The Style Observer

Who is Karen Homer?

The book, "Things a woman should know about style", written by Karen Homer, should really be renamed “Things a woman should know about classic style”, just so that everyone (namely the experimental, fun-loving and apparently “clueless” twenty-something year olds) shopping on Amazon know what sort of “style” they are psychologically getting themselves into when clicking the "buy" button. I would have no qualms with this book if the title were changed to something more accommodating to the clothing discourse specific to social-x-rays and color-phobics. If anything, it would indirectly acknowledge there’s an abundance of style’s (plural) that go skin-to-skin with the abundance of personalities (plural) that permeate and radiate through mind, body and cloth around the world.

I understand the idea of a “capsule wardrobe”, I do. Although being bland, boring and (always) black in your twenties isn’t exactly my idea of sartorial I-just-threw-on-a-pencil-skirt-and-blouse enjoyment. So, if “Things a Women Should Know About Style” is to resonate with us young and apparently “unknowing" folk, we must first understand that two key words take centre-stage in this book - affluence and timelessness - which, by-the-way, I'm willing to bet is exactly the sort of terms Ms Homer lives by. I don’t mean to offend but you can’t write a book about classic style if you haven’t actually lived several decades of it, yes? There’s a certain air of well, maturity, which is mutually constitutive to that sort of attire. And it goes without saying you pretty much need to be rolling in it to afford thousands of dollars of natural pearls bi-yearly.

So taken on that basis - the Ms Karen Homer basis - the book was not bad at all. I might have even enjoyed it if she retracted her comments about toilet water being incredibly chic. Anything with the word toilet in its title is inherently not chic, Ms Homer, you of all people should know that. I on the other hand shouldn’t because I am only twenty and by your watch haven’t really lived a full-on fashion cycle yet, but I do so go figure. Actually also, while we’re here, trouser suits are not suitable for every occasion, every second of every day, nor is minimalism style’s answer to world peace... I think all that tribal fashion at the moment has a better shot for obvious reasons (spears, voodoo dolls etcetera etcetera, see where I'm going with this? Rhetorical question). Gosh, try putting a Romance Was Born sacrificial techno goat mask-come-headgear against your "capsule wardrobe" and see how it fares.. Hmmm… Yes, not well, I presume.

That being said, Ms Homer does provide a very convincing argument about putting food before fashion… something about starving yourself all day and then downing the Perrier Jouet like it was water, which I must admit is fun, but not that fun when you swell up the size of a pregnant rhinoceros.

Here are some of my favorite excerpts:

"Too-tight t-shirts make your bust look like two pigs wrestling under a blanket."

"Crotchless or nipple-less underwear is taking things too far. Forget the decency question, just imagine the draughts. What would your mother say? ('Always wear clean knickers, dear, you never know when you might get runover.')"

"Big pants have a certain Berlin-stripper appeal, just make sure they are big enough. There is nothing worse than bottoms bulging over knicker-elastic."

"B-strings look great under clothes but awful in the flesh. Dental floss, wedgie or cheese-wire are apt descriptions of its comfort rating. It is depressing to pay more for five square inches of Lycra than you do for ten, nevertheless VPL is the well-dressed woman's nemesis. Grin and wear it."

"Alternatively think big: tummy-sucking waist-cinching panties, thing-slimming, bottom-lifting tights and anything with the word 'control' in its description are the guardians of the pear-shaped woman's vanity. Don't be alarmed if you are striped red and white and half your size when you take these things off. It's a bit like coming up from a deep-sea dive: you have to re-pressurise gradually."

"Never pass up an opportunity to wear a tiara."

"Pashminas should be timeless, but are still suffering from fashion overkill that hit a couple of years ago. A pashmina neatly knotted at the neck says City Trader. A pashmina untidily wound round over a denim jacket says wannabe model. A pashmina draped elegantly over the shoulders at a black tie dinner says Affluent Wife and Mother. A pashmina draped fully over the shoulders in the style of granny's shawl says Cold Fashion Editor, fed up with waiting for another bloody fashion show to start, three hours late."

