3Last weekend, I had a work retreat thing which meant a short trip to the mountains and a very loosely-goosey dress code. Just exactly what does one wear when “hanging out” with work colleagues in the middle of nowhere? Thankfully, no camping was involved, and I further simplified my dilemma by carefully avoiding the outdoors as much as possible. (Which was, in retrospect, a rather prescient move on my part, since a couple of my colleagues had a closer-than-recommended encounter with a bear on a hike near our resort. Luckily, it was not a Leo-going-for-the-Oscar type of situation, but scary nonetheless.) In the end, I went with a simple, business casual capsule, heavy on black and warm layers. Conference rooms are always cold as freezers, no matter the season or location.

Here’s what I wore:

I wore this at the office in the morning, then on the bus to Kananaskis. Comfort level: one step down from sweatpants.

Once we got to the hotel, a night of pub trivia and collegial mingling awaited us, so I changed into the mom version of my old “going out” uniform. Comfort level: half a step down from sweatpants.

Saturday went something like this: meetings, lunch, meetings, massage, nap, brief consideration of going outdoors, nap, dinner. I wore my new-to-me Cartonnier blazer (part of a swap with Jen/Life Preloved) during the day, and my Club Monaco dress at dinner. It was all pretty low key, but I blended in well and I count that as a success.

There were more meetings on Sunday, then a long drive home, so I went with my sweatpants-like non-sweatpants for comfort, and threw on a blazer for respectability. I think I accomplished … some of my goals, at least.

In all seriousness, Kananaskis Country is gorgeous and you should go visit if you get a chance. Here’s proof:

Note: Chapter 8 of A Temporary Engagement is now up on my other blog. Check it out here.

I still enjoy reading books about style, even now after all these years of blogging (tens of thousands of words on every conceivable topic related to clothes) and reading, well, countless other books about style. I was wondering about why that is as I was perusing the latest acquisition in my collection, How to Get Dressed – which, thankfully, is not your typical style book.* The answer came to me with a side of irony. I like reading style books because I am still struggling to define my own style, and forever hoping that a book will hold the key that will magically unlock that mystery. The irony came from the fact that How to Get Dressed spends little time on the topic, and yet, paradoxically, it actually nudged me closer to the answer I’d been seeking all along. Perhaps all the way there, in fact.

Before I go on, let me acknowledge the obvious: “struggling” to define one’s personal style is the very definition of a first world problem. Even within the context of a personal style blog, it’s a bit of a navel-gazer. The truth is, not having a ready handle on my style – that neat, two-word summary that perfectly encapsulates the sartorial “me” – has never stopped me from getting dressed, and doing it in an acceptable manner. But it’s nagged at me. My life is over-flowing (with many good things, and also plenty of stress, and worry, and endless activity), so I really shouldn’t be wasting any time or mental energy on it, but good luck telling my brain that. It’s like a dog with a bone – it just won’t let go. Maybe, it tells itself, if I just figure this one thing out, every actual, legitimate problem I’m procrastinating on tackling will magically disappear. Yes, that’s the ticket. And that is how I find myself pondering style adjectives at 10 o’clock at night. Sigh.

Having stepped way into TL;DR territory, let’s just plunge on, shall we? Because I have to tell you how How to Get Dressed helped me get a handle (finally!) on my pesky style dilemma.

As I mentioned, How to Get Dressed doesn’t delve in great detail into the issue of how one ought to go about defining one’s style. The author (Alison Freer) does recommend using a thesaurus to brainstorm words if you’re feeling stuck. And that is precisely what got me moving down a new and interesting path.

My “struggle” (hah!) has always been to reconcile some pretty disparate style tendencies into one cohesive (or at least, clearly dualistic) persona. So, for example, I like some looks that might be classified as minimalist, some that are more quirky, some that veer towards menswear-inspired, some that are quite the opposite (feminine, I guess?). I like monochromatic looks, but I also love colour. I like black. I like texture and patterns. On top of that, somewhere at the back of my head, there lurked the seemingly invincible conviction that the epitome of style was a sort of modern day, French Audrey Hepburn. It was all very confusing, you see.

