Yves Saint Laurent ad banned for using 'unhealthily underweight' model

Yves Saint Laurent ad banned for using 'unhealthily underweight' model

Advertising Standards Authority’s ruling criticises YSL’s use of female model with ‘very thin’ legs and ‘visible rib cage’, calling fashion advert ‘irresponsible’

Haroon Siddique

Wednesday 3 June 2015 00.01 BST / http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jun/03/yves-saint-laurent-ad-ban-underweight-model

An advert by the fashion company Yves Saint Laurent has been banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog for using a model who appeared to be unhealthily underweight.

Upholding a complaint that the model looked too thin, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) censured the advert, which appeared in Elle magazine, as irresponsible.

In its ruling, published on Wednesday, it said: “The ASA considered that the model’s pose and the particular lighting effect in the ad drew particular focus to the model’s chest, where her rib cage was visible and appeared prominent, and to her legs, where her thighs and knees appeared a similar width, and which looked very thin, particularly in light of her positioning and the contrast between the narrowness of her legs and her platform shoes.

“We therefore considered that the model appeared unhealthily underweight in the image and concluded that the ad was irresponsible.”

It said YSL indicated that it did not agree that the model in the advert for Saint Laurent Paris was unhealthily thin but did not provide a detailed response.

The use of skinny models has come under increased scrutiny in recent years, with critics claiming that it damages the body confidence of women and girls by promoting unrealistic and unhealthy ideals.

A petition started by an LA-based blogger urging YSL to stop using “painfully thin models” in its advertisements collected just under 50,000 signatures last year. Despite the spotlight on the fashion industry, the YSL advert is one of only a handful that have been banned by the ASA for featuring models who look too thin.

In 2011, the watchdog banned an online advert for the clothing brand Drop Dead, for using a size-8 girl in a bikini with “highly visible” hip, rib and collar bones.

Last year, Urban Outfitters was ordered to remove a photo from its website showing the lower half of a young woman’s body, with the ASA noting that “there was a significant gap between the model’s thighs, and that her thighs and knees were a similar width”.

Responding to the ruling, Jo Swinson, co-founder of the Campaign for Body Confidence said: “Where images are irresponsible, it’s right that the ASA takes action. It’s better for girls to channel the spirit of [Sport England campaign] ‘This Girl Can’ to focus on their body feeling great through exercise, than feeling pressure to have a thigh gap.”

The ASA found the advertisement breached section 1.3 of the Committee of Advertising Practice code, which states: “Marketing communications must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.”

YSL and Elle declined to comment on the ruling

TOMMY PAGE vintage mantique in Amsterdam.

TOMMY PAGE

vintage mantique in Amsterdam.

Prinsenstraat 7

Amsterdam, Netherlands

020 330 7941

http://www.tommypage.nl/

The shop is curated and run by the designer Tommy Page, whose curiosity for menswear throughout history has led him to open his own vintage archive in the heart of Amsterdam.

Tommy Page has a special direct connection with Hornets Kensington in London.

So if you are looking for the “real thing” concerning british “tweeds”, this is the place to be in Amsterdam.

"DIOR AND I" / Corporate Promotion Documentary.

Review: ‘Dior and I,’ a Documentary That Peers Into a Storied Fashion House

Dior and I

By A. O. SCOTTAPRIL 9, 2015 / http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/10/movies/review-dior-and-i-a-documentary-that-peers-into-a-storied-fashion-house.html?_r=0

An elegant and captivating piece of corporate promotion in the guise of a documentary, Frédéric Tcheng’s “Dior and I” unfolds like an episode of “Project Runway” with better clothes and bigger budgets, or perhaps a Christopher Guest movie without a sense of humor. There are some amusing moments, to be sure, and some touching ones as well, but the film is less interested in ideas or emotions than in illusions. It produces an aura of suspense without a sense of real risk, and offers devotees of fashion an appealing, shallow fantasy of inside knowledge.