(images via photobucket)

[P]orn and the [E]thical [T]reatment of [A]nimals

Look I get it, I do; sex sells. And I’m all for getting your kit off for a worthy cause. And the whole no fur/no clothes irony is very witty. Bravo PETA, bravo. But you overlooked something… campaigning with naked people and animals entwined in suggestive discourse might send out messages that weren’t entirely intended. But hey, PETA, whatever floats your boat. Personally, I liked the tees.

(images from Associated Press)

Betsey Johnson Celebrates 30 years of Fashion

(Source - Associated Press)

McFashion - Michelle Lee "Fashion Victim"

Fashion has begun to resemble fast food: fast, disposable, easy, unintimidating, entertaining and homogenous. Just as McDonald's has taken over the globe, dishing out the uniformity and consistency of their burgers and fries, mass-market clothing retailers have succeeded in spreading a similar message: predictability in fashion.

Nearly every major retail chain today represents McFashion. Gap is to H&M what McDonald's is to Burger King - they may not carry the exact same items, but they convey essentially the same message: consistency. Even Urban Outfitters, which, to some kids, appears to sell clothes that scream individualism, actually sells the same standardised message as Gap: wear our clothes and you'll fit in. But instead of khakis and plain sweaters, it sells studded belts, cool T-shirts printed with messages such as 'Self Service', big-ass tinted shades, black canvas hipsters and chunky cotton hoodies.

McFashion is bland and down-market, but it's also affordable and abundant. It lets us fit in with certain social groups, but sometimes to the point at which our individuality disappears. McFashion drains our wallets and leaves us little to hold on to in the long run.

McFashion, like fast food, relies on 'speed chic'. One of the realities of fashion is that we fall hard for a trend, then not only tire of it but begin to despise it. So we're stuck in an endless cycle, trying futilely to hurry up and be cool. To make matters worse, the giant hamster wheel of style continues to accelerate, so we grow weary of trends much faster than we used to.

(image via Sasha)

These days, shopping for clothes is a manufactured experience. Retailers know consumers are impatient and in-store hassle can turn away valuable cash. Every aspect of the shopping experience has been brainstormed by executives so that surprisingly little is left to chance. Shoppers may feel they're browsing, but they're really being led. For instance, McFashion retailers customarily hire certain types of sales staff. Urban Outfitters commonly hires cool kids with dreadlocks or cheek piercings or sleeve tattoos. At Victoria's Secret in America, the strict dress code dictates that staffers' outfits be 95 per cent black. The store's six-page code contains such rules as: 'Only two rings per hand are acceptable' and 'Fingernails should have a natural appearance both in colour and in length.

Cheap chic is nothing new, but the stigma associated with it has diminished. Today, cheap chic stores hold varying levels of cachet: a £3 tank top from H&M is far more fashionable than its near-identical counterpart from Wal-Mart. Consumers have actually seen cheap chic looking good at some point. Fashion magazines have started showing clothing from stores such as Gap and H&M in their spreads, either mixing them in with more expensive designer clothes or showing them in the context that affordable clothes can indeed look good (well, at least on a professional model with impeccable lighting and styling). A women's magazine recently sent supermodel Heidi Klum to Kmart to create a cute outfit within a paltry budget. She assembled a striking ensemble, which included a child's bathrobe that she tied around her torso to create a chic wrap top. Of course, this was no endorsement of Kmart's clothes since Klum, who had earned the nickname 'the Body', could have wandered into the motoring section of the store and looked ravishing in a dress constructed of car mats and an oil funnel hat.

It's not only the clothes that feel safe but also the experience of shopping. Eating at McDonald's only requires a pocket full of change. In the same vein, shopping at a chi-chi boutique requires a level of sophistication. It can be scary: the too-cool salespeople glare at you, the clothes don't fit, the sizes are sometimes done by measurements, so it can be embarrassing if you don't know whether you're a 28 or a 36. Touching the clothes, let alone trying them on, seems too precarious to even attempt. At a McFashion store, on the other hand, it doesn't matter how cool you are. Chain retailers encourage shoppers to touch the clothes, they invite even the fashion illiterate with open arms. Meanwhile, the glamorous designer and gauche mass-market worlds have collided, so consumers can believe they're engaging in high style on the high street
Just as too much McDonald's gradually blocks our arteries, too much McFashion gradually narrows our channels of creativity and individuality. The bulk of our clothing purchases are made in the same stores over and over again. It is McFashion's homogeneity that makes it desirable to many people in the first place. 'While people want to be individuals they also desire a high degree of conformity and group acceptance,' says Elizabeth Rhodes, director of the school of fashion design & merchandising at Kent State University, Ohio.

