Pages

Fashion Notes: Inspirations (Anne)

In order to be “well-dressed,” the consensus goes that one must cover one’s face in obliterating spackle, wobble about unsteadily in heels that limit one’s stride, and wear miniskirts and pantyhose in winter. Simply put, “beauty is pain,” or at the very least annoyance, and unless I did nothing all day but stare at myself in the mirror, I couldn’t reap whatever aesthetic benefits I gain by conforming to someone else’s idea of perfection—or even my own idea of perfection. And I’ve always been as obstinate as a mule, refusing point-blank to move at any pace but mine or make an effort at doing anything I don’t truly want to do. It’s more important for me to feel comfortable in my own body and in the clothes that I’m wearing than it is for me to look good.

This means that I’m probably one of the least fashionable people you’ll ever meet: I always err on the side of casual, rarely suffer high heels, wear my few favorite outfits to death, and still cling to my bootcut jeans and trousers from the 90’s. I do whatever is necessary to be considered presentable, and not an iota more or less. I need clothes that flatter, especially because I have the kind of figure that is difficult to dress around, but beyond that excessive embellishment is unnecessary: in my opinion, clothes don't have any business attracting undue attention to themselves, away from their wearer. I suppose this is the reason why I don’t really lust after designer clothing or keep up with the runway shows: ignoring the sour-grapes-factor, much designer clothing either tends to dwarf the wearer in its outréness or telegraph, by its own preciousness, its own elevation from quotidian concerns... and while I really am a snob at heart, I would rather not look like one, or at least not so openly.

So it seems like great audacity or even hypocrisy on my part to dare write about style, and it is difficult for me to name a single designer, movement, or even aesthetic that has made an impact on the way I dress, or even on the way I imagine I'd like to dress. My preferences change little even with increased exposure to sartorial possibilities, but the more I see, the better I know what my own tastes truly are. To this day, I still don’t quite know what I really like, much less my reasons for liking what I do, though I have realized that I keep coming back to the same themes. Possibly I’m driven by nostalgia—many of the influences I cite have their roots in childhood memories—or possibly I’m working myself into a permanent rut that only grows deeper as time passes. It's as if my tastes were predetermined and all that is left to do is to refine and streamline my habits accordingly, stripping away everything that is not truly necessary to my own satisfaction. It is this process of self-discovery that is the whole point; I am too narrow-minded to take an interest in anything else.

When it comes down to it, people dress for the benefit of others, and though it is true that well-dressed people are usually treated better, a certain saturation point is reached once you've done what's required to look decent and clean and “put-together”; beyond that point, no one is going to care. And “put-together” usually means dressing in some incarnation of a classic preppy style, derived from the dress of what was once the New England upper class, itself derived from an idealization of the dress code of the English elite. It’s an aesthetic characterized not by outlandish cuts or a dizzying turnover rate for trends, but by subtlety and close attention paid to fit, details and the quality of materials. Each person wears much the same thing as every other person of comparable class and situation, and there is very little departure from core basics in terms of styles and cut, so there is a certain kind of security to be found in anonymity and conformity, but somehow, the garments seem entirely personal to the wearer, managing to flatter without stealing the stage for themselves. These are the kind of clothes/outfits that I want to live in: I could throw them on in the morning unthinkingly and count on looking polished and at home in almost any milieu. (French-chic, which has admittedly become something of a cliché, is also a similar aesthetic, but more urbane and youthful, and less hidebound: APC's seasonal lookbooks, or Emma de Caunes looking sexy in nothing more than a basic buttondown in a brilliant emerald green that sets off her tawny skin.)


