Month: November 2010

Ghosts of loves past

I may be testing your memory with this one, but remember my “Love, love, love” list from a couple of months ago? It featured this boiled wool jacket from Anthropologie:


Back then, I bemoaned the prohibitively high price tag, but vowed to haunt the Anthro sales room as long as necessary. To be honest, after going back to check on it once, I mostly gave up the pursuit, resigned to the idea of never getting my mitts on it. But – lo and behold! This past weekend, on an impromptu trip to West Ed, I remembered my erstwhile quest and decided to wander into Anthropologie. And came across lots and lots of my jackets – at about 50% off!

It wasn’t all good news. The only sizes left in the mustard colour I loved were not ones that fit – sigh! So I decided to go with a bluish-grey version that, while less of a statement colour, will probably accessorize better in the long run.
 

For anyone who might be interested, this is a great jacket for petites (or anyone with a shorter torso) because of the cropped length and sleeves. [On the other hand, it may not be ideal for generous cleavages, because of the pleats/ruffles detail.] It’s also a nice statement piece for showing off a pair of killer earrings. Worth checking out if you’re in the neighbourhood!

One for the lads

There is exactly one month left until Christmas Eve. Guys, if that doesn’t strike fear into your hearts, it should. Because that means you have exactly one month to find a way to avoid the dreaded last-minute dash to the mall the day before you have to put something under the tree for your better half. Hopefully, this post will make life a little bit easier, at least for some of you. Because I think I may have found the perfect gift for that special woman in your life who already has everything.

What is it? A charm bracelet.

Here’s why. First, it’s jewelry. Most women love jewelry, and fine jewelry is a romantic sort of gift – a lot of women don’t buy it for themselves. A charm bracelet is a simple yet classic piece, so even someone (like me) who’s not much into bracelets can appreciate its sleek, understated appeal. I have quite a few friends who own one, even though they don’t otherwise share the same style.

Second, it can be personalized; there are any number of different charms that can be added to the basic bracelet. I suggest you start with one or two, so you’re not just giving a bare chain. This also solves the problem of the next half dozen Christmases/wedding anniversaries/birthdays – just keep adding the charms! 

Third, there is the potential for built-in sentimental value in each charm. For example, my parents (who bought me my first bracelet) got me an “evil eye” charm that is supposed to protect against, what else, the “evil eye” of folklore. It reminds me of stories my grandmother used to tell me when I was little, which scores high on the nostalgia scale. My husband has plans to add to it with a bee charm – which  might seem random unless you know that his nickname for me is Bee.  A charm bracelet is also a piece that might easily turn into an heirloom down the line.


Fourth, it can satisfy even the label snobs. Both Tiffany’s and Links of London have relatively affordable sterling silver options and, hey … the nice box doesn’t hurt.  For those looking for something a little bit different, I read that  Thomas Sabo – a famous European brand – is coming to West Edmonton Mall. Their charms run the range from the classic (trefoil, key, hearts, etc.) to the hippie-chic (astrology signs) and the whimsical (Disney characters). Here is one of their “Charm Club” bracelets, courtesy of my stylish Swiss cousin. 


Happy shopping!

The news stand

I can be scatterbrained at times, but I think someone at Elle has me beat. Either that, or they’ve decided that ye olde Roman calendar was just too passe. Because, by my count, it’s currently November, and yet, accordingly to Elle, it’s high summer. Witness:
No doubt, if anyone can pull off an anachronistic see-through dress, it’s Kate Hudson. She’s all, “drink me in, bitches!” and I don’t blame her – she’s smizing something fierce. But let’s take a peep inside, shall we?
It is November, right? I haven’t lost my mind have I? I guess for the jet set, it’s St. Tropez time all year round. And the lady does have her five pounds of necklaces to keep her warm. 
By contrast, Harper’s Bazaar was positively festive this month:
Bless the gorgeousness that is Christina Hendricks, but that’s a whole lotta red! Is this the fashion magazine version of ‘Christmas creep’? Inside, we get a dose of fall-slash-winter outfits, magazine-style:
Well, as my grandma would say, at least she’s wearing tights. 

Vogue took a somewhat similar approach. On the cover, Anne Hathaway looks as dewy and gorgeous as ever wearing burgundy. OK, at least technically it’s not red.

Inside, there is another version of the fashion-on-the-heath spread; Vogue gets the edge over Harper’s Bazaar seeing as how it managed to get Stella Tennant to do the traipsing. 

On the other hand, she’s not wearing tights or a scarf – both no-no’s in my grandma’s books. However, the spread does feature sheep at one point, so maybe she’s planning on making them from scratch later. Bonus points to Vogue in that case.

On the other other hand, Vogue loses the battle of the anachronistic spreads to Elle, since it doesn’t commit fully to the concept of summer-in-November. All Vogue can muster is a few summer frocks, no bathing suits in sights.

There is always December.