McFashion, like McDonald's, has come to symbolise America. In an April 1998 essay, New York Times writer Lisa Napoli described her surprise when friends from Paris wanted to make Gap the first stop on their New York shopping tour: 'They didn't want some funky, original Gotham boutique, where they could find something unique to the city. They wanted what they perceived - rightly - as a slice of America.

Just as the arrival of yet another McDonald's restaurant in a new country triggers moans from some locals, worried that this facet of American culture will begin to overtake their own, the arrival of another McFashion store elicits the same response. 'Our possibilities of perception are dwindling due to manufactured experiences throughout our lives,' says Akbar Ali Herndon, who runs a website about vanishing American culture. 'The world offers less and less opportunity for an original anything, including clothing. But I think the loss still eats at us. We worship consumption and replication while retailers such as Gap benefit.

Our dwindling sense of culture isn't entirely retailers' fault - consumers bear some of the blame. Retailers may make McFashion hard to resist, but it can only survive because we shovel money into it. As with everything in fashion, the Fashion Victim is less a victim and more a willing participant. Just as McDonald's boasts 'Billions Served', McFashion has served nearly as many. And with so many customers hungry for more, McFashion is destined to become an indivisible part of our style diet.

"Fashion Victim" is available at Amazon)

"Where are you? Has your mind (finally) run away with the Uggs?" *Shopgirl_344@yahoo.com

Hi Shopgirl. Possibly. Although it ran away with the Havaianas a very long time ago...

Yes, I know. Slap me. Hit me over the head with a hammer, beat me senseless with a bat but woo me back with a wide-brimmed hat, blah blah blah. I'm sorry. Yes, I have received all your emails; the one above I had to make special mention of principally because I don't think we were friends in a past-life. An alternate reality maybe; one where Ugg boots were code for NOT THE FUGLIEST EFFING THINGS EVER. But right now, in a realm where it's still possible to look like a human Clydesdale - facilitated by, you got it, fugg boots, I'm taking complete and utter defense thank-you very much.

To everyone else, I appreciate your sincere concern. I haven't died. I realise that for the last month or so posts have been thinning like Paul Giamatti’s hair. There's just a lot going on at the moment. Please be patient, apparently it's a virtue. Although you'd be excused if it weren’t in your emotional repertoire because if I'm honest, it's right down the bottom of mine. In short, I am trying to hone in on this lack of patience and increase it ten-fold, for posts will continue to be sporadic for the time being. I don't recommend holding your breath between rants, but I plead with you to hold the site in your bookmark/history and click on it every now and then to check for updates. Or even better, subscribe to the TSO feed if you haven’t done so already; the possibility of contracting RSI from over-clicking will be partially if not completely eliminated.

FYI – In keeping with the horsey theme that is consuming every single solitary thought from the good people over at Uggs Australia, pewter metallic Ugg Boots are now available for purchase. I think they want Uggs to have a monopoly in the horse market. That, and world domination. Say it with me: Dear. Sweet. Jesus.

Why didn't we do this at school, Mrs Spiller?

...instead of wasting our time on useless practices such as Algebra and Long Division? Honestly, who even uses long division these days? It's like mathematics for pre-historic times, i.e, before those nifty gadgets known as calculators where invented. Note: nobody cares if you were the long division champion in high-school, it's not going to validate you as a person, and it most definitely will not get you laid. In fact, the only thing it was good for was those metallic gold star stickers and the occasional mars bar... if you were lucky.

