetings involving eight people sitting around a table with somebody making notes, so everything is agreed with back-up in writing. The agency has a huge team consisting of the creative director, the art director, the copywriter, the account director, the strategic planner. . . they try to mirror the structure of the large corporations they are working for. But a fashion house is a much smaller unit.’
Robert Triefus, executive vice president, worldwide communications, at Giorgio Armani, confirms the approach at many fashion houses: ‘We decide the communication themes, the imagery and the overall strategy at our head office here in Milan. We don’t have an ad agency – we have our own graphics studio covering advertising materials as well as point of sale and store windows. We do, however, collaborate with famous photographers and art directors. It boils down to the fact that fashion is a very particular arena, and the creation of an image that is relevant and appropriate to the fashion world, given that it is a very aspirational product, requires the involvement of people who can really get under the skin of the brand. While I don’t wish to criticize advertising agencies, historically fashion has not been their domain –much to their disappointment. Agencies don’t necessarily have people who understand the nuances of a fashion brand. I’m sure a person from an advertising agency would have thrown your tape recorder at me by now; and certainly it’s a long-running argument. They often claim we don’t know what we’re doing. We disagree.’
Advertising agencies say that the cliquish fraternity fashion brands work with means that their ads are often indistinguishable. And indeed it’s doubtful that many fashion images could pass the marketing test that involves taking a bunch of print ads, covering up their brand names, and seeing which of them has a recognizable visual identity. Advertising for designer brands – whether clothing or accessories – is frequently sensual and elegant, but it can also be clichéd, humourless and chokingly pretentious.
In late 2004, Chanel spent a reported €26 million on a television commercial (the press office called it a ‘mini movie’) and print campaign to re-launch its No. 5 perfume. The TV ad starred Nicole Kidman and was directed by Baz Luhrmann, who was also behind the actress’s hit film, Moulin Rouge. To some, the ad looked spectacular. But was it entirely a case of sour grapes when Trevor Beattie, the well-known adman, wrote in The Guardian that the ad ‘sucks so hard it vacuumed my living room carpet’? (‘The ads that stole Christmas’, 6 December 2004.)
Beattie, the chairman and creative director of London agency TBWA, has had considerable experience in fashion, having helped to create one of the most successful British high-street brands: French Connection UK. The acronym ‘FCUK’ had been used solely on internal mail until Beattie spotted and unlocked its marketing potential. ‘FCUK fashion’, said the store’s advertising, and young consumers quickly bought into the message. Media outrage only fuelled demand. Lately, however, it seems that over-familiarity with the logo has blunted its shock appeal. Experiencing a sales slump, French Connection is downplaying its appearance on clothes and in advertising, at the same time insisting that it hasn’t dumped the brand completely. Nevertheless, FCUK had an impressive run, and is a good example of what an advertising agency can achieve for a fashion brand, as long as there’s a sharp creative at the helm.
And it is by no means the only example. The UK-based agency Bartle Bogle Hegarty has created consistently award-winning campaigns for Levi’s in a relationship that stretches back to the 1980s. Its ability to constantly refresh the brand in the mind of the fickle young consumer – and in a highly competitive market – is certainly admirable. Diesel is another company that has worked with a series of advertising agencies. However, the brand’s creative director, Wilbert Das, has ultimate control over its advertising messages, and admits that he prefers to work with ‘small, energetic agencies’. ‘We’ve worked with one large agency, Lowe Howard Spink, and, while it was an interesting process, I found their structure just too large for us,’ he says. ‘You should really feel that an agency is part of your brand, which is not always possible with a big international network.’ There is also a considerable gulf between a largely British chain store, a hip jeans brand, and a global luxury giant such as Chanel or Yves Saint Laurent. Here, perhaps, a more elitist approach is required.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply