Duchess Kate wore a $2200 Alessandra Rich dress to visit Bletchley Park

Embed from Getty Images

The Duchess of Cambridge has a connection to Bletchley Park, which is where many of the British intelligence services were conducted during World War II. Kate’s grandmother worked at Bletchley Park, and because of that connection, Kate has been tasked with doing various events at Bletchley for years now. Today was another event – she’s viewing their latest exhibition to mark the 75th anniversary of D-Day, and to spend time with children who were doing a little play about codebreaking.

I once theorized that Kate loves polka dots because the dots remind her of buttons, and I’m still sticking with that theory. Kate chose this £1,750 polka-dotted Alessandra Rich dress which… I mean, Princess Diana absolutely would have worn this. In 1982. The collar, the hem, the cuffs, the BUTTONS, it’s all so dated and vintage school-teacher. Did Kate think she had to do some kind of theme-dressing for the WWII exhibit? The thing is, this isn’t a WWII theme. It’s a late-70s/early ‘80s sartorial theme. This is the first time Kate has worn this dress to an actual event, although we got a glimpse of it in Prince Charles’ 70th birthday portraits.

I was going to say something about how Kate’s vibe for the past year or so has been for a below-the-knee hemline more consistently, and going for more prim/frumpy/dated looks. But then I caught sign of the last button on her skirt and how high it is – gal loves to flash some leg, huh? At least the skirt split isn’t at crotch-level though.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

126 Responses to “Duchess Kate wore a $2200 Alessandra Rich dress to visit Bletchley Park”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

    It would’ve looked a LOT better with a red or yellow shoe.

    (And Abigale Spencer wore it better at M&H’s wedding).

    That said, glad she’s out and working; wonder if *any* nose(s) will be in a snit as Harry’s outing was covered more…?

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      That’s why this dress seemed familiar. Is it the same dress?

      • BchyYogi says:

        Drop waist is just NOT for her body type’; her torso appears “circus mirror” and her usually long looking legs appear stumpy. I GET the trend-proof practicality of English Royal fashion, but the proportions need to suit. In this case I’d call the frock a “waist” of money, for several reasons.

    • Kylie says:

      Kate wore it in the pictures for Charles’ birthday last year and Pippa has it in a solid,. It is pretty popular dress.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      OMG yes Abigail wore it best, i loved the way she styled it with the best and fascinator. It is a nice dress.

      I don’t mind it on Kate but she does make it look boring with head teacher at a victorian school cosplay. Kate doesn’t have the vibe and posture to pull off high end designer/bespoke creations.

      I’ve said it before and will say it again, Kate CANNOT wear clothes they wear her and badly. What is it with the Middleton women, Pippa is the same – the only one who looks consistently good is Carole. She knows how to wear clothes.

    • Julianne says:

      I like the dress but found the pics of Abigale Spencer wearing it and agree she pulls it off. I think it’s the belt that does the trick and I’m not sure that would do Kate many favors. The whole vintage look is really in right now, but I’m not sure that’s why Kate is wearing this type of thing. She does seem to put a lot of thought into what she wears though .

      • LadytoLazy says:

        She didn’t seem to put a lot of thought into this appearance. I agree that the matching belt pulled it into today’s style, but without the belt and the same sausage rolls in her hair, she looks dated.

  2. Jay says:

    Yikes what a horrible dress.

    • Flying fish says:

      It really is a horrible dress. Whether it’s styled like Abigail or Kate, it’s still a horrible dress.

  3. t says:

    Below-the-knee hemline doesn’t have to mean frumpy or dated. It depends on style and attitude. Look at any of the muslimah fashion bloggers for example. It’s Kate’s personal style, not the hem length, that tilt the look into dated and prim.

  4. CrystalBall says:

    Not a good look when the wind blows the slit up and back as seen in other photos! What a shame she still can’t get it right after all these year.

    • Starkiller says:

      And per pics not shown here, it was also almost completely see-through. Just imagine the foaming at the mouth that would be taking place if she-who-must-not-be-Named wore a see through dress slit halfway up the thigh.