Anyway, where was I before my brain ran off without me? Ah yes, these crazy renewable fashion designs by Fernando Brizio. I think the concept is a clever one: just stick some colorful fabric markers in a dress and leave them be to leak. So basically, anyone could do it, hence my fabulous and altogether beneficial idea of including it in compulsory school curriculum. OP1's would be flying left, right and centre; think of how intelligent Queensland would look compared to other states... they don't call us "the smart state" for nothing you know.

Sarcasm at bay, I will say that I think it's interesting the way Brizio allows the owner/wearer to change the particular color and style arrangement after each wash, it really draws on the idea of 'recyclable' clothing. Although, how 'recyclable' can a garment be if it sheds its skin again and again like a hyper-colored snake on steroids? 'Everything old is new again' - good for Ebay re-sales, not-so-good for St Vinnies and Lifeline.

"By placing colored felt-tip pens in the pockets of the dress its appearance changes over time. Within an hour - to one and a half hours the colored ink bleeds into the fabric and creates a one-off design for each occasion. the owner can then clean the dress and color it in a different way for each time they wear it." Brizio adds.

Fancy a play date?

(all images via Designboom)

Yum Yum

Question: has anyone noticed that the A/W ‘08 Lanvin Silk Organza Top vaguely resembles a shiitake mushroom? Don’t get me wrong, I love shiitake mushrooms, just as I adore the new Lanvin creation. But it still makes me ponder the possibilities of channeling the likes of fruit and veg when designing clothing… Next thing you know we’ll be swimming in orange-peels, and walking around in pants inspired by the shape of carrots. Horrifying I know, and quite possibly not something to salivate over. But anyway back to the top, I like it, it’s pretty, and it has the whole ruffle thing going on which is pretty much the principal reason it reminds me of a mushroom. That, and the fact that it's a creamy-beige, and very very intricately and closely stitched together. To help those of you with slightly dwindling imaginations in this regard here are some mushroom pictures:

Okay, I'll admit, it’s obviously not what I quite had in my mind when I was envisioning the perfect mushy slash Lanvin replica, but these were the only ones on flickr that weren't mutilated into some form of culinary delight and so by golly they’ll have to do! And yes I am aware that these particular pictures also run the risk of generating undeniable ugliness in what was otherwise a culmination of an oh-so-picturesque’ blog, but who am I to be elitist? And how do you make mushrooms ‘picturesque’ anyway? So, the mushrooms stay. And they’ll stay because I said so. Alright? Alright.

Oh, and during my imaginary food/fashion adventures I crept onto google and stumbled upon these fabulous fruity tutty ads that are the brainchild of Japanese pop artist, Nagi Noda. He created them for a Hong Kong label b+ab’s; a mass-marketed brand launched in 1995 that actually doesn’t skimp on quality. Who would have thought?

(images via Stylebubble)

A Big Fat Commerce Prickle Amongst The Weeds

Sometimes I think Australia is slowly creeping away from the dark ages of fashion denial, not only firmly grasping one eager hand around creative talent, but also facilitating an environment where major economic growth in the industry can occur. Why, we have more Australian-owned and produced fashion magazines than ever before, an international fashion week and some fashion festivals that just keep growing and growing like a weed in-between the verandah bricks (but a pretty yellow, non-poisonous kind of weed mind you). So why then, do my eyes need to be rudely accosted with this article written by Frockwriter.

(image via Frockwriter through Getty Images)

