Barbourian invasion
Waxing. Nostalgic.
British farmers are protesting. I know this because one of my timelines had a selfie of a Welsh farmer on a train to London, for these protests, explaining that he is not comfortable in a city. I guess this was meant to be charming and folksy and real. It did not make me more sympathetic to his cause, whatever it might be.
I am intentionally only going to google why British farmers are protesting after drafting most of this post, because I want to first guess at what’s happening on the fashion-and-images front.
Barbour. It is a sea of Barbour jackets. There are (I take it) politicians sporting Barbour in solidarity with the farmers. This in turn led to a Menswear Guy tweet-thread (another doing the Twitter and Bluesky thing, the mark of a true poster, game recognizing game, or something) I too-snarkily responded to, seemingly reassuring people that they won’t come across as conservative if they wear a Barbour as long as they style it right, but perhaps there’s more to it.
What is a Barbour? I remember, when I was a child on the rough-and-tumble Upper East Side of Manhattan, that the posh mom look involved a navy quilted coat that brought to mind (at the time, I would remark on it) the Bounty ads for the “quilted quicker-picker-upper.” But I’m pretty sure it was Burberry, not Barbour.
Another possibility is that it was L.L. Bean, which seems to specialize in what are either jackets inspired by other brands’ classics, or to be itself the ripped-off party, I have no idea. (More on that in a moment.) Regardless, they also make one, at a tenth of the price of the Burberry, which is making me think these women were probably in the Burberry.
I get the appeal of these jackets now that I am an ancient myself, but also, Uniqlo innovated on the navy-quilted-jacket technology and having something like this but packable must have won out in the end, because I’m pretty sure I have one of those on an entryway hook. (Toronto houses don’t much go in for downstairs closets.)
I promise I’m getting to the farmers.
Barbour, these are the green ones? It’s also a classic look, but not one I’d been much aware of until the brand started opening shops in the States. One appeared on Madison in prime quilted-picker-upper territory but I don’t remember this as having been there when I was growing up. Heritage-brand doesn’t mean of deep local roots, and that would be, like, Zitomer. Or E.A.T., where people with Substacks who did not move to Canada evidently have their gatherings. Or things that no longer exist, but that I did in fact see the inside of more than once: Daikichi Sushi, Tasti D Lite, Pintaile’s, the Lexington Avenue branch of the Gap. I was never really of the neighborhood, not the things it’s known for, but it doubtless made some kind of aesthetic impression.
I also remember a Barbour in Princeton, when I lived there in the deeply unpreppy capacity of IAS postdoc spouse. They had nice dog jackets in the window, but we wound up buying a similar-idea one online from Lands End.
The overall look has to have been on my radar, though, a bit earlier. There was some menswear Barbour x J. Crew situation my husband tried on and (we agree; I feel comfortable speaking for us both in this capacity) should have bought in the year 1840. (Definitely pre-move-to-Canada, would have been.) Also the Bensimon via Parisian consignment shop (Chercheminippes) jacket that I bought for myself in similarly distant times, that had a nice (and surprisingly padded) plaid-flannel lining but was always too brown versus green and I think fit weirdly so somewhere along the line I got rid of it. There’s also a Muji flat-quilted I once got on sale, in a color far more green than what’s this looks like here. It’s a good’un but also a bit short, even for fall.
“There is only one brand I would suggest buying a barn coat from new and that is L.L. Bean.” So newslettered Isabel Slone, who deserves joint credit with some sale they were having at the time for prompting me to take the plunge for the fall jacket I now wear all the time.
Is the jacket, as they say, doing me favors? So this is another matter. My efforts in the careless-country-elegance direction tend to make me look (I have observed this before) more Seinfeldian than aristocratic. Maybe it’s my face, maybe it’s that while I own pearl studs I rarely wear them, who knows. The more I dress like Kate Middleton, the more I look like, well, George.
But George was onto something! It’s classic but not costumey, and (allegedly) machine-washable. It doesn’t have to be sent out for re-waxing. It’s Barbour-ish, but, as with the Burberry situation, a fraction of the price, even well full-priced. Which brings me to my confusion:
Who is buying the $600 jacket? A $600 parka aka giant winter coat, whatever, these are normal in Canada where there is no alternative if you walk around a lot year-round and don’t want to freeze. But not-$600 midweight jackets abound. Is this a case where something that was gear gets reclaimed as streetwear (or in this case, poshwear)?
A British farmer (see: Lol) cannot possibly be earning that much, or else why are they protesting (again, don’t know yet). British professors as I understand it earn next to nothing, possibly have to pay the universities for the privilege of being lecturer. (What do I know, about this, or anything?)
Or is the idea that the Barbour isn’t the result of generational wealth but rather a handed-down item, such that it would be gauche to buy one new? That’s the vibe I get from Violet’s neighbors in the Keeping Up Appearances where Hyacinth and Richard encounter an upscale waxed-jacket-clad gun-toting (because country; England, remember) drunk. She hadn’t just been shopping on Madison Avenue or Nassau Street or wherever it is one would go in London.
OK, I am now looking up about the British farmers.
And… I think I might now see where the jackets enter into it.
This isn’t about all farmers nor about urban/suburban posh people dressing ‘country’ but rather something like As Time Goes By where 50-something (60-something?) Lionel’s father gives him a manor house with a farm that’s part of it and then Lionel, wanting to earn some money, decides to sell the house, and the buyer is none other than his father. (I may have mentioned this once or a thousand times before in this newsletter. Not bothering linking to all instances.)
Could be that, or could be farmers whose land value passes some new inheritence-tax threshold. That strikes me as more likely, but I cannot emphasize enough how unqualified and uninterested I am where opining on the specifics of this are concerned. The point is that this protest falls at the intersection of ‘farmer’ and ‘not short of a bob or two’ (that’s something, isn’t it?). So while the mere fact of agricultural employment may not imply waxing of cotton or $600 CAD, farming and being concerned about inheritance taxes very well might.