      • Ceedee says:

        She did wear a dress with a very high slit (much higher than Kate’s here) during their Australia and NZ tour last year, the linen white striped one. No one’s mouth foamed, if I recall correctly.

      • CSNy says:

        Shhh, Ceedee, everything on here must be life-or-death drama at all times.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        Not drama so much as fashion discussion!

        Meg’s beachy slit dress did have a lining and there were attempts to attack her choice.

      • Johnna Shapiro says:

        Au contraire, Ceedee. Mouths definitely foamed.

    • Megan says:

      Ugh, do we really need to police women’s hemlines?

      • SK says:

        Yes! Thank you!!!! It is 2019 – who cares???? She is showing literally 2 inches of skin above the knee and people are practically fainting over it. It is fine. It is still professional. Also, this dress is not see-through. It’s actually quite nice and it is in fashion. I think it would look better with a belt because of the style and her body proportions; but it still looks lovely like this. Yeesh.

  5. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Longer hemlines don’t have to look frumpy or dated. It’s WHAT and HOW Kate wears them that makes them that way.

  6. Moneypenny says:

    It’s supposed to have a belt with it (looking at the designer’s pics of it and how Abigail Spencer wore it). It needs the belt to make it less 80s. Kate’s energy is too prim to pull this off without looking like an admin 30 years ago.

    • Snowflake says:

      Exactly! Her whole look is very dated imo. If her hair was in a more modern style, the whole look would be retro but instead it looks dated.

  7. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    You are spot (dot) on with early 80s. I had a dress just like this. And I remember a black polka dot dress from Needless Markup with a sailor collar which had very similar vibes.

  8. Stef says:

    What a terrible dress, she looks like an 80’s school teacher. Such a great figure yet she looks like a grandma here. uh. Sadly, I have nothing nice to say…

  9. Bichon Lover says:

    To have access to so much money and the best designers and still come up with this look is tragic. I’m sorry, I don’t mind Kate, but she could certainly do a better job with $2200. Come on, she’s tall, thin, and rich…a designer’s dream.

  10. M says:

    I like it!

  11. Simon the Bird says:

    I actually really like this one. Flattering. Retro.

  12. FluffyPrincess says:

    Is the DM going to print a detailed list of how much her outfit cost–even if it’s a re-do?

    I like the dress overall, and falls right into her style range. Although, the suggestions of a red or yellow shoe seem like a fun pop of color.

    Get those numbers up while you can Kate, because I have a feeling when Meghan is back, she is going to work as much as she can–like the Sr. royals — like Countess Sophie and Princess Anne.

    • M says:

      They did! It costs 1750 pounds!

      • FluffyPrincess says:

        What about the shoes and the bag? Meghan’s lists are very detailed — shoes, bags, jewelry too. . .

    • M says:

      well… they did. the shoes cost 425 pounds.

      Meghan has spent an extreme amount of money on clothes for being married to number six in line to the throne. I think it is absolutely valid to focus on her spending. The media in Denmark does the same thing to the Crown Princess who also spends an insane amount of money on clothes. She recently admitted in an interview that she did spent too much money, and that she would lower her cost. This kind of tracking is absolutely normal when the spending habit is out of reach like with Meghan.

      If Meghan was wiser, which we clearly know she is – wise and clever, she would be better at repeats and mixing more garments of less expensive haute couture. But she isn´t really doing that, so she is dragged for it by the media. She could choose differently, but she has not.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        Does your “extreme” cost claim include the repeats the media pretended were new, the pieces she owned prior to marriage that were also treated like new, the random prices the media claimed about bespoke pieces like the Dior gown in Morocco, etc.? 🙄

      • M says:

        Even if we have a margin of +-100.000 pounds of error, she has still spent way more than any royal that outrank her. Like WAY more. And while she receives public funding, it´s completely valid to keep track on how she uses her money, and she has failed in that department. She has looked nice, but this comes at a high cost.