At some time or another, everybody's job gives them occasion to laugh out loud. I had two such moments this week. The first was when I called the Sydney Chamber of Commerce concerning a story I am writing for Womens Wear Daily.
Some local readers already know that I am the paper's Australasian correspondent.
On Monday, in the course of researching upcoming Sydney events - which include next month's inaugural Sydney Fashion Festival - the city's growth, retail potential etc... I thought the Chamber of Commerce would be well-positioned to comment.
As not everyone is familiar with the publication, I explained to communications director Nick Davy that WWD is a high profile, New York-based, business-to-business publication which is read all over the world by movers and shakers in the global fashion, retail, luxury and beauty businesses.
Many of these companies, I added, may already have business operations in Australia - with others contemplating so doing in the future.
Davy said he would check if executive director Patricia Forsythe was available for a phone interview, adding that she is "very busy".
Davy's response, delivered some time later, was that neither Forsythe nor indeed anyone from the Chamber would be available to talk to me. He added:
"We've checked your website. It's a women's fashion publication and frankly, this is..... just not relevant".
Fast forward to yesterday and a news alert in one of my inboxes.
It was from travel retail e-letter The Moodie Report and covered a Sydney Airport Corporation callout to international luxury brands to open inside a new T1 "luxury precinct" called The Forum.
According to the release:
“This is a unique opportunity for world famous designers to join prominent, global fashion houses who have already indicated their intent to open flagship boutiques in Sydney International Airport’s Terminal (T1), which is currently undergoing redevelopment.
“As Australia's major gateway, T1 handled more than 10 million passengers in 2007 and designer brands are lining up to secure a retail site in the airport's much-anticipated expanded, world-class shopping precinct.”
As I say, I did have to laugh

Here’s an idea – fashion is not just full of frivolous Barbie’s wincing away their pretty pennies on Monolo’s and DVF dresses… And well actually, come to think of it, even if it is – at least it makes them happy! Think about all those people who spend their hard-earned dollars on doofing-up their Toyota Corrola, or spending it on technological gear that I won’t even attempt to try and spell? Do we sit here and judge you? No. Do we glare at you with unsympathetic pitty when you talk about how you need to install new Chrome-thing-a-majiggies? No. We may stare at you due to lack of understanding, yes. And quite possibly disinterest. But never do we tell you that your happiness, or indeed, what you choose to consume is irrelevant? Because really, when you think about it, in a capitalist society everything we consume is relevant –it means BIG bucks. And you know what, if, giving the House of Chanel $1200 dollars for a blue star dress is going to make us happy in our daily lives, then it’s a win-win situation.

It’s fashion. It’s a hobby. It’s a profession. It’s a play. It’s society. And no matter whether consuming it, dictating it, or reflecting upon it, we should not be made to question it's appropriateness or place in the actions and conversations of life. It’s fashion. It’s one of the largest industries in the world, where intelligent women dominate the boardroom and the studio, where enormous profits are made every single day. So, I ask you Mr/Mrs Chamber of Commerce, how in God’s name is fashion not relevant…?

(image via google)

Facebook Fashion

For all of its unproductive woes, the social networking (or social neglecting, depending on your viewpoint) site has a couple of benefits. Firstly, it gives you the ability to join groups with obscure and humorous names so as to further reflect and define your “self” as a cyber person… are you sensing the sarcasm here??… The second benefit, (and not an inkling of sarcasm intended) is… wait for it… photos. Yes photos of everything and nothing in particular. Of happy times. Of sad times. Of party times. Of beautiful times. And of times when you are just minding your own business, quietly stuffing your face with seafood risotto, only to have your mate - Einstein that they are - whip out the old Digicam proclaiming their undying love. For facebook silly, not you… Do you think they would plaster the money shot of the garlic sauce oozing uncontrollably from your face if their yearning for you was stronger? Get with the program honey, that’s why so many people site “themselves” in the “AIM” part of their page. Okay but come on, you’re missing the point, ego can sometimes be a good thing. Especially now that everyone’s a photographer, and churns out photos like their life (or imaginary photography career) depended on it.

That being said, stalking friends’ shots is a good way of passing time, and though, not usually an actual waste of time, I would like to point out for the record that I don’t need to see 4509258 slightly blurry and off-centre photographs of your mother’s aunt’s baby lying unknowingly in its cot. Let the poor beggar sleep.
Photographs provide memories and proof. Memories of happy times. Memories of sad times. Memories of party times. Memories of truly beautiful times. And yes, memories of times when you were dribbling garlic sauce. But more importantly, whether we like it or not, photographs provide us with proof of what you were wearing while all of this life stuff was going on.

I like Big Bows and I cannot Lie...

You other lovers can’t deny. That when a girl walks in with an itty-bitty face and a silk thing in your face you get sprung!

(image via flickr)

(image via Vintage Society)

(image via Suzi)

(image via Facepalm)

(image via Style.com)

Please Sir, Can I Have Some More?