The designer with members of his couture team, referred to as the “petites mains,” and the premières who head the ateliers, Florence Chehet (right, in black) and Monique Bailly (left, in black).Inside Raf Simons’s HouseAPRIL 9, 2015

Early and late, Mr. Tcheng summons the specter of Christian Dior, who appears in archival footage accompanied by passages from his memoir (read by the poet Omar Berrada) that reflect on his double identity as an ordinary provincial Frenchman and as the name above the door of a storied Paris fashion house. Dior, whose 1947 New Look created some of the most enduring iconography of modern femininity, is invoked as a friendly ghost haunting the workshops and showrooms of his maison de couture, and as a benevolent patriarch devoted, above all, to the elegance of women. In 2012, when most of the film takes place, Dior’s legacy has been placed in the hands of Raf Simons, a Belgian designer recently hired from Jil Sander.

Mr. Simons, Dior’s new artistic director, arrives in an atmosphere of nervous expectation, with just eight weeks to produce a couture collection to be shown at Paris Fashion Week. Best known for his men’s wear, he has a reputation as a minimalist — a characterization he disputes — that potentially makes him an odd fit with the company’s tradition of tasteful luxury. Introducing Mr. Simons to the white-coated staff of the workshops where the clothes will be made, his boss notes with evident mixed feelings that the house is “modernizing.” Mr. Simons, who favors dark sweaters and open-necked shirts over silk ties and elegantly cut suits, also prefers to be addressed by his first name.

“Dior and I” is itself a sign of the times, in which transparency is the new mystique. An audience that once might have savored the mysteries of craft now feasts on the spectacle of process. We demand to see how the sausages — or in this case the dresses, but also the dances, the plays and the movies themselves — are made.

A documentary style has arisen to answer this hunger that splits the difference between cinéma vérité and reality television, engendering films that often feel like CliffsNotes versions of Frederick Wiseman’s dense, slow moving institutional studies. Like “Ballet 422,” Jody Lee Lipes’s recent film about the choreographer Justin Peck, “Dior and I” generates momentum and interest by showing deadline-driven creative work. In both cases, there is a counterpoint of individual vision and collaborative labor. Mr. Simons, assisted by his longtime collaborator Pieter Mulier, delves into contemporary art and Dior’s history in search of inspiration.

Shy, morose and unable to speak French, Mr. Simons sometimes has trouble communicating with the women who run the workshops, who view him with skepticism. The two premières, Florence Chehet and Monique Bailly, who preside over teams of white-coated cutters and seamstresses (one for dresses, the other for suits), are by far the most fascinating figures in “Dior and I.” They are a study in temperamental contrasts — Ms. Chehet warm and bubbly, Ms. Bailly anxious and astringent — and also exemplars of loyal service and artisanal pride.

Ultimately, though, they are treated with condescension, by the attention-seeking, hype-driven industry that employs them and by a film that uncritically embraces the values of that industry. Access to an institution like the house of Dior is a rare and precious thing, and Mr. Tcheng has paid for it with a flattering portrait dressed up to look like cleareyed scrutiny. The emperor’s clothes are beautiful, as you always knew they would be.

Dior and I

Opens on Friday

Written and directed by Frédéric Tcheng; director of photography, Gilles Piquard; edited by Julio C. Perez IV and Mr. Tcheng; music by Ha-Yang Kim; produced by Mr. Tcheng and Guillaume de Roquemaurel; released by the Orchard. In French, English and Flemish, with English subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 29 minutes. This film is not rated.

‘Dior and I’ Review: Sartorial Sprint

A documentary tracks the new artistic director of the House of Dior as he creates his debut collection in only eight weeks.

By JOE MORGENSTERN

Updated April 17, 2015 2:15 p.m. ET / http://www.wsj.com/articles/dior-and-i-review-sartorial-sprint-1429210425

Screenwriters often heighten the drama of fiction films by equipping their plots with ticking clocks—only so many minutes, hours or days to do such and such before all hell breaks loose. In the fine documentary feature “Dior and I,” a countdown clock is set for eight weeks at the beginning of 2012. That was the startlingly short stretch of time allotted to Raf Simons, the House of Dior’s new artistic director, for the creation of his debut collection, after which, it was hoped, his vision of fashion heaven would open its floral gates. Frédéric Tcheng’s film tracks the collection’s genesis and development with unconcealed admiration—this is hardly the anatomy of a flop—but with a reporter’s sharp eye for detail, and a playwright’s appreciation for suspense. The drama of getting new dresses on the runway turns out to be transfixing, while the hero redefines the notion of intense.

