Category: Trials and Tribulations

The Pants Situation

Louis Vuitton Alma vernis Amarante; J. Crew Minnie wool pants
Pants & shirt, J. Crew (via consignment); cardigan, J. Crew Factory; shoes, J. Crew; bag, Louis Vuitton (via consignment)

… is still dire, as you can see. That sheepish look on my face says it all: I wore horribly-fitting pants to work, and blogged about it. In my defence – and I definitely feel like one is needed here – it all went down on a day I was planning to leave the office early, and I only realized just how poorly those pants fit too late in the game. As in, 5-minutes-before-I-had-to-leave-the-house late. (It wasn’t worth changing my outfit and being late over it, when I was going in for a short day anyway.) My old BR Sloan pants are also loose, but not like this. Yikes.

I mean, behold:

Louis Vuitton Alma vernis Amarante; J. Crew Minnie wool pants
um … yikes

Clearly, in addition to a black pair of work pants, I also need a burgundy one. Because, “saggy pants ass” aside (don’t ask, and don’t look at my Instagram either), I really, really liked this outfit. I’m telling you guys, there is something about the black + white + accent colour combination that can’t be beat for sophistication. At least, can’t be beat in my books. This week. [Let’s call that wiggle room in the event that I come down with a bad case of the grandma florals next week.]

I guess I better write another “Dear Banana Republic” letter …

Louis Vuitton Alma vernis Amarante; J. Crew Minnie wool pants
hiding my shame with a pretty, shiny bag

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?