Life: Under Construction

Gap's back in their niche

Walking through the city, the new GAP 1969 ads are appearing on every other bus stop. The ads feature various attractive, polished models wearing the GAP's new line of 'premium denim'. The GAP was established 1969 to fill both a gap in the market and also to fill a generation gap in a changing time. The store in San Francisco sold jeans, records and tapes. Young people flocked to the store buying the denim and helping themselves to a five-finger discount when it came to the music. The music quickly filtered out and the GAP came to be known for offering the basics. 40 years have passed since it first began and yet the GAP continues to return to its  roots...advertising the basics. In 1998, their khaki swing ads helped put some extra pep into the preppy essential. Now, faced with increased competition from new high-end denim retailers (7 For All Mankind, J Brand), the GAP is going back to its roots and making simple denim jeans. I always feel a sense of relief when I see GAP returning to where it belongs. Their stores always become a frightening mishmosh when they try and jump on trends. While I probably won't be rushing into the store anytime soon to purchase these new 1969s, I don't object to the new ads littering street corners and I am thankful that we have moved away from the 'Red' campaign! 

Booties Battle On!

I have mentioned before on this blog how much I hate the type of shoe that is out and about right now that is like a bootie except for the fact that the end of the shoe features an opened toe. Back when we first started seeing these sorts of shoes, I assumed that it would be a passing trend and the sooner it passed, the better as far as I was concerned. Today I went to Refinery 29's blog, 'Pipeline' and was assailed with images of Topshop's fall shoes.

Before I go any further I must digress and explain that I went to the Topshop on Oxford Circus was back in the early 90's when I first started trying to be cool. My first purchases from them were a pair of Doc Marten-esque boots and a black suede leather jacket. I'm not sure I really pulled off either of these articles but it didn't matter, it was my first taste of fashion and I was in love. My relationship with Topshop has continued since that time all those years ago, despite that period when all they had were synthetic trousers that, try as I might, my bum would not fit into. Even today whenever I go back to Topshop, I make a pilgrimage to that same store that has turned into my version of Mecca.

Now that you all know how much I heart Topshop, you will understand why it pains me that they are continuing to support the open-toed bootie trend into the fall. My problem with this type of shoe is toefold: first, the bootie shape has a tendency to make your legs look shorter, rather then longer. Have a shoe that cuts off at the ankle also tends to make your knees look knobbly and wide. The result is that in order to look good in booties, you need to have skinny, shapely and long legs. Most of us have legs that may embody one of these qualities but it is a rare woman that encompasses all three.

The second issue with these shoes is that they have an open-toe, which means that you have to really nice toes. That means that if the toe next to your big toe is the longest, your out. If your toes are mangled and gross, your out. If you just haven't had time to get a pedicure recently, you should probably opt out for your own good. So, anyone that hopes to look decent in open-toed booties has to both have perfect legs AND perfect feet and this combination is that easy to find. Even if you do have the prerequisites for this item, I can't help but feel that you would look better in a classic pump or a sexy, knee-high boot.

While I would never ask anyone to avoid going to Topshop, I am recommending that we all stand united in not visiting their shoe section. It is pure danger!

I'm Charmed

The fashion industry always seems to be putting out statements like: 'Turquoise is so IN right now!','This, will be the year of the dress!', 'Put your pants away, this season belongs to the skirt.' or 'If you buy one thing for fall, make sure it's a belt!'. I just opened Refinery 29 and the second I opened the window I saw 'Charmed Life: Get Lucky With Our Latest Charm Jewelry Fixation'. I followed the link to their Pipeline blog and was told that the eclectic, funky look of charm bracelets 'feels so right nowadays'.

I had to smile at this because I am the proud owner of charm bracelet. It used to be my mum's and before that the charms belonged to my grandmother and before that, her grandmother. Each owner has added a few charms so now there are about a dozen. My mum boxed the bracelet up and presented it to me as a present for my 14th birthday. Sometimes a new bracelet will enter my collection and steal my attention for a short while, but just like the sun returning to the northern hemisphere, I always return to my tried and true charms.