He sat with his stiff wooden spoon and deserted plate, his mind flooded with yearnings of the sweet, sweet honeyed porridge that once was. “Please sir, can I have some more?” There, he did it. He entertained his curiosity; mocked his own sensibilities in the vain hope of gaining just that little bit extra. Can we blame him? We could all learn a few things from young Oliver Twist. Just as one should only rarely deny stuffing the pie-hole with heart-attack-inducing portions of porridge, or um, blueberry pies (and any other type of food for that matter) one should also only rarely deny the eyeballs (or pay-pal account) online vintage stores. Especially because there is a deliciously overwhelming amount cropping up left, right and cyberspace centre. They are the sweet tooth of the fashion industry, constantly providing pretty and individual bits and pieces for a pretty decent price, and best of all – you don’t have to get off your arse to find them. Now, some of you may whinge and whine about how this ‘takes away’ from the monthly Zen, a fix caused solely from physically trawling the Mecca that is the local ‘Vinnies. But I say bollocks, shouldn’t you be studying anyway? It’s two things you can do on the laptop for the time of one. And plus, it’ll cut fuel costs so you can spend that extra tenner on the electric blue pussy-bow blouse.

I want to note a particular Ebay vintage shop entrepreneur, she’s a local upstart and has some amazing pieces already on offer: Vintage Lover Online - is your online vintage fantasia… bringing to you a kaleidoscope of color and fur, denim and taffeta, pretty and tough. So please sir (madam), satisfy your eBay vintage need, and yeah, I think you know exactly what I’m going to say next…

Note…[please don’t ask me how I made the correlation between food, Oliver Twist, ‘please sir, can I have some more’s’, and vintage online EBay stores. But somehow I have, and, well, sue me. Use your imagination… I might have just eaten a blueberry pie].

(Images via Vintage Lover)

The Verdict Is In...

Although never one to say I told you so, there comes a time when the irritating and often irrational phrase is in favor of a belief so strong, so utterly rigid, that the words just conveniently slip between pursed lips with an air of arrogant, unavoidable certainty. That time is now. I. Told. You. So.

Despite an open email invitation to crown the next leg-warmer warrior, the kind of person that could do for the woolly legging cut-out what Kate Moss has done for mini-shorts, it seems nobody could come even close to presenting a cheerleader for the clothing item. But oh, did we have some shockers...

And thanks must go to Emily from Washington D.C, for providing us with a fabulous leg-warmer tribute even the 80's would rather forget.

And yes, it's true, there are even booties (half-assed attempt at boots, themselves) with leg-warmers attached.

I think I need to lie-down.

Everybody's PUFFed

(image via Style.com)

Ever since the Miu Miu Ballerina skirts flounced down the runways of Paris, a whole lot of DIY action has occurred on the blogosphere. And for good reason, these flattering and feminine pieces are both oh-so-easy to wear and oh-so-easy to make (that is, if you aren't too sewing machine dyslexic). It is a welcome alternative to the art-deco come bohemian chic trend that we're also seeing on the runways at the moment. And, unless you're into slaving over a piece of silk or linen with brushes, paints and beads, I think we'll keep that one to the professionals.

(elle)

(childhoodflames)

(flyingsaucer)

(kingdomofstyle)

Is it a rhetorical question?

Many people write me asking the age-old question: “who is your favourite designer?”

It is amazingly difficult for me to choose just one favourite, as so many of them constantly inundate us with refreshing and intricate shapes, colours, lines and fabrics. Also, a rather vital thing I take into consideration is how designers market their products, and not just the pure aesthetic prettiness of their clothing.

