Last week I spent a lot of time looking at the future of store design and display at Euroshop, a once-every-three-year show held in Dusseldorf, Germany, about all things retail. It’s exhausting but fascinating, especially if you are mad about retail as we are and I was there with the trend forecasting agency Stylus.com.
I came across many wonderful things, but none made me laugh quite as much as The Ugly’s collection of mannequins from Dutch mannequin supplier Hans Boodt. When I asked about them, the spokesperson said ‘we’re not all perfect, not everyone looks like a supermodel, these are more of a reflection of reality’. Apparently the mannequins -which I might add are beautifully made -have sold to a few retailers already.
Now, I whole heartedly support the idea of more realistic mannequins, if you’ve been following the comments on our post on Fashion Week Models you’ll know we’re not keen on showing unsuitable role models for women of any age. But seeing what reality actually means in solid fibreglass (including underwear) is not as pretty as I’d have hoped. What do you think?
The most important thing for me is a range of body sizes and shapes. They don't need to actively make mannequins of models ugly though, that isn't really useful either!
I hate the fact that they have been named The Ugly's, they are not ugly they are normal! If they are a 'refelction of reality' why call them ugly – weird. Personally I quite like them as they are quirky and not a bad copy of Cheryl Cole or some super model – like most mannequins seem to be. Did they have any women?
Jane
Sadly no women, that's a really interesting point, do you think that might have been too controversial? Not quite so sensitive an issue making fun of men, but women…hmm a whole different set of rules apply. Any comments on that ladies? Ax
Well, it could be worse. As mannequins they'll have clothes on in the shops. That's what makes it possible for the rest of us normal Uglies to go outside, isn't it?