Encouraged by the book to “think outside the box” in terms of adjectives, one of the first things that came to mind was architectural. I don’t know why that popped into my head, really. I do love a nice, clean line paired with interesting shape and texture – which is the look that “architectural” brings to my mind – but that’s only a small fraction of my style persona. The word got me thinking, though. What do I love in architecture – or, more specifically, interior design? This answer I knew. I love mid-century modern and neoclassical design. The first was a non-starter; I appreciate the (early seasons) Mad Men look, but it’s not really my thing. But neoclassical … that had potential. To give you a sense of what I mean, here are some pictures:

[Note: all of the above photos come from Influential Styles by Judith Miller, which is one of my favourite books on interior design. The photos, as you can see, are stunning and the text provides a good primer on some of the more iconic styles. I re-read this (and daydream) at least once a year.]

I find these interiors very calming, for lack of a better word. They simply look right to me … the way that a well-chosen outfit makes me feel. They have elements that speak to me: clean lines; interesting details but no clutter; neutrals paired with pops of colour; beautiful patterns. Imagine black instead of white as the dominant colour, and you begin to see the outline of my style persona.

So I liked the sound of “neoclassical” a lot. But neoclassical what? Boho? Eclectic? My style is not always as, hmm, formal and elegant as those beautiful interiors. Especially on weekends. Sometimes, it’s a little quirkier. Sometimes, it’s a little more badass (I do love my leather jacket). “Eclectic” might cover a multitude of deviations from the purely neoclassical, but in a way, that’s its biggest drawback; it tells you almost nothing, except that I have a tendency towards being somewhat all over the place.

Mulling on this topic, I came to another realization: as much as I admire French chic, my true “spirit animal” resides on the other side of the Channel. “Slightly madcap English aristocrat” is probably far closer to it than Audrey Hepburn or any of her modern-day sisters-in-style. Mind you, my style persona is not much of a horse-, hunt-, outdoors-lover (although I love me some knee-high boots and tweed), so perhaps I should amend that to “bookish, slightly madcap English aristocrat”. Depending on the location (town versus country) and the circumstances (swanky bar versus village fair), she might wear anything from a ball-gown to, yes, a leather jacket. Good tailoring, quality materials, timeless silhouettes … with a dash of quirkiness, because she can. There are probably examples out there (Amanda Harlech? Daphne Guinness?) but it’s their spirit, not their specific style, that’s the key here.

And that brings me back full circle. My style persona is never going to be reduced to two neat words; I’m just not good enough of a wordsmith. But it has both form (neoclassical) and spirit (the aforementioned madcap English aristocrat), and that is a pretty good start. After all, style is ever-evolving, right? Right. So, get your thesaurus out and have some fun with it! That’s my advice anyway … what’s yours?

* How to Get Dressed focuses more on practical tips that transcend individual tastes and styles, like proper fit, alterations, methods for cleaning and caring for clothes, etc. Some of these were pretty obvious/well-trod ground, but a surprising number were both new to me and very helpful.

Pants, two days in a row? What is even happening, you guys? I don’t know, but there it is. I felt like taking this Vince sweater out for a spin, and then … got lazy with the rest of the outfit. Or, if you like, went classic and simple. I did pull out these ancient (circa 2008) Enzo Angiolini shoes to match the silver thread in the sweater stripes, so there was a hint of fun.

The weather is befuddling at the moment. The mornings have been legit cool (sub 10 C), and definitely fall-like, but then the afternoons turn broiling (high 20s). No matter what I wear, I’m inadequately dressed for at least one of my commutes. I’m not complaining — even if it reads that way — because I’ll take Mother Nature’s Sybil moment any day over a full-time commitment to Edmonton fall. But in case you’re wondering why my outfits are all over the place (who are we kidding though, that’s nothing new), now you know why.