Sarah Jessica Parker: feared by men, adored by women, influencer of the New York gubernatorial election, the swirling heart of the will-there-be-a-Sex-and-the-City-three controversy…added one more laurel to her couture wreath this week. She launched a line of bridal apparel, “SJP by Sarah Jessica Parker,” with the company Gilt.
Gilt, an e-commerce fashion company, marks its first ever foray into bridal-wear with Parker’s 10-piece line. The small collection is defined by its elegant femininity — feathered skirts, sweeping bows, and flesh-hugging body-suits in delicate pastels. Most of the pieces are made primarily with viscose, an affordable silk-alternative fabric that serves to make the items seem unpretentious rather than cheap. The line can be defined as “affordable luxury” — cocktail attire worn by a bride who can afford much more but doesn’t want to progress farther than the atrium in the wedding industrial complex.
The line ranges from $295 for lowest-end body suits (an inspiring three out of ten items in the collection are body suits or jumpsuits, a sign of the times) to an outlier dress, the only piece in the collection that tops $2,000. Parker’s line with Gilt runs from a size 0 to a size 14, so, pointedly, Parker will not offer clothing to American women who are average size or larger. Though financially feasible for many brides and made widely available on line, “SJP” is intentionally exclusive.
An outfit built from the SJP line will make a bride who looks less like Carrie Bradshaw and more like a minor league Instagram model. For the fashion forward (or the fashion backward to Bradshaw’s turn-of-the-century heyday), inserting pieces from the line onto more daring looks will do the trick. To the promote the collection, Parker paired the most risqué piece (a skirt with crotch-length slit) with the most simple (a scoop-neck bodysuit), and added charcoal denim and a pair of shoes from her line. Of course, though Parker’s bridal collection is “affordable” in the outrageous context of wedding apparel shopping, her line of footwear, it must be noted, is nobody’s idea of a discount (at least, I feel like $365 shouldn’t be anybody’s idea of a discount). But of course! If Parker’s fashion didn’t continue to laser focus on shoes, how could we even recognize her?
Jenny Singer is a writer for the Forward. You can reach her at Singer@forward.com or on Twitter @jeanvaljenny