As well he might. Mr. Simons, a Belgian designer previously noted for a minimalist menswear line, had no way of knowing if the Dior atelier could do his bidding under such pressure, notwithstanding the superlative skills of its seamstresses. And they had no way of knowing if their new leader would make demands they couldn’t meet. (He did, but they met them all the same.) “Dior and I,” which uses a cleverly truncated origin story to invoke the House of Dior’s founder, Christian Dior, is a fascinating procedural with a fitting climax. Stunning models wearing Mr. Simon’s gorgeous clothes slouch their stuff during an opulent show in a Parisian mansion whose walls and doors have been covered with tens of thousands of fresh flowers. Busby Berkeley couldn’t have done better.

Dior and I - Official International trailer

THE TRUE COST OF FASHION .'The True Cost' - Official Trailer

Review: ‘The True Cost’ Investigates High Price of Fashion Bargains

The True Cost

By JEANNETTE CATSOULISMAY

28, 2015 / http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/movies/review-the-true-cost-investigates-high-price-of-fashion-bargains.html

A distressing overview of the consequences of our addiction to fast fashion, “The True Cost” might suggest another exposé of corporate greed versus environmental well-being. That is certainly in evidence, but under the gentle, humane investigations of its director, Andrew Morgan, what emerges most strongly is a portrait of exploitation that ought to make us more nauseated than elated over those $20 jeans.

To learn who is paying for our bargains, Mr. Morgan dives to the bottom of the supply chain, to the garment factories of Cambodia and Bangladesh and the cotton fields of India, where he links ecological and health calamities to zealous pesticide use. Garment workers subsisting on less than $3 a day recount beatings by bosses who resent unionization and requests for higher wages. At the same time, a factory owner in Bangladesh — where the 2013 collapse of the Rana Plaza building caused more than 1,000 deaths — tells us candidly that when retailers squeeze him, he must squeeze his employees.

“There are a lot of worse things they could be doing,” a former sourcing manager for the fashion brand Joe Fresh says about these unfortunates, echoing an all-too-familiar justification. A visit to Haiti, however, where millions of tons of our castoff clothing have clogged landfills and destroyed the local clothing industry, makes us wonder how much worse these people’s lives could become.

Offering few solutions beyond a single fair-trade fashion company, “The True Cost” — whose serene interludes compete with sickening recordings of Black Friday shopping riots and so-called clothing haul videos — stirs and saddens. Not least because it’s unlikely to reach the young consumers most in need of its revelations.

“The True Cost” is rated PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned). Toxic chemicals and obscene consumption.

‘The True Cost,’ a Different Kind of Fashion Documentary

Vanessa Friedman

MAY 28, 2015 / http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/fashion/the-true-cost-a-different-kind-of-fashion-documentary.html?_r=0

I suppose it was inevitable that after the spate of fashion brands embracing documentaries (see Dior, Gucci, Chanel, Valentino, Gaultier), many of which proved surprisingly effective pieces of industry propaganda, a director would come along to put the whole thing in context.

Sort of.

That director is Andrew Morgan, and his film is “The True Cost,” which probably gives you some idea of the subject. It premiered in Cannes, complete with a red carpet appearance by Livia and Colin Firth (Ms. Firth is one of the film’s executive producers and also appears on screen, as do — full disclosure — I, sitting next to her on a panel at a Copenhagen Fashion Summit). It will be screened Thursday night at the IFC Center in New York, with public showings beginning Friday, and open later in London, Los Angeles and Tokyo. It will also be available on iTunes and Netflix.

Viewers will get a feature-length look at the human and environmental cost of fast fashion, from workers in Bangladesh to cotton farmers in Texas, by way of India, Cambodia and Fifth Avenue. It is affecting and upsetting, and will probably make some consumers think twice about where they buy clothes — though arguably the sort of moviegoers attracted to a film like this already share its point of view.

Mr. Morgan, who also provides the narration, comes at his subject with the naïveté and enthusiasm of an amateur — he acknowledges that he didn’t think much about his clothes beyond style and cost until he started the film; he didn’t, that is, think about supply chain issues. This viewpoint gives the film’s difficult and multidimensional subject an easy-to-swallow accessibility.

But it also oversimplifies it to an extreme and, it seems to me, undermining degree.