        I do think that the media has trated her unfairly in many departments. But not in this one. She spends too much and it is totally fine to point that out as long as she gets her paycheck from the public.

      • M says:

        … And I would feel the same if it was any other royal. Also Kate, the Scandinavian princesses etc…

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate has spent at least over a million pounds in clothing over the years, probably closer to two. Outside of a few people pointing that out there is never the same energy in criticizing how much she spends for the meagre amount of appearances that she makes. Instead we see justifications like she will be future queen consort so she can spend more. Considering she has eight years of wardrobe to pick from, she really shouldn’t be wearing anything new for several years to come.

        If we want to talk about extreme spending then we must include Kate’s extreme spending as well for clothing that is often repetitive and redundant. Any serious conversation must include this or else it is disingenuous.

      • M says:

        Okay Nic919… Let´s follow you hypothesis a bit, shall we.

        Let us look at Meghan vs. Kate for their first year as a senior royal:

        Kate 2011-2012: 35.000 pounds (minus wedding dress) (source, Daily Mail)

        Meghan 2018-2019: 700.000 pounds (minus wedding dress) (source: Express)

        And then, let us have a look at the last year of both women:

        Kate (2018-2019): 68.000 pounds

        Meghan (2018-2019): 700.000 pounds

        So…. The numbers are there.

      • PrincessK says:

        Oh for heavens sake, how many times do people have to be told. Meghan is not daft. She is given a budget for clothing and told to spend that budget! Meghan does not set the budget for her clothing it is given to her, and she is told to spend the money, because that is what it is for. She can’t over spend, and under spending makes the people who set the budget look like they don’t know what they are doing.

        Charles also knows that once William gets his hands on Duchy money that will be it for Meghan, so it’s best that she buys as many clothes as she can now. Kate has had access for years, and will always have.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        M, you’re citing numbers from the same media that is clearly known for manipulating the costs against Meghan and claiming those numbers are absolute fact. “Even if we give a 100,000 pound margin of error”? They already claimed that the Dior gown alone was 90,000 without any sources, so the “margin of error” as you call it is likely well above that number.

      • Wigletwatcher says:

        Meg’s wardrobe has been bloated from previously owned items being counted. She has worked consistently and often through her engagement to now. While her body was ever changing from pregnancy.

        And if we make this a M vs. K who spends more debate… landslide results. And that’s not from time within the BRF.

      • Sam says:

        That Meghan clothing tally is BS.

        The cartier set(which was where the most money was spent) cost around £400,000+ and is said to be gifted and was before she was even a royal yet it was included.They didnt do that for other royals… their excuse for counting it is “it wasnt confirmed by the palace it was gifted” but why on earth would the palace confirm that?

        The royals only start paying for meghan when she becomes a royal and starts doing engagements.Her first engagement was on 22nd May so any item of clothing from Jan-May 19 were paid by Meghan and should not have been counted but they were

        They also dont know which items of meghans are ones she owned before,got with her own money/got given by her friends.
        Her Shaun Leanne jewellry (which was added to the tally) was bought by Marku :
        “The royal owns three pieces from the avant-garde jeweler all of which were purchased as a gift by Meghan’s close friend Markus Anderson”

        When all those are taken out cos they really shouldn’t have been included there at all,the real tally is close to £200k,not saying it isnt much but isnt way above what other royal women have spent

        The people that also made it admitted it was the overall cost of what she wore that year not what she actually spent and they were able to identify more pieces of her clothing than the other royals.

    • M says:

      Generally, Kate´s numbers are about the same as Crown Princess Mary and the Scandinavian princesses. Which still is very high. But it is nowhere near the spending from the Duchess of Sussex.

      • Penny says:

        I’ll also add that Meghan worked a lot more than Kate in her first year of marriage so of course her cost of clothing will be more…let’s compare work ethic and see how that goes, shall we?

      • M says:

        Even if we had a margin of 300.000 pounds, she still would have spent several hundred thousands of pounds more than Kate, and many people don’t like her spending habits. I am allowed to have that opinion, and I do. I think she has failed big time in that department and that the critique is valid. She does not need to wear couture to almost every arrangement.

