Category: Life

Triple Down on Print

Equipment Brett blouse; Ferragamo Flavia red pumps
Shirt, Equipment; skirt, J. Crew (via consignment); shoes, Ferragamo (via consignment); necklace, House of Harlow; bag, MbMJ

As you guys may remember, I had some reservations about this blouse when I bought it. The print combo, paired with the style, struck me as borderline … ugly. I may have been more diplomatic in my description at the time, but that was the gist. I’m happy to say that I was wrong. Quite wrong. And I have no problem admitting that, notwithstanding what my husband might have to say on that topic. (He’s wrong. Hah!) Bottom line: this shirt has grown on me a lot.

Not 100% sure how I feel about it in this outfit though. Let’s take another look, or two.

Equipment Brett blouse; Ferragamo Flavia red pumps
weird, leg-stumpifying angle 🙁
Equipment Brett blouse; Ferragamo Flavia red pumps
too many prints?

Was mixing 3 prints a step too far? They’re all in the same colour family, roughly (blue, black, and white), so I don’t think they look clownish per se. But maybe just a little bit off? Seriously; here’s a close-up, and you tell me: one too many prints?

Equipment Brett blouse; Ferragamo Flavia red pumps
or too matchy matchy?

OK, enough about that. Can you guys handle yet another one of those navel-gazing entries about my never-ending quest to get my (style) s**t in order? Well, I hope so, because here goes. I’m sure I’ve mentioned it a hundred times once or twice before, but I have this weird attraction/repulsion/inner conflict about minimalism. (And, to be clear, I’m talking about minimalism as an aesthetic, not minimalism as a lifestyle.) As much as I love bright colours and prints, my definition of true chic has always skewed in the opposite direction. Think Gwyneth Paltrow’s or Kate Lanphear’s street style. Or a mere mortal’s version of Tilda Swinton’s wardrobe.

I’ve struggled with this a lot because, duh, I love bright colours and bold prints. The idea of wearing a pared-down colour palette and unembellished outfits always seemed … restrictive. And boring. And yet. One of the things that has really surprised me during this whole new “adulting my work wardrobe” adventure is that the outfits I’ve felt most comfortable in – and most like the best version of my(current)self – are the, you guessed it, minimalist ones. Note to self: what the hell is going on?

And, then, it finally dawned on me: the way I feel about colour when it comes to clothes, is the way I feel about colour when it comes to make-up. Let me explain. Set me loose in a drugstore (or, God forbid, Sephora), and I am likely to end up with a bazillion colourful things in my basket – eye shadows, eyeliners, lipsticks, you name it. I see colour, I want to get my hands on it. I want to play with it. But, in reality, I wear the same 2-3 eye shadow and lip colours day in, day out. I learned the hard way to avoid giving in to my colourful make-up buying urges, because it all just goes to waste. I don’t wear all those pretty, bright colours on my face, and if I ever try (because of an ill-advised purchase), I feel odd.

Anyway, it’s kind of the same story with clothes. I cannot get enough colour. I love looking at colours. I feel the same way about pretty prints. I would probably wallpaper my house in Anthropologie-esque prints if my husband allowed it. Because I just like looking at them. Does that sound crazy? Regardless, I’m starting to realize that just because I adore a print, doesn’t mean that I have to wear it. It may not, in fact, be something I really enjoy wearing, as opposed to just, you know, looking at it. I know that’s probably a really strange and random revelation to have but, well, strange and random is kind of the name of the game around here.

So, what does that mean? I think that, going forward, I’m going to try to set aside my love of prints and colours (for their own sake) when I go shopping, and try to base my buying decisions on other criteria. I’m working on figuring out a wardrobe colour palette (loosely inspired by this Into Mind post), which will hopefully make it easier for me to make more, shall we say, dispassionate choices about the things I buy, and don’t buy. What I’m not going to do, at least not until I’m really sure about where I’m going with all of this evolving style stuff, is get rid of all of my colourful clothes and prints. A lot of them I really enjoy wearing, so purging them seems unnecessary; the ones I’m on the fence about, I’m going to evaluate over the rest of the year. (I have a feeling that wardrobe analytics is going to play a big role in this.) No haste, no waste. Or maybe that’s just the hoarder in me speaking.

As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts, so hit me up in the comments.

Friday Flashback: Just Say When

[We haven’t done one of these in ages, and this one is apposite. This post was originally published on my old blog on April 13, 2009.]