Understated good taste and a reliance on basics, however, can never entirely take the place of drama. I need drama to satisfy the extremist streak within me, the part of me that likes red lips and listening to Wagner and reading Ayn Rand, as well as to balance out my (for an asian) broad frame and curves: I look ridiculous in cropped tops and dresses over pants—like a middle-aged woman trying to appear "cute" by dressing like a teeny-bopper and fooling no one—and outright trashy in miniskirts—like Jennifer Lopez cast as a Van Nuys streetwalker in some hypothetical movie. I need long flared trousers, sleeves of a decent width, and voluminous skirts to accomodate my long and well-fleshed limbs, and cowl necks, scarves, bateau necklines, and wide collars, with a crisply-defined shoulder to balance out a broad hip, all centered around a defined waist. Calvin Klein's couture pieces seem to best embody this charismatic and slightly masculine quality I seek. (I couldn't find the exact image I was looking for, which featured a long slim-cut black coat with wide sleeves and an oversized cowl-neck: the material seemed to soft but heavy—possibly a knit—judging from the way it draped and clung to the body. The velour blazer shown here is a decent substitute.)


The accoutrements of ballet, for which I nursed an obsession throughout childhood and beyond, also satisfy this hunger for theatrics: stage makeup, skirts like floating clouds of tulle, satin ribbons criss-crossing slender ankles. Yet despite the romantic excesses of performances and stage garb, the behind-the-scenes lifestyle of ballet dancers is one of simplicity, rigor, and almost Spartan discipline. The (not quite healthy) emphasis on ethereal slimness, sleek uncomplicated hairstyles, and a clean uncluttered silhouette puts the focus on the contemplation of movement and the human form itself. I'm not built like a ballet dancer, but I aspire to the same aesthetic, where the body being dressed is the centerpiece of the look and any superfluous ornament is eliminated.


It is this palate-cleansing simplicity that is necessary to balance out the aforementioned theatrics in an outfit, which like any performer, needs respectful quiet in its surroundings in order to perform at its best. Minimalism is really a form of luxury in its own right when taken to extremes (even the Spartans of antiquity had to rule a slave class that outnumbered them 10 to 1 in order to finance their extravagantly austere lifestyle). Song Hye-kyo is dressed in an outfit of utmost simplicity and minimal fuss: the fluid lines of the jersey and sweater coat and the interplay between beige and black provide a backdrop for the oversized and highly-textured cowl-like scarf.


In contrast with the high-strung elegance of ballet, my sartorial memories of childhood can be summed up in two categories of considerably lesser sophistication: eighties, and polarfleece. In Korea, I am considered part of the “post-Olympic” generation—born too late to witness or remember the 1988 Seoul Olympics—but I inherited 80's fads and culture from those who had lived it, stripped of all the trashy flamboyance notorious to the decade and grown soft and manageable like a hand-me-down pair of jeans that the previous owner had broken in—eighties-lite, if you will. Boxy t-shirts and jackets worn with slim jeans, in primary colors (my brother calls them "Lego colors" and "Rubik's Cube colors"), my cousins' pirated copies of trashy manga, my mother relaxing in leggings and oversized buttondowns belted at the waist, Sophie Marceau as a teen just beginning to discover romance in La Boum, whose tomboyish ways do nothing to mask her (natural) beauty. Childrens' clothing tends to fall about five years to a decade behind adult fashions and I myself wore leggings with sweatshirts, Flashdance-style, until the arrival of the noughties. It's a shame that the current so-called “80’s revival” completely ignores all the things I loved best about the decade, the sort of playfulness that can only come from childish innocence or ignorant stupidity. I would have liked to see the return of a more angular, better-defined shoulder in particular, as well as a certain emphasis on the mature female body—all those hard shoulder pads needed feminine curves as ballast.