  13. minx says:

    I don’t like it but I don’t like much of the 80s throwback clothes. And she needs to stand up straight FFS.

    • Vava says:

      I hate that dress. Looks awful on her. The shoes don’t work with it and her posture is dreadful. Where did her boobs go?

  14. akasamsmom says:

    Buttons. That’s all I see. So. Many. Damn. Buttons.

  15. DS9 says:

    That’s a lot of ugly for the money.

  16. Spicecake38 says:

    It’s okay IMO,But I don’t like the drop waist,if I’m seeing it correctly,but she looks appropriate and she’s working so good for her.

    • Wigletwatcher says:

      Not enjoying the drop waist either. Which is odd because her torso is very long as it is. Why she’s appeared to favor empire waistlines and peplums.

  17. Thaisajs says:

    I feel like she has 14 different versions of this dress, all with big buttons and pointy, granny collars.

  18. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    Frumpy, dated outfit: check
    Poor posture: check
    Near wardrobe malfunction: check

    Another normal showing from Kate.

  19. KidV says:

    I like the dress, and I like that flash of knee. The dress looks better as it moves, not quite so school marm-ish.

  20. TarteAuCitron1 says:

    Duchess Chica loves to flash her pins indeed. I remember reading on the ‘Critique of Duchess Catherine’ blog (sadly defunct/targeted by William) that Kate was very vain about her legs and had some sources talk about how she’d flaunt & flash at school & uni. This isn’t an accident, is what I’m saying. She’s sending a message to William’s Wandering Sceptre.

    I actually like the dress, although I would probably shorten the hem and accessorise it differently. In Ireland & UK, just because the sun is out, doesn’t mean it is actually warm. 🙂

  21. guest says:

    Very grandmaesq.

  22. Wellsie says:

    Also, hair is moving back to sausage-curl territory. This is not a test.

  23. Linda says:

    Gorgeous dress, I need a cheaper version in my closet.

  24. Other Renee says:

    I absolutely loathe polka dots. With a passion. Especially on anyone over the age of six. I know many of you love them but I just don’t.

  25. Beach Dreams says:

    I must say, it’s quite a ‘talent’ to make a dress look dowdy AND tacky.

  26. Sam says:

    I dont like the dress and she is way too skinny

  27. Malificent says:

    If she were going to theme dress, a smart little 40s suit with a cute retro hat would have been fun.

  28. KatieBo says:

    Holy smokes- she can’t win. Either she’s flashing herself and getting accused of her skirts being too short, too juvenile, too revealing or she’s frumpy and dated.

    I love this. It’s nice.

    • mynameispearl says:

      yeah I think this looks great, I have a much cheaper version from Topshop that I love.

    • Marigold says:

      What this website complains about happening to another, they will do in spades to this woman.

    • Deedee says:

      Kate accomplishes something most don’t. She’s both frumpy/dated and too revealing at the same time. That’s a small accomplishment, I suppose.

    • i says:

      They just really don’t like her.

      • Fiffy says:

        I was surprised when there was an actual discussion speculating on her ‘eating disorder’ and how ‘scarily thin’ she was. Her work ethic’s debatable but it doesn’t excuse this kind of slander

      • mynameispearl says:

        To be honest the work ethic thing doesnt bother me (as a UK taxpayer).

        I like to see Meghan and Kate out and about because I (rather shallowly) I like to see what they’re wearing and their makeup and hair etc. I literally do not click on any story about: Camilla, Charles, the Queen, Anne, William (alone), Harry (alone), Beatrice, Eugenie. I don’t think many people really do care, they could do 100 engagements a day but they’d get minimal coverage.

        Kate and Meghan are the stars of the show, however every time they show up somewhere they cost a fortune in their clothing budget and their security. The net benefit in real to the charity is probably negligible.

