Friday, May 9, 2014

Nostalgia Friday - The Blue Dress


I don't know how many of us are actually nostalgic for the circus that erupted in 1998. But Monica has decided to speak out for the first time and I kind of felt interested in her voice - because whatever your politics, whatever your morals, she was to my mind railroaded and wronged.

I don't care what they did or didn't do, what defines sexual relations and what does not. But she came out of that story much worse than he did. He is paid millions to speak. She can't land a job. He is about to become a grandfather. She? In that sordid he-said-she-said, his words carried much more weight. He is beloved and admired. She is the butt - or the knee - of a stale joke.

Excerpts from Monica's Vanity Fair piece are below, at the very end of this post.

Anyways, 1998 was also my second year in the USA. I suppose it was a time of scandals -  I landed into Diana's death and then saw the Clinton impeachment erupt. And this, appropriately enough,  was the song I listened to on a loop that year (don't ask!):


So a blue dress, eh ladies? A work dress that can go out? No pattern, but maybe an infusion  of another color? And not just the standard dress, that bodycon snug thing that we've all seen a million times on everyone from Sheryl Sandberg to whoever?

Bright, ultramarine blue is a perfect color for summer. But darker navy in a crisp cut works fantastically well also. Either hue is a bit hard to pull off in the winter because you are always faced with the conundrum of hose and shoes - nude? black? With bare legs and sandals, however, wearing blue is much simpler.

DREAM:

Saks, and lust:

Barney's:

Shopbop:

MyTheresa:



WISH:
Shopbop:



Shopbop:


WANT:




Monica Lewinsky Writes About Her Affair with President Clinton

Monica Lewinsky writes in Vanity Fair for the first time about her affair with President Clinton: “It’s time to burn the beret and bury the blue dress.” She also says: “I, myself, deeply regret what happened between me and President Clinton. Let me say it again: I. Myself. Deeply. Regret. What. Happened.”
After 10 years of virtual silence (“So silent, in fact,” she writes, “that the buzz in some circles has been that the Clintons must have paid me off; why else would I have refrained from speaking out? I can assure you that nothing could be further from the truth”), Lewinsky, 40, says it is time to stop “tiptoeing around my past—and other people’s futures. I am determined to have a different ending to my story. I’ve decided, finally, to stick my head above the parapet so that I can take back my narrative and give a purpose to my past. (What this will cost me, I will soon find out.)”
Clearing the Air
Maintaining that her affair with Clinton was one between two consenting adults, Lewinsky writes that it was the public humiliation she suffered in the wake of the scandal that permanently altered the direction of her life: “Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. Any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position. . . . The Clinton administration, the special prosecutor’s minions, the political operatives on both sides of the aisle, and the media were able to brand me. And that brand stuck, in part because it was imbued with power.”
Job Hunting
After the scandal, writes Lewinsky, “I turned down offers that would have earned me more than $10 million, because they didn’t feel like the right thing to do.” After moving between London (where she got her master’s degree in social psychology at the London School of Economics), Los Angeles, New York, and Portland, Oregon, she interviewed for numerous jobs in communications and branding with an emphasis on charity campaigns, but, “because of what potential employers so tactfully referred to as my ‘history,’” she writes, “I was never ‘quite right’ for the position. In some cases, I was right for all the wrong reasons, as in ‘Of course, your job would require you to attend our events.’ And, of course, these would be events at which press would be in attendance.”
Correcting the Record
Lewinsky writes that she is still recognized every day, and her name shows up daily in press clips and pop-culture references. She admits that she used to refer to Maureen Dowd as “Moremean Dowdy,” but “today, I’d meet her for a drink.” And she requests one correction of Beyoncé, regarding the lyrics to her recent hit “Partition”: “Thanks, Beyoncé, but if we’re verbing, I think you meant ‘Bill Clinton’d all on my gown,’ not ‘Monica Lewinsky’d.’”
Lewinsky responds to reports made public in February that Hillary Clinton, during the 1990s, had characterized her as a “narcissistic loony toon” in correspondence with close friend Diane Blair. “My first thought,” Lewinsky writes, “as I was getting up to speed: If that’s the worst thing she said, I should be so lucky. Mrs. Clinton, I read, had supposedly confided to Blair that, in part, she blamed herself for her husband’s affair (by being emotionally neglectful) and seemed to forgive him. Although she regarded Bill as having engaged in ‘gross inappropriate behavior,’ the affair was, nonetheless, ‘consensual (was not a power relationship).’”
Why She’s Going Public
When Tyler Clementi, the 18-year-old Rutgers freshman who was secretly streamed via Webcam kissing another man, committed suicide in September 2010, Lewinsky writes, she was brought to tears, but her mother was especially distraught: “She was reliving 1998, when she wouldn’t let me out of her sight. She was replaying those weeks when she stayed by my bed, night after night, because I, too, was suicidal. The shame, the scorn, and the fear that had been thrown at her daughter left her afraid that I would take my own life—a fear that I would be literally humiliated to death.” Lewinsky clarifies that she has never actually attempted suicide, but had strong suicidal temptations several times during the investigations and during one or two periods after.
Lewinsky writes that following Clementi’s tragedy “my own suffering took on a different meaning. Perhaps by sharing my story, I reasoned, I might be able to help others in their darkest moments of humiliation. The question became: How do I find and give a purpose to my past?” She also says that, when news of her affair with Clinton broke in 1998, not only was she arguably the most humiliated person in the world, but, “thanks to the Drudge Report, I was also possibly the first person whose global humiliation was driven by the Internet.” Her current goal, she says, “is to get involved with efforts on behalf of victims of online humiliation and harassment and to start speaking on this topic in public forums.”