My other fond childhood memories are mostly about frequent hiking and canoeing field trips, when I lived in the Bay Area. We wore light, warm polarfleece jackets and windbreakers over t-shirts and cargo pants or shorts and sneakers. One can imagine there wasn’t much room to put on airs; the most you could do would be to tie your scarf a certain way, get a dexterous friend to braid your hair (I was the only girl in our grade who could French-braid her own hair), and make sure your sweatshirt and fleece didn’t clash. We also wore stud earrings, charm jewelry, and string friendship bracelets (it was the 90s), all in a variety of designs that were surprisingly delicate and tasteful, while Lip Smackers were popular to ease lips chapped by the salt sea wind (my favorite was Pink Lemonade). We were still only children, so we were free of the insecurities and status anxieties that would taint similar pursuits at a later date; all that fueled us at the time was a love of pretty things and the desire to put our best foot forward. We may have never had it so right about style as we did back then.

8 comments:

  1. I think being fashionable and stylish are entirely different things. One is contingent on others, while the other is not.

    Bertie with his trumpet! I love that episode particularly.

    Gah, gotta go, will finish commenting later.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, strictly speaking, it's not a trumpet, it's a trombone. :) Sorry, couldn't resist nitpicking.

    And I do think it's a credit to Hugh Laurie that he looks equally at home in tuxes and three-piece tweed suits and those gawd-awful "vintage-printed" tees they make him wear on House.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I love that image of Jeeves and Wooster! Whether Hugh Laurie intended it to be or not (I'm guessing not), it is a proper fashion shot with swagger and undeniability.

    Also, I think he's really come into his looks later in life.

    I know that CK image you're talking about. It was from the fall campaign with the long-haired blonde? I loved that coat, too. It had a really flattering collar.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think in the book it's supposed to be a banjole or something, though I haven't read that particular story. I just love the moment when they "break up", and then the moment when Jeeves lifts his hat to the cow after milking her at the very end—oh, how gloriously English! Fry and Laurie really bring Wodehouse's stories to life, though I get annoyed by the constant actor changes and the antagonistic view of women (though to be fair, Bertie's friends are soundly horrid too).

    "I suppose you could go around London asking people to pretend to be Gussie Finknottle, but what a hell of a life."

    I can't help contrasting it to the more scathing look at British upper-class in the 30s in Gosford Park, however. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad comparison.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well I read something online to the effect that Wodehouse can lambast his characters and still make his reader love them. (Of course, I wouldn't be able to guess at many actors who could play such stupid characters so lovably as Laurie and Fry, so maybe the merits lie with them.)

    I'd guess that Bertie and Wooster wasn't meant to be social criticism in any case, like how the British keep complaining about the preservation of the monarchy in a modern constitutional government, but then get all nostalgic about the royal family. I've never seen Gosford Park, but I get the impression that it's a much more representative cross-section that includes all the layers of society, and doesn't really go in for romanticization of one single class. It's actually more of an experimental film, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Gosford Park is worth watching for the clothes alone, but it's a great movie: witty, unbelievable cast, very scrupulously researched.

    No, W&J is definitely not social criticism on any level; it's quite idyllic. I remember reading once that the character of Spoade was introduced because he had compromised himself publicly (I think in a French POW camp? not sure) and was accused of treason for it. The authorities concluded that he was more naive than anything else, and that naivete does come through his characters.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I loved this post, Anne. The atmosphere created with the pictures is great, I could smell the Bay air!

    Being an incurable Balletomane, I too have a fondness for ballet garb. I like my clothes to breath; simplicity and flexibility are the first things I look for in a garment (in my parallel universe I wear nothing but Fortuny)

    Having a rather, uh, primitive nature my style stresses the body more than the garment itself. I don't layer, accessories are simple, and the palette is classic. The statement I make is my person, which is why fragrance, makeup and hair are more important to my outward presentation than clothes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That's true, Kathleen. I've found that the easiest way to look good and feel comfortable at the same time is to wear something that stresses your body rather than the clothes itself (and while you're at it, doesn't detract from your personality).

    Trouble is, as The Kindly One mentioned on her post about body-conscious dressing, it's not always easy to find the styles that flatter without overwhelming (and this is different for every person). Nor is it easy to figure out how to wear such clothes properly, once you have them.

    ReplyDelete