Every now and then I get really discouraged about this writing gig. When I’m down in those familiar dumps, I amuse myself by looking up famous literary rejections. Did you know that, in 1944, T S Eliot, then a director of Faber and Faber, rejected George Orwell’s Animal Farm for publication on the grounds of its political subtext? Someone also once told Rudyard Kipling that he didn’t know how to use the English language, and informed Nabokov that Lolita was “overwhelmingly nauseating” and would be best buried under a rock for a thousand years. Writers have some of the best rejection stories out there, simply because rejection comes with the territory and the good zingers are captured for posterity.

That’s not to say that only writers feel the sting of rejection. Rejection is an equal opportunity pox: everyone gets it sometime. For my part, rejection is like failure: to be avoided at all times. I’ve been pretty successful in doing it most of my life. If that sounds like bragging, it’s not. I’m not particularly proud of this achievement because it represents a failure in itself – a failure to take chances, reach higher. It’s not to say that I’m a slacker or an under-achiever; but I’ll never be entirely sure whether I might have achieved more had I been more willing to face rejection, or failure. I’ve done well in everything I’ve chosen to do, but I’ve chosen to do those very things because I knew I could do them well. My victories were born of hard work and perseverance, not ingenuity or audacity; hardly the stuff for laurels and parades.

The world needs fearless gamblers. If people couldn’t face rejection, the whole species would be extinct by now. If people couldn’t countenance failure, we’d probably still be living in caves. The fact that we’re still around, and kicking around slightly fancier digs, speaks volumes about our inherent resilience in the face of (temporary) set-backs.

Rejection, I was once told by a young gentleman who (I can only assume) must have been something of an expert in the subject, is a numbers game. Getting rejected nine times out of ten still means you get one “yes”. After a while, you build a certain immunity to the sting of rejection. Failure is not entirely dissimilar. A friend of mine once told me that the reason why she didn’t ski was because she was afraid of falling. Having learned to ski the hard way (by being dumped by my parents at the top of the black diamond slope on my third day in skis*), I told her that the fear lasts only until your first fall. Falling on your butt, unpleasant as that is, is the best thing that can happen to a new skier. Now, if only I could take my own advice and apply it to my fear of failure, right?

Of course it’s not that easy. I’m nearing 30, and I’m still trying to ready myself for that first really big wipe-out. One of these days.

 

* I was about 7 years old. I made it down safely, mostly on my ass.

[Editor’s note: I was actually looking for another old post of mine when I came across this one, and went: “a-ha.” The fear of failure has been on my mind again lately, likely because this year is set to be a time of some significant changes in my life, mostly career-related. It’s a fear that was must have been ingrained in me so early on in life that, to this day, I have a very visceral reaction to the idea of failure. As I wrote almost 6 years ago (and even more so since then), to a lot of people, my accomplishments may seem like a pretty good definition of success (at least in the context of an average person’s life). And yet, the spectre that looms over it all for me is the fear of failure. I’ve still never really failed at anything – with the possible exception of baking – in 35 years and the thing that is hard to admit, even to myself, is that the reason is negative: I’ve just never really reached beyond what I knew, for certain, to be the limits of my abilities. The known limits of my abilities, if you will.

Perhaps there is more to it. This year, I’m determined to find out.

A friend of mine got me thinking about choosing a word to define my year. At first blush, it seems like such a kooky-Facebook-quiz thing to do. Exactly the sort of thing I hate. But I’ve been re-reading The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, and thinking about the power of our intentions, and of the energy we put forth in the world. And that got me thinking that choosing a defining word – a theme – this year would be a lot like picking a mantra to help focus myself. And so, after some more thinking, I did. I chose a word that scared me with its implicit messages.

Soar.

Its grandiosity scares me. Its presumption does too. I keep thinking about the lessons of Icarus. And, yet, there is such a sense of freedom that comes out of it too. Of lightness. Of letting go of things that hold one back, and also of rising above the turbulence of our human sphere. Which reminds me of something else I want to focus on this year: learning to be more compassionate. Resting bitch face notwithstanding, I don’t think I’m a un-empathetic person. But reading about compassion (the wish fulfilling jewel) in The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying made me realize that I still have a very long way to go as far as practicing everyday loving kindness goes. “Soar” will hopefully remind me to rise above attachments to personal desires and frustrations, and channel my energies towards others’ well-being instead. Lofty goals all … but I’m ready to try and fail, rather than not try at all.