Thursday, May 8, 2014

The Art of Layering II - suggestions

Ladies, your comments made me think.

How can we make this flower/stripe combo work without looking like a hot mess / blob / and breaking the bank?

Here's what I've come up with:

Look 1:

Zara tank:
striped top:

Look 2:

Dress, Anthropologie:

Top, Delia's:
Look 3:

Dress, Nanette Lepore (FYI, ladies, same dress at Anthropologie is $100 more!):


Striped top, JC Penny:

Look 4:

Top, Zara:

Striped top, Old Navy:


Who's with me?

The Art of Layering



A few years back JV complained that one of her black dresses (yes, like any other smart dresser she has multiple black dresses!) has fallen out of rotation. She couldn't figure out how to wear it to make it work and look current. I suggested layering it over a snug white T. The dress went back in.

Layering, ladies, is a great thing. It is not only functional (as in making you warmer); economical (as in you can wear a summer top over a long sleeve shirt to maximize its utility); but also super stylish - it can transform an item, making a stale outfit look completely new. It is almost Shklovskian.

The most recent issue of Vogue has a fantastic editorial  - "Day Tripping". Its premise is artful layering of somewhat unexpected combination, and the best are not just sudden but even clashing, and wildly so (BTW Vogue did not invent this styling priciple - Jenna Lyons at JCrew has been an avid and fantastic layerer).

My favorite? What else if not the striped T under anything. HOT.

Check it out:


This image: Louis Vuitton sweater and dress paired with a Proenza Schouler striped top, my newest lust object:



Above: a sweater worn over a dress and then belted. The clash of flowery and geometric patterns while remaining true to one color scheme works beautifully.


In this case a plain long sleeve T is worn under an embellished top and then paired with an embellished skirt. I'm not saying that we all should go bravely into the day bedazzled like bullfighters but the principle stands - plain objects when paired with heavily embellished ones can take the dressiness factor down by a few nothches.  Same goes for the addition of the belt, although I tend to find it fussy. 



Here a McQueen dress is worn with a Stella striped sweater and a fab necklace. Should be on overload but it works. 


My favorite image of the editorial - and I'm sure you all can guess why (clue: it is not the dog!).  This is just so bloody perfect I'm inspired to try it at home. Same Proenza top from above (panting with lust here) worn under a Peter Pilotto dress. Flowers and stripes ladies, it is a match born in heaven. 


Same principle is at work here as well- a striped button down by Givenchy under a very feminine Vera Wang dress for a perfect injection of masculinity. 


Ah, multiple stripes. And a crisp white collar. And a beret (which I could never make work in reality). 
A fantastic Peter Pilotto skirt. Shirt from Guess (imagine that!). And a striped sweater from APC:




This outfit is impossible to pull off in real life without the layers bunching like crazy. But on the page the attempt is valiant. What this is is a Valentino butterfly dress (short) worn over a longer Carolina Herrera skirt and a Marc Jacobs striped shirt, plus a Marni necklace and a belt. A gorgeous overload.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

In Defense of Obsessions - Do repeat purchases mean we are irrational?



A friend posted the following story from Fashion Magazine (scroll below) and I took it almost as a personal challange - hey, Anna, what say you?