In the more than ten year period that I have been wearing it, there have been multiple times when charms were being touted as the 'IT' accessory of the season. At first I would hear a statement like this and think to myself 'If my charm bracelet is 'IN' right now, does that mean it will be 'OUT' at some point?!' My worries turned out to be needless because like the other staples of our wardrobes, a classic piece like a charm bracelet does not have an expiry date.

As much as the fashion industry would like to convince us that things change from season to season, most of fashion is about re-working the same old ideas. For proof, take a look at the woman that sits at the pinnacle of fashion: Anna Wintour. No matter what trends she may be viewing, she sits there in her over-sized sunglasses, bobbed hair and sheath dress. The designer labels of her clothes may vary but the look doesn't. I suppose we should all take a cue from Anna and develop our own looks that just as timeless. I will be keeping my charm bracelet wrapped around my wrist.

The Horrors of Thong Sandals

Before I begin, I should start by saying that I hold a deep appreciation for flip flops and sandals in general. Indeed, I would say I probably couldn't survive a summer without them. But, this morning I opened WhoWhatWear.com and what met my eyes was an abomination.

The feature was 'What They Wore: Coachella'. As you would expect of the things worn to an outdoor concert in California, there were a few shapeless dresses, a few Doc Martin boots of the sort I haven't worn since my grunge faze in 6th grade and then there were these:

Sure, they look innocuous enough on their own but they must have been cursed with dark magic because once on, they turn otherwise normal, attractive female feet into flippers!! I'm not talking about the cute flippers of a baby dolphin....I'm talking about the flabby flippers that adorn a full-grown walrus, the sort of flippers that could double as water-skis.

The most offensive piece is the strip of leather that runs from between the toes up to the top of the foot. It essentially divides the foot in half making the big toe and inner arch look like it's own enormous island...ugh!! Who needs this?! And then, of course, this sandal also has an ankle strap which makes your legs look short. I feel sure that whoever designed this shoe must hate feet.

I am writing this blog to send out a plea that no matter how trendy these shoes may become this summer, you will resist wearing in order save your feet some dignity.

Over and out!

Um...Didn't You Forget Something?!

I was in first grade when I woke up one morning and decided that I would get dressed backwards...I put my socks and shoes on first, followed by a dress and then I was so distracted by the thought of breakfast that I forgot to put on my underwear. Being a wee 6 year old, I did not immediately notice. As I walked into school I was aware that something felt different, something was missing, but it wasn't until we had to sit cross-legged in a circle that I realized what I had forgotten. Unfortunately that day we had gym which featured the rope climb...oh, the indignities of childhood!

It is this sense of nakedness that I am reminded of every time I see a woman wearing a ridiculously short dress. A couple of weeks ago I was at dinner with a friend when a woman walked past wearing a dress that was so short, she only had to bend her elbows and we would have seen butt crack...and we all know crack is wack!! At the time, my friend and I worried that perhaps we were becoming fuddy duddy and overly conservative.

Certainly some people have the sort of legs that can pull off a barely there skirt. But do you really want to go there? If you have the sort of legs that look great in nothing, they will look even better in something. Plus, you avoid looking like you mistook a blouse for a dress. I just saw a girl on the street wearing such a short, baggy dress with apparently nothing underneath that I felt almost compelled to run up to her and whisper in her ear 'You forgot your pants' in the way you do if someone's skirt is caught up in their underwear or they have a trail of toilet paper stuck to their shoe.

The biggest problem with this look is that it can look barely decent from the front and completely vulgar in the back...so unless you have me in your dressing room giving you the 'A-OK' from the rear, this look is far too problematic to bother with!

The Quagmire of Compliments

I got on the elevator the other day only to be followed by a young man (by young, I mean unmarried and childless not adolescent). Before we go any further, let me describe what I was wearing: my feet were in Havainas flip flops (don't be alarmed, the Manolos were in my bag waiting to be put on), my skirt was on oldy but goody from Club Monaco, black and very Audrey Hepburn in a poofy, 50's kind of a way and then on top I was wearing my brand new purple-striped RUGBY (by Ralph Lauren) blouse with a bow-tie neck...needless to say this was the piece-de-resistance!