      • Fiffy says:

        I mostly agree. Most people in the UK don’t really care specifically how much they do and I guess they bring a lot of benefits to the charities they represent

  29. Rae says:

    I looks very dated. Definitely agree about the belt and a pop of colour.

  30. AA says:

    Stop with the Princess Diana cosplay! Plus, I feel like this could be purchased at Dress Barn for $59.99. I can’t believe how expensive it is.

  31. Casey02 says:

    Is the English Rose going back to flashing the public? Does she want the attention that bad? The dress was hideous on Abigail and if possible more hideous on Kate! Her hair in contrast , is simply perfection!!!

  32. Casey20 says:

    Uh….. why not do something different on this visit. She did the same event last year…Photo op. No substance…..Brits have ZERO expectations of the Eng!ish Rose….what an embarrassment…Does the Queen approve???

    • Fiffy says:

      I wouldn’t rely on the Queen’s approval… She did cover up Andrew’s association with a paedophile after all.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I wonder if Andrew realizes how much he screwed up his life due to the people he associated with.

    • Fiffy says:

      We don’t expect much from all of the royals, they’re all doing the bare minimum considering what they’re afforded

      • grace2 says:

        Can you clarify what you mean by ‘what they’re afforded’? Do you think for example that Kate would actually be doing more meaningful work if it was up to her?

      • Fiffy says:

        What I meant by this is that some royals are able to live rent-free in their houses in exchange for their royal work as well as security paid for by taxpayers. I’m sure Kate is able to choose what she wants to do as part of her work and it is charitable but considering all the perks it is the least they can do

      • Fiffy says:

        I think I misused the words ‘what they’re afforded’ 😅 sorry about this

  33. Coz' says:

    Flashing?!?! This is flashing? In which era?Because frankly in 2019 I don’t see how it could be considered as flashing especially when balanced with a high collar.
    Like the dress or dislike it, like Kate or dislike her but there is no flashing here.

    • Casey20 says:

      So flashing is a Kate thing..she’s known for it….she will flash at important ceremonies honoring the fallen, children and the general public (no one is safe). There are other photos that shows she nearly flashed, once again!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Casey20, Do you think Kate flashed on purpose or just did not add weights to the hem of several dresses because it either slipped her mind or she did not know better?

      • Casey20 says:

        First maybe second time is an accident …..Kate’s like on her 10th flashing

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Kaiser literally said Kate was “flashing some leg”…which she did? Flashing is not meant in the usual way we’re accustomed to with Kate but it still fits. Though these pictures are mild compared to other ones I saw from today’s event, where she really was *flashing* some major thigh as she walked.

  34. Casey20 says:

    Can we get a Harry update from the Children’s Hospital….he’s talking about Archie to one of the patients!

  35. Babsie says:

    Comment deleted.

  36. Anastasia says:

    God, I’m sick to death of seeing her in dresses like this shit.

  37. RedWeatherTiger says:

    That dress makes her torso look like it belongs in the Guinness Book…I never thought she had an abnormally long torso until this dress made me question everything (including my own life choices for caring)..

  38. Becks1 says:

    This is a great dress. But, Kate can’t style
    It at all. This is an example of her biggest problem when it comes to fashion- she does not know how to style things. This dress requires the right accessories and yes, attitude, to keep it from
    Being too 1980. And it just doesn’t work.

  39. i says:

    Casey20, take a break.

  40. Seraphina says:

    The dress needs some fun like a colored shoe and the collar is just too much. Others have said the same.

    And yes, girlfriend won’t be happy unless she shows some leg to the cameras. I’m beginning to think it’s a sign to someone.

  41. MangoAngelesque says:

    Whhhhhyyyyyy does she refuse to stand up straight? That slumpy-slouchy shoulder hunch is just so off putting.

    Her fashion choices are her fashion choices, and she obviously has her comfort zones and that’s fine. But the horrid posture is baffling. My back and neck empathetically ache when I see it.