I have to acknowledge the propensity we all share to gravitate towards same garments - that is an undeniable fact. What is up for debate are the psychological motivations that lead us down the path of repeated consumption. And in that area I think the vaunted psychologists and fashion specialists quoted in the story are wrong. We shop and shop again for the same items because we want to improve ourselves. We settle on basic things in which we feel comfortable but then want these items to keep improving to reflect new realities and styles. Related is also the issue of cost management - we try to have in our closets items that will maximize their utility, and as it happens the majority of the things we buy the most of DO tend to get worn the most.

Take stock of the items in your closet that exist in multiples. Here's my list:

- black jeans
- black tops
- black jackets
- black skirts
- black shoes
- striped tops

Other that the fact that I am trying to pass as a Sicilian widow (or alternatively a sailor) what we learn from this is that items in high rotation get worn out and need replacement quicker. Furthermore, items in high rotations need subtle variations: a slimmer jean for tucking into boots, a shorter one for wearing with flats. A longer, fuller skirt for wearing in the summer with a tight shirt as opposed to a pencil one that I can wear with boots in the winter.

These are not irrational or even aspirational decisions. Nor are the differences imperceptible or somehow imaginary. They are very real, we are all familiar with them. Are they 'necessary'? No, but then anything beyond 'bare life' - beyond that which covers your nakedness and keeps you warm is. Fashion is unnecessary in the strictest terms. We might rationalize it as such because purchasing a new item that carries the promise of making you look even better is a form of a high - and who does not need a high? But buying multiples of an item you love to wear is not a sign of mental instability. Or a consumption abuse problem. Multiples of basics are not your guilty buys. We don't need a support group.

Unless, of course, you are buying multiple red leather jackets or bedazzled jeans. But then you wouldn't be reading this, would you?

Point being ladies, I think buying multiple versions (VERSIONS!) of staples in your closet makes perfect sense and is, in fact, a great thing. Which is why I frankly resent the title itself - why label these items repeat offenders?

Solid wardrobes are made out of repetitions, the same way a symphony is structured via repetitions with subtle variations. The best closets out there consist of a great stable of basics with a few fantastic secondary players. Not the other way round.

That said, the story did have one thing right. Here is a list of their 'repeat offenders' culled from women in the fashion industry:

Item 1: Breton Striped Shirts
Item 2: Turtlenecks
Item 3: Black shoes
Item 4: Gray sweatshirts
Item 5: Cream silk blouses









And you know what? This list supports my point. 
Here is the story:

Why we buy the same thing over and over: The science behind your closet of repeat offenders