If I had to narrow it down, I can say that I’m particularly interested in contemporary designers such as Luella Bartley, Sass & Bide, Erin Fetherston, Easton Pearson, Muiccia Prada, Karen Walker, Christopher Kane (I’m very sure I’m forgetting about twenty, and I’m not going to put any pictures up because they all have so many wonderful designs; it would take me hours to choose a couple… it’s really a case of you googling and gazing). I believe their designs embody a youthful exuberance that reflects as-well as creates the vast mish-mash of “street” cultures apparent in modern society, than say some “classic” (and in some ways more artistically abstract and introverted??) designers like Karl Lagerfeld and John Galliano (NOTE: what I mean by introverted is that they may draw more on ideas within themselves and their own relationships than their surroundings, for example in “Karl Confidential” by Rudolph Marconi, he said his designs come to him in dreams… and it is a widely known fact that John Galliano’s creativity draws upon references that come from a dizzying array of rarely connected times, people and places and thus appears quite “random” at best).

That’s not to say I don’t love the unexpected creativity of the masters - because I do - they truly add fuel to the “fashion as art” fire. But, being a youth myself, the above designers have always been more accessible to me, and I love being able to grab a floral Luella skirt, and team it with some Sass & Bide leggings and an Easton Pearson hand-printed, sequined shirt with a colourful headpiece. It’s a very gen Y thing to do. There is an element of picking and choosing and experimentation, of creating your own unique look. I believe the youth of today are able to do that more than any generation prior (whether it be because of a heightened sense of self maturity earlier on, the loosening of social conduct and appearance boundaries, or both), that notion is in-turn, reflected in the ethos of the designers who are fairly new to the runway.

In terms of fashion brand, it would have to be Marc Jacobs, no question. He is responsible for creating an image for his label that is completely at odds with what he produces. He is notorious for his peculiar choice of models for his campaigns (actress Dakota Fanning, Jarvis Cocker etc), and moulds his advertising demographic accordingly. He makes his actual demographic (the up-towners and trust-funders who can afford his clothes) believe they are being edgy, creative and pretty much the epitome of cool when wearing the brand. And the irony is, the throes of actual downtowners – the ones sipping a black coffee in an undisclosed café – would be sifting through vintage stores, unable to justify spending around two and a half thousand (AU) on a bag with some funny chains on it. Pretension, maybe. Genius, yes.

(images via photobucket and Nylon)

Leg Warmers: Why?

(image via The Fashion Police)

Leg warmers are, and always will be, the stupidest things ever invented. They are the epitome of stupid; they embalm the wearer with such stupidity, that in fact the scant coverage they do provide offers solace (it could be used as a rather handy hanky I would imagine) for the embarrassment one should be feeling when they opt to choke their leg in something resembling a shin-girdle.

Let us consider, for a moment, the name it was christened with a mere decade or two ago: Leg. Warmers. I know, hilarious. Especially because they have no function of service for ones’ legs’, or the warmth therein. Apart from transforming the wearer into an Anna Pavlova try-hard, they serve no real purpose at all.

Now, as you all well know by now, I’m not adverse to anyone wearing Magpie’s atop their heads, facemasks resembling Catwoman on a sequin binge and the odd couple of thousand outfits with the ‘WTF factor’, Susie Bubble describes and depicts so effortlessly in her blog, BUT - and there is a BUT - even the most comfiest, woolliest, gut-wretchingly frilly leg-warmers with the grey pom-poms must not rest on vanity for vanities sake alone. They simply won’t do; I can honestly say I have never seen anyone pull them off before, not even Milla Jovovich (and of course, that’s saying something).

(image via Shoehunting)

Please, if you can prove otherwise then go right ahead, I’m all ears (and eyes). I will swoop to the ground and beg thee for forgiveness; yes I'll perch myself directly below all you lovers of what should have been hailed the ‘half-arsed excuse for a legging’, if someone can just provide me with proof that a teeny-tiny piece of material which transforms its wearer into a hobbit (a cold one at that) looks good on, well, someone. But, in the meantime, for the love of the god, please wear boots, or stockings, or even - wait for it - leggings - or, if you really want to push the push the clothing envelope: above-the-knee socks (but honestly, do you really want to go there? I don't think you do. Above-the-knee socks dwindle just short of the school-dance tragic-fashion line).

Oh and also, remember that *good is a subjective notion. And they who hold the magical password to Typepad have final say. Nonetheless, armed with cynicism yet hopeful admiration, let the emailing begin…

thestyleobserver@gmail.com