Indeed, most of the leading figures of the fashion industry concurred that Sarah Burton's design was a triumph. Viktor & Rolf said today that “Kate’s dress was simply elegant. Her hair down was a beautiful and natural touch, and the tiara was stunning. She looked as at-ease as humanly possible and was radiant. Our compliments.” (WWD)
Antonio Marras of Kenzo was unreserved in his praise: “McQueen was a brilliant choice. The choice of the label and the style of the dress was a very clever mix between edgy fashion and tradition - all in a very British way. You could see references to Grace Kelly or Queen Elizabeth's dresses, but in a simpler, more modern way. I loved her hair down. It looked perfectly natural and noble. Truly royal." Peter Copping of Nina Ricci agreed, describing it as “very much in a royal tradition, reminiscent of Queen Elizabeth’s – and a little bit Grace Kelly. She looks happy, radiant and natural.”
It wouldn't be fashion if there wasn't a little damning with faint praise. Elie Saab said she "would have liked it even more with a little extra volume and a longer train, ” but added "It was a very elegant dress, subtly refined and discreet, in keeping with her style" while Hubert de Givenchy complained "the veil is a little flat, but because she has such a lovely face, she can afford to wear it this way. She is very pretty.”
The only truly bitter note was struck by Andrew Groves, the former assistant to Alexander McQueen. He is reported to have stated:
“The design of Catherine Middleton’s wedding dress is completely inoffensive. Any sharp edges that were subversive and iconoclastic in the true sense of the word have now completely gone. It’s a 'nice' dress but who wants that from McQueen?” Judging by the largely joyous reception of the dress by the fashion community, and the public at large, we'd say rather a lot of people.