Last night I went to the Pierre hotel in New York to see a Lanvin loves H&M fashion show. They – by which I mean H&M, since this was clearly their gig to fund, though it had been given a Lanvin make-over — had taken over a jewel-like ballroom in the luxury hotel and erected a catwalk; outside was a red carpet. Many foreign fashion editors, as well as director Mike Figgis, who made their on-line advert/film, had been flown in for the occasion, and put up at the Four Seasons, and some celebrities, like Elettra Widemann, were front and center. The whole thing was running on high-fashion time, so the invitees stood around for an hour as tuxedo-clad waiters served caviar and blinis and champagne. Finally the show took place, and everyone cheered; Mike Figgis, who was sitting next to me, whispered that he thought the clothes had been upscaled for the catwalk. Afterwards, there was a pop-up shop where the attendees could have first dibs on the collection, though not immediately: people were let in according to colour codes on the back of their invites.

In other words, as an event it was: expensive, gorgeous, and elitist. All of which are words I think of as par for the course for high fashion, but the exact opposite of what H&M stands for, and what has made it such a success, which as I’ve always understood it was great fashion for the masses. And that, along with the prices tags of the Lanvin for H&M dresses, which clock in at $199.90, made me wonder if, perhaps, the event was about a little more than just a big blow-out shindig .