Announcements If you're new to this blog, then read our guides to the basics: Skin (Part I), Skin (Part II), The Supernatural, Color Theory I, Color Theory II, Eyes, and Brushes. Also, check out the blogsale. Contents Favored Art Tattler the glamourai The Non-Blonde Perfume Shrine Lisa Eldridge Garance Doré Smitten Kitchen Into The Gloss Grain de Musc Lacquerized Res Pulchrae Drivel About Frivol The Selfish Seamstress Killer Colours Bois de Jasmin Glossed In Translation Jak and Jil Toto Kaelo Worship at the House of Blues I Smell Therefore I Am Food Wishes The Natural Haven Messy Wands 1000 Fragrances Moving Image Source Wondegondigo The Emperor's Old Clothes M. Guerlain Colin's Beauty Pages Barney's jewelry department Parfümrien loodie loodie loodie The Straight Dope Sea of Shoes London Makeup Girl Sakecat's Scent Project Asian Models Ratzilla Cosme Smart Skincare Illustrated Obscurity A.V. Club Tom & Lorenzo: Mad Style Eiderdown Press Beauty and the Bullshit La Garçonne Flame Warriors Everyday Beauty Fashion Gone Rogue Now Smell This Dempeaux Fashionista The Cut A Fevered Dictation Nathan Branch 101 Cookbooks |
![]() When I saw this image in the December 2009 issue of Lucky, it created more excitement in me than I've felt about fashion in a long time. I have long loved tie-dye (I went to a hippie middle school), and I love the visual depth the t-shirt creates against the jacket. Being small both in stature and frame, visual depth isn't something that's always been easy for me to achieve. I've generally assumed depth to mean mixing textures in an outfit, leading to experiments with cable knits and tweeds that have inevitably ended in either adding bulk to my frame or drowning it. Either way, I was overheated and depth was not had. My confusion was compounded by endless viewings of What Not To Wear, in which Stacy and Clinton create visual interest through a mix of textures (satin, chiffon, various wools) and really girly accessories. It wasn't until I saw this look that something in my head clicked; I finally got that creating the look of depth in an outfit doesn't have to come from adding texture itself. Instead, it's more about literally creating visual interest by wearing something that draws the eye inward. In this look, specifically the middle picture, depth was created both by the tie-dye pattern and the mix of patterns in complimentary tones. The tie-dye itself shows variation in depth between brightness of color and tone which naturally draws the eye inward. In addition, the jacket brings its own depth with its mottled pattern while staying in the same color family. This is one of the quickest ways to introduce depth to an outfit: remain within a single color theme while incorporating variations in pattern, texture, or tonality. ![]() This Calvin Klein shift gives an idea of how depth can be created through pattern alone. The ombre pattern literally draws the eye into the shift, creating dimension. Likewise, the texture of the dress (puckered cotton voile) creates further dimension. This is the difference between visual depth and adding a "pop" to an outfit, as would What Not To Wear. A pop is a statement that screams from an outfit, be it a bold color, accessory, or item of clothing. Visual depth actually draws the eye into the outfit, causing the viewer to look closer and become engaged in the outfit. ![]() Visual depth can also be created through wearing black and leather together. Though this is typically done with black leather, the contrast of the almost burgandy tone of the brown, as well as the cage design, work together to create depth against the dark tones and tweeds of this Rodarte dress. The reason why leathers work so well to create depth is because they cause the eye to stop wandering and focus on them, creating contrast against the other elements of the outfit. This is particularly true in all-black outfits. Whether matte or patent, leather attracts both light and shadow, and anything that attracts light will naturally contrast with matte black, which absorbs it. This contrast creates the illusion of depth, the effect being heightened in all-black outfits, in which the total look is the interplay of light and shadow - in effect, the definition of depth. ![]() One of my favorite ways to achieve depth is to take one main color - here it's black - and work with tones that compliment it. Despite the difference in colors themselves, the reds, blues, and yellows of this Dries van Noten blouse are similar in tone (they are all colors that have had black added to darken them). When paired with black itself, the contrast is quite striking, and the eye is drawn into the top. This is probably the easiest way to achieve visual depth, as we all have basic, neutral tones in our wardrobes to work with. I also find this look the easiest on the eye (coat excepted); it requires the least thought, and all the tones work so well together that the outfit flows nicely, especially when contrasted with the more aggressive look of the jackets and t-shirts at the top. Labels: calvin klein, dries van noten, fashion notes, lucky, proenza schouler, rodarte 12/30/2009 [1] 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. Labels: apc, ballet, bonne belle, calvin klein, city hunter, emma de caunes, fashion notes, hugh laurie, jorge donn, margot fonteyn, song hye-kyo, sophie marceau, stephen fry 5/13/2009 [8] |
Subscribe to The Mnemonic Sense Most Wanted The Beauty Primer Lookbook Bestsellers Consumer Diaries Closet Confidential On The Label Beauty Notebook The Hit List Color Me In The Makeup Artist Wedding Bells Globe Trotter Desert Island perfume notes beauty notes fashion notes culture notes minimalism chypre arc floral arc fresh arc masculines arc gourmands & orientals arc Archives August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 August 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 March 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 June 2013 July 2013 Images Photobucket |