Starting with the fact that, either for brevity or impact, Mr. Morgan conflates “fast fashion” with “fashion” writ large. And while he is condemning the Main Street megaliths for producing in sweatshops, he slips in photographs of high-end runway shows, implying that they also produce in sweatshops. Yet fashion (the “almost $3 trillion industry,” as he calls it) is not created equal, and fashion’s impacts are not equal. Sports brands have different problems from premium brands, many of which have their own factories, and premium brands have different problems from mass brands.

This is not to say that high-end fashion should not be taken to task for its failings, but simply that to police a sector effectively, or call it out on its shortcomings, you need to do it in an informed and realistic way. Otherwise you create openings for companies to dismiss the charges as irrelevant, which can taint the whole project.

(Not that any companies, aside from those known to have an ethical agenda like Stella McCartney and People Tree, appeared willing to speak to Mr. Morgan, which suggests they have their own fears about this subject. I think that was a big mistake. To begin to address the issues we first have to know what they are, thorns and all.)

Similarly, though lots of eye-popping statements are used, including that fashion is the second-most-polluting industry on the planet, after oil, they are unattributed. Because they are so powerful, this seems a surprising omission.

I emailed Mr. Morgan to ask about the pollution comment, and he wrote back that it came from both the World Wide Fund for Nature and the Danish Fashion Institute, and that the statement referred to the whole process used by the fashion industry. “The chemical industry” — which I mentioned in my query — “is now most often seen as being a part of other key industries, fashion being key among them,” Mr. Morgan wrote.

Still, “The True Cost” would not have been hurt if Mr. Morgan had taken a slightly more granular approach to his subject — had he, say, included the sources of his statistics, or limited himself to the biggest, most mass-market brands, as they touch the most people. He spent two years making the film, visiting 13 countries, and it’s hard not to feel in the end that he was overwhelmed by the scale of the problem. In trying to do everything, he skirted a lot of things, including acknowledging the shades of gray in this subject.

It’s too bad, because doing less might actually have added up to more.

Jeeves will be away ... for a period of 10 days.

“Lord Peter Wimsey was a kind of Bertie Wooster with Brains” … The Unique, Unforgettable, Ian Carmichael as Lord Peter Wimsey/ BBC / VÍDEO /Ian Carmichael OBE - BBC Obituary

LORD PETER WIMSEY The Complete Collection starring Ian Carmichael. "No crust has even been more upper, no sleuth more of a hoot." —Los Angeles Times The acclaimed BBC dramas seen on PBS’ Masterpiece Theatre! Here at last are all five of the original BBC adaptations of Dorothy L. Sayers’ crime thrillers featuring Ian Carmichael as the brilliant aristocratic sleuth. Hailed by critics as one of the finest mystery series ever filmed, it was so successful on PBS’ Masterpiece Theatre that it single-handedly inspired the spin-off Mystery! Running at least three hours each, these dramas do full justice to Sayers’ vivid characters and elegant 1920s settings. THE MYSTERIES: Clouds of Witness, The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club, Murder Must Advertise, The Nine Tailors, Five Red Herrings DVD SPECIAL FEATURES INCLUDE exclusive Ian Carmichael interviews, filmographies, interactive trivia and Dorothy L. Sayers materials.

Ian Carmichael starred as Wimsey in radio adaptations of the novels made by the BBC, all of which have been available on cassette and CD from the BBC Radio Collection. In the original series, which ran on Radio 4 from 1973–83, no adaptation was made of the seminal Gaudy Night, perhaps because the leading character in this novel is Harriet and not Peter; this was corrected in 2005 when a version specially recorded for the BBC Radio Collection was released starring Carmichael and Joanna David. The CD also includes a panel discussion on the novel, the major participants in which are P. D. James and Jill Paton Walsh. Gaudy Night was released as an unabridged audio book read by Ian Carmichael in 1993.

In How I Came to Invent the Character of Lord Peter Wimsey, Sayers wrote:
Lord Peter's large income... I deliberately gave him... After all it cost me nothing and at the time I was particularly hard up and it gave me pleasure to spend his fortune for him. When I was dissatisfied with my single unfurnished room I took a luxurious flat for him in Piccadilly. When my cheap rug got a hole in it, I ordered him an Aubusson carpet. When I had no money to pay my bus fare I presented him with a Daimler double-six, upholstered in a style of sober magnificence, and when I felt dull I let him drive it. I can heartily recommend this inexpensive way of furnishing to all who are discontented with their incomes. It relieves the mind and does no harm to anybody.