So after my fellow elevator rider and I exchange good mornings he says 'Is that outfit by some designer?' Is this supposed to be a compliment? Is this some bazaar Martian way of chatting someone up?

Not sure how to reply, I went the jokey route with 'Well, I assembled it so I should get full credit!' You would think that response would have put an end to the whole issue and the crisis would be past us but no...

'No, really, is it by some designer?' OK buddy, you just stepped over from awkward conversation man to creepy elevator guy.

'The shirt is RUGBY by Ralph Lauren.' If you must know, you prying, inappropriate freak. We had arrived on his floor so this was my parting line as I zoomed up to the penthouse.

But the topic was not done-for. On seeing me later in the day, he approached me and said 'Is that really Ralph Lauren?' Um, yes it is. Are you going to buy one for yourself now and prance around your apartment as you extract blood from chickens for weirdo tantric rituals?

Needless to say, men need to be careful with complements. It is a minefield of female emotions that you are trying to navigate when you engage a woman on her home turf of fashion. Tread lightly. For more specific instructions, check out Hadley Freeman's piece in today's Guardian.

Hat tip: Susie!!

PP gets a notable mention!

The papparazzi say 'Jump!' and Phoebe Price asks 'Do you wanna see my panties?!'. Her ludicrous desire for fame, no matter how tawdry, is the main reason I think that PP is a complete waste of space. I suppose I should feel compassion for her since her only friends are the photogs and as such we can safely say that NOBODY loves her. I believe she claims to be an 'international supermodel'...is she supposed to be a model of vapidness, or perhaps she demonstrates the danger of too much plastic surgery. While nothing natural remains of her face and that hair looks like it was sprayed out of a bottle, I have new found respect for PP.  In a day and age when celebrities would risk looking like a Dorito or contracting skin cancer rather than have pasty-pale skin, PP flaunts it. No doubt the texture of the skin is fake (BOTOX!), I think it is great that PP has kept one trait that differentiates her from all the other plastic Barbies cavorting around California. Well done PP, as usual you have earned yourself mention by doing absolutely nothing extraordinary, you just were yourself. Let's all raise our glasses (or Snackwell's cookie packets as the case may be) to the plastic, cellulite and paleness that is Phoebe.

Daft Heels (lame title I know, it's been a long morning)

I do realize that as someone who once stepped off the elevator at work in 4inch Betsey Johnson heels only to completely wipe out, sent one shoe flying across the lobby and then hobbled over to said shoe and had to lean against the wall to regain enough balance to replace lost shoe, this post is a bit like the pot calling the kettle dirty bottom. Caveat in place, one of my pet peeves is women in heels that are too high. I cringe at myself when I realize I am clumping down the street with bent knees, bowed shoulders and wobbly ankles. Why do we do this to ourselves?! 

What always amuses me is the names given to dangerously high heels. Sometimes they are given mundane titles like 'closed-toe pump', 'satin d'Orsay' or 'patent Mary Jane' which are completely utilitarian in their description but more often than not, designers opt for names that imply elegance, grace, and beauty...everything you will not embody while wearing the shoes. Christian Louboutin has 'Catenita', 'Very Prive' and 'Decollette'...all names indicative of the luxury of needing to be carried to your destination in unwalkable shoes. Meanwhile Manolo has 'Something Blue' (maybe your future husband will catch you as you go ass over tea kettle) and "Mladari' (I have no idea what it means, but they make my legs look great!). 

Then this morning I came across the most brilliant name for a pair of shoes: 'Daft'. Robert Clergerie has a wicked sense of humor. Finally a name that aptly describes what we are...daft! Daft for wearing a pair of shoes that carries significant risk of bodily harm and humiliation, not to mention the stress of wearing five pound weights on either foot and announcing your arrival with a sound that mimics the thunder of horses' hooves. While I find his shoes clunky in a way that makes me think he has spent way too much time with the Swedes, I now have the utmost respect for Clergerie as he clearly has a very realistic view of his day job.

