Archive for August, 2012

Who’s Going to IFB?

Ladies! Any of you attending the Independent Fashion Bloggers conference next week in New York? Because on Wednesday the 5th, I’m on a panel about Journalism vs. Blogging—a topic about which I have a thought or two. You MUST come, and afterward, you absolutely must introduce yourself.

Blue and black is totes sophisticated

I’m finding this whole blue and black thing very appealing. Not as much the color block pieces—which always feel a bit mod and costumey—as the prints, which seem richer and less one-season. I also very much like how excellent all the shades of blue are: rich and jewel-y-toned, purply-cobalt, and extra-flattering.

Maria Cornejo is one of my favorite designers, because she really knows how to cut clothes for women that are not only flattering but also comfortable. This dress is so elegant I can hardly bear it. It says, Yeah I’m cool, but don’t not take me seriously.

On a somewhat less subdued—but I still think perfectly appropriate—note: this Marc by Marc Jacobs number. It looks very short here, but that might be due to glamazon model issues; in this picture, on a model who’s 5’10”, it hits right above the knee.

Ikat prints can be so damn loud, but this one is positively chill.

This Theyskens Theory sweater feels like it would have all the versatility of a solid cardigan, but so very much more excitement.

Plus, it’s rather fantastic from the back

 

The genius of this by Malene Birger scarf is that the zig zag print is kind of  abstract and messy, which keeps it from being overwhelming.

Crazy or cute?

Clog granny boots. Inspired union or unholy alliance?

Morning links

 

• Beautiful people riding the subway. (Refinery 29)
• I like this thing the networks are doing where they preview entire episodes of new shows online.  Watch The New Normal—which I’m going to come right out and say I really liked, although it’s definitely got some kinks to work out—here .   (Splitsider)
• Best cleaning tip ever: pick up tiny shards of broken glass with bread! (Amazing Food Tricks)
• Richard Nixon thought of everything. Here’s the speech he prepared just in case Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin crashed and burned on their 1969 mission to the moon. (The Daily What)
• Somebody got their hands on the training manual for Apple store Genius Bar employees, and it is—as these documents so frequently are—kind of fascinating.  The list of banned words and phrases alone if a tour de force of Customer Service-speak.  (Gizimodo)

 

Leopard: king of the animal prints

I am so obsessed with leopard prints, and hold so many and varied extremely strong opinions on them, that I sometimes think I could start a Tumblr on the topic and never run out of material. I can’t think of another print that can go so many directions depending on who’s wearing it and how. But one must exercise caution here: there is also no animal print that can skew quite so tacky.

My general rule is to avoid anything too tight, cleavage-baring or otherwise overtly sexpot: a fantastic straight skirt—like this one from Christopher Kane—would be my sole exception, and even then only if the rest of the outfit is comparatively subdued.

As for sweaters, I like a sloucher take—this Zara v-neck hits the exactly right  note.

And I’m so batty for this pre-styled-for-your-convenience piece (the flash of leopard at the hem is part of the sweater) that after I’m done with this post, I might reward myself by walking over to my neighborhood Rebecca Taylor store to try it on.

A good, clean-lined leopard jacket is always hard to find—and it almost never comes cheap. Too often, designers revert to a retro, 50s-ish shapes, or use cheap faux fur that can make you look a little bit like you’re wearing a plush doll. This By Malene Birger number gets it just right.

I was obsessed with this Elizabeth and James coat last winter, because the tailoring looks so dead-on, and those leather lapels are fantastic. Thrillingly, it recently turned up at Neiman Marcus Last Call, way-discounted.

Leopard print dresses are tricky business—they can come off so costume-y—and definitely require strategic styling. I’ve been thinking about this one since I saw it front and center in Anne Klein’s fall ad campaign. I’d definitely throw a cardigan on with it, though, to break it up a bit.

As a rule, I am not in favor of the leopard print shoe. No matter how fancy or fabulous the designer, they always look cheap to me. But I kind of love this Loeffler Randall pair: the red adds the right playful touch, and takes them to a delightfully new wave place.

I feel about tops in this category the way I feel about sweaters: the less seriously played, the better. This tee from Freshman is fantastic and my love for it would be complete were it now cropped just a pinch higher than I like my t-shirts to be.

And how cute is this? I can’t decide if it’s maybe too young for me, but I’m in love with the clever interplay of colors. The green just totally works with that red, which if so cool and unexpected.

My ass and I are a few years beyond the time when leopard jeans would be advisable, but that has not dampened my enthusiasm for  what Current-Elliott  has been doing with the print for the past few seasons. I like how subdued the wash always is, which keeps it from looking too 80s metal. So does the fact that this pair in particular is grey. And I like them with just a bit of give. Don’t be afraid to size up.

Leopard print scarves abound. I prefer ones that go colorful. How cute—but not cutesy-sweet—is this pink and red one?

And this is rather unexpected in the green, no?

As for bags: that’s a topic unto itself, and I shall address it another day. You can be certain.

Why wouldn’t Obama do an interview with Glamour?

One might have foreseen that news of  Barack Obama sitting down with Cindy Leive of Glamour—for a piece to run in the magazine’s November issue—would result in a big old public outcry from the right. But the fact of its predictability makes it no less annoying. “Can’t wait to see what he thinks of the new collection. Next up: the Cosmo interview!”  snarked a columnist at the National Review who, in a follow-up email exchange with WWD,  elaborated: “The grumbling about Obama’s fluff interviews would be quieter if the country were in a time of peace and prosperity, or if he hadn’t gone eight weeks without a press conference.”  Greta van Sustern and the Drudge Report chimed in with similar sentiments.

It’s not like there’s nothing to this criticism, but the ugly brand of glee that has accompanied it feels reductive and misguided and tinged with misogyny.  Glamour may or may not be your personal cup of tea, but it does have a long history of covering issues surrounding women’s professional,  personal, and reproductive rights.  In addition to which (and as many have pointed out), George W. Bush—who had an almost xenophobic relationship to the press during a similarly fraught period in this nation’s history—spoke with the publication as well. And anyway, a general interest magazine aimed at women doesn’t seem any less relevant a venue than, say, People,  which quite recently ran an interview with Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and their wives.  For which I don’t knock them: Obama’s been in People too. Giving access to high-circulation publications is something candidates do.  That Glamour—or any women’s magazine that has consistently prioritized important women’s topics—would be considered a less-than-viable venue is such absurdity that I’m annoyed anyone’s even debating it.