Holy TL;DR of a post, eh? If you’re still awake, tell me: have you conquered the fear of failure, and if so, how? Have you picked a word for 2015, or are you more of a specific-resolutions kind of person?

 

Style Confessions, vol. 6

Quality Matters More When You’re Not a Size 2

This is a self-evident truth if you happen to not be a size 2 (or 4, or 6), but it’s been a while since I’ve been in that boat, and I had forgotten.

Now, before a bunch of you guys jump on me, I know that quality and fit are difficult to find (and precious) for everyone who shops off-the-rack. Pant legs and hemlines are either too long, or not long enough. Sizes are wonky. Everything is cheaply made in third world countries. This is true, and it is a pain, whether you’re a size XXS or XXL.

It just matters more if you’re on the larger end of the spectrum.

When it comes to fashion, skinny is still the ideal. Skinny can wear anything and everything; even on the worst day, it might look ridiculous or sloppy, but skinny will still look skinny – even if wearing the proverbial potato sack. You can conceal a lot of design and manufacturing flaws if you’re putting the clothes on someone who is a size 2. I know because I used to be a size 2 … and I rarely didn’t buy something because it looked terrible on me. It might have looked goofy, or even too big – but, hey, that’s sometimes a trend in itself.

I’m not a size 2 anymore. A few weeks ago,  I went to the J. Crew Factory store (because they had a big sale, and I haven’t gone in ages, and don’t judge me, ok?), and tried on some skirts. In fact, the skirts I tried were skirts I used to own a couple of years (and sizes) ago – and loved. They used to look quite nice, considering the price point. I sized up to my current size, and … I hated the fit. The skirt rode up and wrinkled on me while I was standing in the changing room. I tried one size bigger, and then the size after that too. And those looked bad too, for other reasons. More importantly, I looked bad, wearing the skirt. I didn’t just look like I was wearing a poorly made garment; I looked to be in worse shape than I am. And I guess that’s where my body acceptance runs out, because I’d really rather not. (Which is a discussion for another day.)

So, if you care about conventional style rules – which are all about not looking bigger than you are, but ideally skinnier if possible – then quality is not just a “nice to have”; it’s a “must have”. The right fit, the right fabric, the right proportions: they make all the difference between a potato sack and a cute pencil skirt.

I Don’t Photoshop For the Blog

But maybe I should; all the cool kids are doing it.

Fran wrote an awesome post about the reasons why more and more fashion bloggers are succumbing to drastic Photoshopping. Skinny sells, yes? There are very few fashion bloggers who don’t blog for money (or aspire to). This is understandable, because who doesn’t want a hobby that pays for itself? The downside is that, sooner or later, everyone encounters ethical dilemmas, whether it’s shilling a sponsored product the blogger wouldn’t buy with her own money, or posting heavily edited photos to attract followers and sponsors. Of course, for some people, these are not really dilemmas at all and, for the most part, they are rewarded for their, ahem, pragmatism. Some of us may chuckle at parody Instagram accounts like We Photoshopped What, but the majority of the fashion blog-reading public is unaware of the behind-the-scenes manipulation … and left in admiring awe. So, Photochop is the new normal.

I’m too lazy, and not sufficiently invested in this whole blogging game, to bother with it. For the most part. Because here’s the thing: I’m still as vain as the next peacocking blogger. As much as I want to be honest with you guys, I have no desire to (intentionally) put unflattering photos of myself on the internet. Who would? Nobody, that’s who, and if someone tells you otherwise, they’re lying. So I’ll edit away blemishes, and slap on eleventy million Insta filters, because it only feels a little bit wrong. I try to be upfront about that as much as possible, because it’s important that you know that no one wakes up with perfect, pore-less looking skin, especially anyone over the age of 12. (And no cream, or powder, or foundation is ever gonna beat the magic of Instagram filters. Trust.)

There are also pictures that you will never get to see on the blog. For example, can you guess which one of these two made the cut?

instagram photoshopping
you don’t need 3 guesses on this one

This begs the question: is what I’m doing any different than what the Photoshop queens are doing? Lying by omission is not the same as being honest. But is it closer to it than this?

instagram photoshop
lazy man’s version of the skinnifying app

I don’t know. We could probably have an interesting debate about it. But I’ll leave you with this pearl of wisdom: never, ever assume that what you see on a blog is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.