Who's The Star?!

I promise this will be my last post on Sex and The City mania, at least until I have seen the movie (just two more days to go!!) and I do realize that with each and every SATC post I put up, I prove myself to be an obsessive fan but who cares...it's fun. I just noticed Sarah Jessica Parker's dress that she wore to the New York premiere of the SATC film last night. What strikes me in this photo is not so much that SJP must have skinned a bunch of mermaids to make that thing but more that she is determined to the belle of the ball. We've already witnessed that hideous hat that she wore to the London premiere, it was as if she wanted an great green arrow pointing at her head and going 'I'm here! I'm here!' just in case anyone forgot who was the headliner of this rodeo. We all choose to make a statement with the clothes we wear and the statement SJP has made over the last few weeks is one of a diva demanding our undivided attention (you know she'll throw her Manolo at you if you're too friendly with Kim!). Perhaps she is trying to make up for the fact that Carrie is the most irritating character on the show...you're glad when the other three are happily settled but with Carrie you just feel like she doesn't deserve it. How many guys has she alienated? How many lunches has she dominated with her personal woes? How irritating is that high pitched squeal?!! Not that I wouldn't mind walking a mile in her Louboutins and of course I will be running out to see the film version but I just wish SJP could have walked the pink carpet in something a little more humble.

Fashion Flub In The City

This morning I took a Sex And The City trivia quiz and, as expected, I got perfect marks. The message that awaited me at the end of my triumph was this: 'You clearly have an unhealthy obsession with the lives of four self-obsessed Manhattanites. You've seen the film already, haven't you?' I cannot deny the veracity of this statement although I have not yet seen the film, but while I await the film's general release in the US I thought we could dissect some of the outfits worn my the stars to last night's premiere...what larks!!

Yesterday I shared my thoughts on skirt length and the way that a pore garment choice can make you look much worse than you actually are. The converse is also true: a well-chosen garment can make you look much more svelte than you do in your birthday suit. Luckily the SATC premiere in New York last night provides prime examples of both of these phenomena.

In the fug corner we have Kim Catrall wearing...what exactly is she wearing?! I like this length of skirt on her and the color is flattering but what on earth is going on with its bodice? We've got lederhosen running up the front like train tracks, trying to reach Kim's shoulders but falling short ever so slightly. This, combined with the weird ruching around the bust make her breasts look like they are making a run for the southern border. Worse is that the fact that the lace dribbles down and hits her at the top of the thigh...accentuating what is a woman's widest part as well as making her legs look proportionally shorter than her torso (I do acknowledge that the camera angle doesn't help but still!) Kim is a gorgeous woman with a figure I would die for, to say that this dress does not do her justice is an understatement.

Then we have the fab corner: Jennifer Hudson. Not the skinniest Hollywood starlet my any means...this girl has curves and this dress takes advantage of all of them! Her bust is well-supported and is revealing just enough to be sexy without crossing over the line into tawdry. The wide, open neck of the dress is incredibly flattering...she is positively glowing. The wide black belt is cinching in her waist, taking advantage of her hour-glass figure. The belt is also tied at her natural waist. This has the effect of making her lower torso seem longer (who wouldn't want that) so that she appears much more leggy that she is. The narrowness of the entire outfit gives the impression that there is less of her (if you are on the bigger side, the last thing that you need is more bulk). And the length of the skirt is just perfect for giving her lower leg some definition. Well done Jennifer, well done. Additional props awarded for the flattering haircut..all the coolest people have bobs (including yours truly!)

My only hope is that someone (perhaps Dreamgirl's stylist) takes Kim under their wing and tutors her on the importance of finding a dress that makes you look fabulous, not fabulously dreadful. There's still time Kim! I'm sure you've still got the Tokyo premiere. Whatever you do, don't where Issey Miyake!!

hat tip: dlisted.com