BY  | MAY 6TH, 2014 
In Breakfast at Tiffany’s, we first meet an elegant if forlorn Holly Golightly peering into the windows of Tiffany & Co. She’s wearing sunglasses and a long black dress. Fast-forward a few scenes and we see her scrambling to get ready for a meeting, hastily slipping her lithe frame into a little black dress. And in the penultimate scene, she leaves the police station for a flight to Brazil and changes into—you guessed it—a black dress. We never actually see Holly’s closet, but it seems pretty plausible that there are at least a few more black dresses in there. She may be a fictional character, but Holly Golightly’s tendency to amass multiple versions of the same item is a classic case of art imitating life. When I moved out of my apartment in December, my boyfriend packed up my bedroom and marvelled at how many pairs of dark blue skinny jeans I own. “There’s your hoard of denim,” he said, pointing to a large, overflowing suitcase (it needed to be expanded to accommodate them all). I’ve personally declared a moratorium on my mother purchasing any more navy-blue suits, and a friend recently made me vow to step in if she tries to buy another pair of black flats. Even Jenna Lyons admits to having an entire rack of white shirts in her closet. So why, even with shelves of blue jeans, closets full of navy suits and countless pairs of black ballerinas, do we keep buying more?
For me, skinny jeans take the guesswork out of getting dressed. In the same way that Claire Underwood on House of Cards defaults to a wardrobe of pencil skirts and stilettos, allowing her to bounce seamlessly from the office to a CNN appearance, my skinnies allow me to go from a press junket to a launch party without a second thought. According to Karen Pine, a psychology professor at the School of Life and Medical Sciences at the University of Hertfordshire, U.K., when it comes to clothing ourselves, we want to feel physically and emotionally comfortable. “We have comfort zones in all areas of our lives, and our wardrobe can be another form of comfort zone where we stick to what we know and what feels safe,” she says. “It’s a fixed sense of self, and a fixed idea of what we feel good in.” If denim weren’t an inherently casual fabric, I’d have worn skinny jeans to my best friend’s wedding.
Like any addict, we repeat shoppers are good at finding ways to rationalize our behaviour. A few years ago, a friend of mine from New York came to visit for the weekend and expressed a desire to go shopping. As she slipped into a clingy black dress, I pointed out that she’d worn a near replica of it the last time she came to visit. She proceeded to point out the “major” differences between the two dresses: this one is an inch longer in the hem, that one has a three-quarter sleeve, this one ruches in the middle, and so on. Crazy as it sounds, this kind of logic resonates with me. Not all clingy black dresses (or skinny blue jeans) are created equal.
On an intellectual level, wearing the same item of clothing also helps us manage how we are perceived by others. Dawnn Karen, a psychologist and founder of Fashion Psychology Success, a fashion consultancy in New York, says: “If you consistently wear the same thing that you know you look good in, people will confirm this and you’ll elicit the same perception every time.” Meaning people may not even notice that I’m always wearing skinny jeans, just that I look consistently stylish.
Stacey Rumpf, a Toronto-based sales manager, confesses to owning 11 pairs of Lanvin ballet flats and 20 leather jackets, nine of which are from the French brand Iro. “Subconsciously, I am a bit of a label whore, and I want people to recognize what I’m wearing, but I know that every time I put on a pair of those Lanvin shoes, they’ll feel and look pretty and delicate, and make me feel pretty and delicate too,” she says. “And they go with everything.” The cognitive process around Rumpf’s repeat buys is echoed in a 2012 study published on the website of The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Led by Adam Galinsky, professor of business management at Columbia Business School, the study had participants wear either a doctor’s coat or regular street clothes before taking an attention-based test. Those wearing the doctor’s coat made half as many errors as those in street clothes. Evidently, dressing like a medical professional can make you feel as smart as one. “When we [put] on a suit, we are not only giving impressions to other people, we are also giving an impression to ourselves,” Galinsky told ABC News. “We feel the rich, silk fabric on our arms; that allows us to take on the characteristics of those clothes.”
Of course, there is a difference between buying the same things because they feel good and shopping in circles. “People search for the perfect [piece] and end up having multiples of the same [item],” says Marlo Sutton, personal shopper at Holt Renfrew Bloor Street. “I encourage clients to diversify their wardrobe or buy pieces that complement what they have. Sometimes it’s even just about showing the client a new way to wear those familiar pieces.” In other words, it wouldn’t kill me to add a printed pant to my deluge of denim.
According to Karen, fashion comes down to taking risks. “It can be problematic to keep buying the same things all the time, because you’re preventing yourself from venturing outside,” she says. But I prefer to think of fashion as a form of self-expression, which isn’t something that I want to venture away from. Maybe we’re not drawn to the other possibilities because they’re simply not us? Holly Golightly wouldn’t be so chic and mysterious without her black dresses, just as I wouldn’t be me without my skinny jeans. They’re no doctor’s coat, but they make me feel and look my best, and that, I think, is worth putting on repeat


Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Meh After Party


Why have one dress when you can have two?

Oddly enough though, none of these dresses do I covet... and so we close the Met Ball coverage with a heavy sigh of disappointment and a large dose of snark:

Rihanna decided to bare a different area of her body:

Rosie Huntigton-Somthingly thought that the stripes on her dress would match her hideous shoes:


Kate Upton remained faithful to her milkmaid look and just opted for its negative (minus a few yards of fabric):

Diane Kruger decided to give the world a view of her enviable sides (an fantastic dress if not the side-sheers):


Maggie Gyllenhaal decided that the many colors on her Met gown were not enough, and found something with even more:

Charlize Theron figured that boob fringe is the way to jazz things up:


Dita was decidedly less teasy:

As was Naomi Watts, who despite the fact that she wore more fabric showed much more skin at the MET:


Reese Witherspoon wanted to match her pointy chin to her cleavage (although it is actually a cute dress):


And Kristin Stewart just changed into her everyday wear, because why try?


Dress Your Life - The Long Sleeve T

A long sleeve T.

Respectable looking yet casual.
With something that is unique and not quite humdrum, yet not dressy.
Warm but not too warm.
Not too dark, given the season, when you want to dress like it is already warm (if it isn't) - which is to say, given my current obsession a preference is given to white.

A T for the season and for your life?

Here's a selection, ladies, for reasons of life heavy on the WANT section:

DREAM:
Proenza Schouler:

Rick Owens:


WISH:

Reiss - the perfect white:

Eileen Fischer:

Marc Jacobs:


WANT:

JCrew:
Club Monaco:

Anthropologie: plain T in front, drapy in back:

Wyatt, a smaller label I love:

Tahari (ignore the ridiculously wonky image):

Bluefly (nice belly hiding properties):

Inhabit - same as above, perfect to hide a pouch: