Pix: style.com

You have to take into account the want-factor that repping any sort of fur creates

Much love and all as I have for both Marni and Fendi (the Polifonia shoe, I die) on the accessories front, I don’t love the fact that they both make copious use of fur in their collections.

The AW13 catwalks for both Italian lines were heaving in collars, capes and furry bags and this tri-coloured piece from River Island, while obviously done in fun fur, is a clear homage to both designer brands.

And, you know, while there’s a whole train of thought in place about faux and second hand fur being A-Ok, if you actually poke about under the hood of that reasoning a bit, you have to take into account the want-factor that repping any sort of fur creates.

It’s easy to assuage guilt by only choosing second hand or faux, but this arguably still fuels demand, and that demand has many faces and price positions; the knock-on seems to be we’re seeing more and more fur on runways.

It’s an issue no one has ever really put to rest. Whether you do or don’t buy the fur-is-eqiuvalent-to-leather arguement or the one about people in Siberia-slash-Dronning Maud Land wearing copious skins, that’s up to you. The flipside, though, is if you don’t live in those cold climates and you’re not eating minks – so there is no by-product of another industry –  those defenses may be a little hard to maintain.

What do you think about it all?

  • Brand new fur is fine – it’s luxury and covetable
  • Buying second hand is perfectly acceptable
  • Faux is ok
  • You’d rule out anything at all that’s even remotely an approximation of an animal skin

Do drop a comment.