“Lord Peter Wimsey burst upon the world of detective fiction with an explosive "Oh, damn!" and continued to engage readers in eleven novels and two sets of short stories; the final novel ended with a very different "Oh, damn!". Sayers once commented that Lord Peter was a mixture of Fred Astaire and Bertie Wooster, which is most evident in the first five novels. However, it is evident through Lord Peter's development as a rounded character that he existed in Sayers's mind as a living, breathing, fully human being. Sayers introduced detective novelist Harriet Vane in Strong Poison. Sayers remarked more than once that she had developed the "husky voiced, dark-eyed" Harriet to put an end to Lord Peter via matrimony. But in the course of writing Gaudy Night, Sayers imbued Lord Peter and Harriet with so much life that she was never able, as she put it, to "see Lord Peter exit the stage".


Sayers did not content herself with writing pure detective stories; she explored the difficulties of First World War veterans in The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club, discussed the ethics of advertising in Murder Must Advertise, and advocated women's education (then a controversial subject) and role in society in Gaudy Night. In Gaudy Night, Miss Barton writes a book attacking the Nazi doctrine of Kinder, Kirche, Küche, which restricted women's roles to family activities, and in many ways the whole of Gaudy Night can be read as an attack on Nazi social doctrine. The book has been described as "the first feminist mystery novel."


Sayers's Christian and academic interests are also apparent in her detective series. In The Nine Tailors, one of her most well-known detective novels, the plot unfolds largely in and around an old church dating back to the Middle Ages. Change ringing of bells also forms an important part of the novel. In Have His Carcase, the Playfair cipher and the principles of cryptanalysis are explained. Her short story Absolutely Elsewhere refers to the fact that (in the language of modern physics) the only perfect alibi for a crime is to be outside its light cone, while The Fascinating Problem of Uncle Meleager's Will contains a literary crossword puzzle.


Sayers also wrote a number of short stories about Montague Egg, a wine salesman who solves mysteries.





“Lord Peter begins his hobby of investigation by recovering The Attenbury Emeralds in 1921. He also becomes good friends with Scotland Yard detective Charles Parker, a sergeant in 1921 who eventually rises to the rank of Commander. Bunter, a man of many talents himself, not least photography, often proves instrumental in Peter's investigations. However, Wimsey is not entirely well. At the end of the investigation in Whose Body? (1923) he hallucinates that he is back in the trenches. He soon recovers his senses and goes on a long holiday.


The next year, he travels (in Clouds of Witness, 1926) to the fictional Riddlesdale in North Yorkshire to assist his older brother Gerald, who has been accused of murdering Captain Denis Cathcart, their sister's fiancé. As Gerald is the Duke of Denver, he is tried by the entire House of Lords, as required by the law at that time, to much scandal and the distress of his wife Helen. Their sister, Lady Mary, also falls under suspicion. Lord Peter clears the Duke and Lady Mary, to whom Parker is attracted.


As a result of the slaughter of men in the First World War, there was in the UK a considerable imbalance between the sexes. It is not exactly known when Wimsey recruited Miss Climpson to run an undercover employment agency for women, a means to garner information from the otherwise inaccessible world of spinsters and widows, but it is prior to Unnatural Death (1927), in which Miss Climpson assists Wimsey's investigation of the suspicious death of an elderly cancer patient.


As recounted in the short story "The Adventurous Exploit of the Cave of Ali Baba", in December 1927 Wimsey fakes his own death, supposedly while hunting big game in Tanganyika, to penetrate and break up a particularly dangerous and well-organised criminal gang. Only Wimsey's mother and sister, the loyal Bunter and Inspector Parker know he is still alive. Emerging victorious after more than a year masquerading as "the disgruntled sacked servant Rogers", Wimsey remarks that "We shall have an awful time with the lawyers, proving that I am me." In fact, he returns smoothly to his old life, and the interlude is never referred to in later books.