  42. grace2 says:

    I have to laugh at the words that I have seen (here and elsewhere) used to describe Kate’s activities (I refuse to call what she does work) – “visits” “attends” “watches”, “views”, “attends”, etc. Many of these activities would be considered “entertainment” for most people and often would even involve spending money or getting an invitation – e.g. going to Wimbledon, a film premiere, a museum, etc. Plus, free clothes, and someone else to do the driving.

  43. kerwood says:

    That’s an ugly dress.

    Should the English Rose, who’s the ‘future Queen Consort’ be showing THAT much leg?

  44. A says:

    I really like the shoes. It’s just different enough to be kind of cute, but still matchy-matchy so that Kate isn’t straying too far from her comfort zone.

    I like the dress, sort of. I like parts of it. I like the long sleeves, and I like the little white cap right at the wrist. And I like the collar. I think this is a dress that would have been better served if it were knee length, like the one polka dot dress we saw her wear for Wimbledon last year. Also: home girl needs to restock her hem weights, because welp.

  45. CindyP says:

    Flashing her legs is unforgivable for someone of her stature doing an official event. So tacky; no wonder all her aristo neighbors make fun of her

  46. celialarson12 says:

    The upper part of the dress looks fine on her. Looks strange from the waist down. That being said, I think Kate looks “tight – faced” …..for lack of a better word. Maybe she should have taken William with her since in tha last couple of outings with William, she has been grinning from ear to ear.

  47. Amelie says:

    This dress is a no. Many celebrities have actually worn this dress surprisingly: Kelly Ripa when hosting her show, Christie Brinkley, Ivanka Trump (she belted it). Sarah Jessica Parker wore a shorter version below the knee which looked much cuter and belted it. Anna Kendrick wore an above the knee version and she looked great.

    But on Kate this dress looks like she came straight off the set of Little House on the Prairie or my mom’s favorite show When Calls the Heart from the Hallmark Channel (the show Lori Laughlin got fired from). The drop waist makes her torso look super long and with her hair down and high neckline the dress has this suffocating effect. If you’re going to dare to wear the long version of this dress, you need the right accessories like Abigail Spencer had at Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Otherwise it’s just a frumpy bowl of frou frou. I know Kate loves frou frou and she’ll always wear something once in awhile to remind us of it. But she doesn’t know how to accessorize (and I know that can be hard, I’m not good at it either). Don’t attempt to wear a dress like this if you can’t style it correctly.

    I’ll commend her for doing work which must have been interesting for her as she has direct ties to Bletchley Park thanks to her grandmother and great-aunt. The exhibit about codebreaking looks fascinating, I’d love to visit it!

  48. Cherie says:

    Eh, it’s in her wheelhouse.

  49. SpilldatT says:

    To sum up my reaction to this: WHY?

  50. twoz says:

    IMHO the whole outfit looks like it cost $50 at Venture back in the day (Aussies of a certain age will remember – think down-market version of K-Mart).

  51. Meg says:

    I still dont think shes confident enough in herself to have her own style so she just copies diana

  52. MsIam says:

    Definitely giving off a frumpy vibe and agree with the Diana cosplay comment.

  53. Snowflake says:

    I don’t like her style. I feel like if everything matches to an era it makes the whole look dated. For example, i was born in 1976. If you look like you could have been alive the first time it was in style, you cant do the hair and the clothes and the makeup from that time period. Cause it them looks like you never changed your style, not like you were going for a retro look. So for example. If I’m wearing a hair bsnd tshirt and doc martens, you definitely don’t want to do the frosted blue eyeshadow and permed hair look. Take one or two elements from that time period otherwise you just look like you’re stuck in a time warp. Kate matches the hair and makeup too much, imo. No one does those fat ringlets from a curling iron anymore. She needs a better hairstyle.

  54. Susan says:

    The fit of this dress from the neck to the hips appears to be sooo tight…. how can she move with these tight sleeves and shrink-wrapped, dropped waist fit? She’s given birth to 3 children…how does she have the figure of a pre-adolescent girl? It’s not attractive.

  55. Gesine Weinhold says:

    I love it. Classy.