During the 1920s, Wimsey has affairs with various women, which are the subject of much gossip in Britain and Europe. This part of his life remains hazy: it is hardly ever mentioned in the books set in the same period; most of the scanty information on the subject is given in flashbacks from later times, after he meets Harriet Vane and relations with other women become a closed chapter. In Busman's Honeymoon Wimsey facetiously refers to a gentleman's duty "to remember whom he had taken to bed" so as not to embarrass his bedmate by calling her by the wrong name.


There are several references to a relationship with a famous Viennese opera singer, and Bunter – who evidently was involved with this, as with other parts of his master's life – recalls Wimsey being very angry with a French mistress who mistreated her own servant. The only one of Wimsey's earlier women to appear in person is the artist Marjorie Phelps, who plays an important role in The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club. She has known Wimsey for years and is attracted to him, though it is not explicitly stated whether they were lovers. Wimsey likes her, respects her, and enjoys her company – but that isn't enough. In Strong Poison, she is the first person other than Wimsey himself to realise that he has fallen in love with Harriet.


In Strong Poison Lord Peter encounters Harriet Vane, a cerebral, Oxford-educated mystery writer, while she is on trial for the murder of her former lover. He falls in love with her at first sight. Wimsey saves her from the gallows, but she believes that gratitude is not a good foundation for marriage, and politely but firmly declines his frequent proposals. Lord Peter encourages his friend and foil, Chief Inspector Charles Parker, to propose to his sister, Lady Mary Wimsey, despite the great difference in their rank and wealth. They marry and have a son, named Charles Peter ("Peterkin"), and a daughter, Mary Lucasta.


While on a fishing holiday in Scotland, Wimsey instigates and takes part in the investigation of the murder of an artist, related in Five Red Herrings. Despite the rejection of his marriage proposal, he continues to court Miss Vane. In Have His Carcase, he finds Harriet is not in London, but learns from a reporter that she has discovered a corpse while on a walking holiday on England's south coast. Wimsey is at her hotel the next morning. He not only investigates the death and offers proposals of marriage, but also acts as Harriet's patron and protector from press and police. Despite a prickly relationship, they work together to identify the murderer.


Back in London, Wimsey goes undercover as "Death Bredon" at an advertising firm, working as a copywriter (Murder Must Advertise). Bredon is framed for murder, leading Charles Parker to "arrest" Bredon for murder in front of numerous witnesses. To distinguish Death Bredon from Lord Peter Wimsey, Parker smuggles Wimsey out of the police station and urges him to get into the papers. Accordingly Wimsey accompanies "a Royal personage" to a public event, leading the press to carry pictures of both "Bredon" and Wimsey. In 1934 Wimsey in (The Nine Tailors) must unravel a 20-year-old case of missing jewels; an unknown corpse; a missing World War I soldier believed alive; a murderous escaped convict believed dead and a mysterious code concerning church bells.


By 1935 Lord Peter is in continental Europe, acting as an unofficial attaché to the British Foreign Office. Harriet Vane contacts him about a problem she has been asked to investigate in her college at Oxford (Gaudy Night). At the end of their investigation, Vane finally accepts Wimsey's proposal of marriage.


The couple marry on 8 October 1935, at St. Cross Church, Holywell Street, Oxford, as depicted in the opening collection of letters and diary entries in Busman's Honeymoon. The Wimseys honeymoon at Talboys, a house in east Hertfordshire near where Harriet had lived as a child, that Peter has bought for her as a wedding present. There they find the body of the previous owner, and spend their honeymoon solving the case, thus having the eponymous "Busman's Honeymoon".


Over the next five years, according to Sayers' short stories, the Wimseys have three sons: Bredon Delagardie Peter Wimsey (born in October 1936 in the story "The Haunted Policeman"); Roger Wimsey (born 1938), and Paul Wimsey (born 1940). However, according to the wartime publications of The Wimsey Papers, published in The Spectator, the second son was called Paul. It may be presumed that Paul is named after Lord Peter's maternal uncle Paul Delagardie. "Roger" is an ancestral Wimsey name. Sayers told friends orally that Harriet and Peter were to eventually have five children in all.


In the final Wimsey story, the 1942 short story "Talboys", Peter and Harriet are enjoying rural domestic bliss with their three sons when Bredon, their first-born, is accused of the theft of prize peaches from the neighbour's tree. Peter and the accused set off to investigate and, of course, prove Bredon's innocence.”