I’ve recently pondered the culture of appearances. How the way we look affects third party judgement and that fashion is an intrisic part of human appearances.

It’s especially bizarre when you compare the two polar opposites of fashion.

On one end, you have the fashion magazines and runways who supposedly dictate what is beautiful and ideal. However, the extreme of the fashion magazine industry is that it is TOO ideal, to the point that models are photoshopped to death and look like stick figures without an ounce of flesh on them. They end up looking human-like but not in the sense of a real person. A fantasy so to speak.

On the other end, you have every day people who can’t afford to look like models, nor the designer clothes that they wear. Yet, they go to a far extreme that decency seem to fly out the window. What does one do when one is severely overweight? Many of them love to show off how fat they are by wearing little clothing.  Or some people simply enjoy offending others with graphic tshirts, but these are just attention seekers looking for a reaction - any reaction. I just keep wondering what goes through their heads before walking out the door.

The reason I bring this up is because of this site, The People of Walmart, a daily photo blog of people shopping at the venerable super store. While ignoring the image captions, it’s unfathomable to me how some people can walk out of their homes wearing torn tshirts and jeans, or extremely revealing clothing that they believe to be acceptable. I mean if you can afford a car and chips, you can afford to buy new clothing (and Walmart does have a clothing section that’s entirely affordable). And it wouldn’t kill the women to buy clothes that actually covers them decently, or the men to wear a tshirt that isn’t shredded to reveal the top of their bottoms like Joe the Plumber.

Decency isn’t about dressing like a nun or to be without personality with your clothes, decency is having courtesy to not offend the people around you, and the children who are in the store. But it seems that respect for others in terms of fashion is “up to the individual”. Yet there’s only so much a person can take. You’re living in North America, you’re not in a third world country, and honestly even people in third world countries don’t dress as dowdy as these people. There’s no need to show off just how offensive they can be just to get a reaction from others.

It’s difficult not to judge people by the way they dress, we unconsciously associate certain looks with certain social status, with a certain background. But even the rich often make poor fashion choices. Regardless of social status, it all boils down as to what consists of “normal” and what consists of “too much”. I think everyone with a modern mindframe can guess that to be respectable in their looks is to go by unnoticed or at most, to be complimented and admired. But some people really take it too far to get noticed.

There are those who are proud of their round figures. Good for them! You love your body and you won’t succumb to the marketing slogans of the world. But please, put some pants on. Please, put a top on. Even if a slim person who walked into a Walmart in a bikini top or with boy shorts would be deemed indecent even to me. Maybe I’m just being prude. You can be attractive with clothes on. Seriously.

Whatever happened to good manners? Whatever happened to having a respectable appearance? I know it’s a general term to have a “respectable appearance,” but is it too much to ask to have at least your breasts and your bottom covered? Magazines aren’t helping, that’s for sure.

Image credits: People of Walmart

I do love the dresses you have and the ultra cute shoes and accessories that give that little bit of glam. I love visiting your stores, and I love what you’ve done with the new flagship on Ste-Catherine.Your website is top notch and you’ve got the online magazine à la Net-a-porter down to great looking editorials.

However, sending me email blasts of yet another sale every single day will not entice me to purchase from your online store. I don’t care how nice your email creatives are.

If you want an effective email campaign, try sending at most once a week of your promotions. And if there’s a sale, it’s better to simply send at most 2 global campaigns to your lists: one to announce, and one to remind. There’s no need for you to send me an email every day. It’s pointless and it’s spamming my inbox.

It’s email marketing 101. If you were a consumer, would you want to get an email from your favorite brand every day? I don’t think so.

Sincerely,
Dahlia

“Haute” is of course referenced to  “Haute Couture”, by definition it means “high end” in the context of fashion. When we enunciate the original french way, it sounds like “o-tuh” with a brief “t” at the end. So if you know any basics in French, “Haute” and “hot” do not sound alike at all.

So when I see things like the recent J.Crew ad of “Haute for the Holidays” or at Vitamin Daily, it just rings terribly ugly. “O-tuh for the Holidays” which clearly tries to make an allusion to “Hot for the Holidays” by trying some alliteration.  Are they trying to saying “Haute” in a German accent? “How-tuh”?

Either way, fashion advertisers maybe should play a round of Boggle in order to get words that actually sound similar and not embarrass themselves with silly play on words that don’t work. There’s nothing wrong in inventing words like “Freakonomics” or having funny alliterations like “Beads for Boobies.” I’m not a language police, but it’s annoying to see a French word made like it sounds similar to another word when it clearly doesn’t.

Otez-moi ça! C’est débile!

Histoire de plaire is a newly opened store on Ste-Catherine next to the recently revamped BCBG flagship store . This small Swiss chain had recently established itself and is somewhat of an oddity on the Ste-Catherine strip.  I took a random tour of it last weekend to see what the store was about and was surprised at what the merchandise had to offer.

The first rack I came upon were the sales racks of Chanel-like tweed jackets and skirts, all priced at around $500 each. The overall styles of the store weren’t really particular to my taste until I started noticing fur pieces. I don’t particularly know too much about fur (except of course being able to tell what is fake and what is real), but it wasn’t until I saw a fantastic brown mink coat in the far left corner of the store. I’ve never seen mink upclose, the stuff only seemingly existing on tv shows and movies. I thought it was some other type of fur but upon touching, I knew it was something different. It was smooth to the touch despite its coarse hair, a perfect size 38 (in Italian sizing) with brilliant shiny fur with the softest undercoat.

I casually checked the price tag and was flabbergasted at its price: $10,500. The lining was made of polyester, though a controversial fabric in itself (it is made with oil), its advantages are somewhat justified: polyester retains heat and never wrinkles. But the biggest insult to injury besides the hefty price tag was its home production base: China.

I’m not sure which factory in China creates luxury products of this sort that it can justify a retailer in selling $10K mink coats, but either some chinese companies are really upping the ante on quality production, or we’re getting scammed somewhere else.

If Histoire de plaire can sell at those price points, it had me begging other fur pieces in the store. Sure enough, ultra soft black fox fur boleros were clocking in at a few thousand dollars, rabbit fur jackets were a few hundred dollars (though from what I was told, rabbit fur is the cheapest you can get, and russian sable is top of the line).

Non-fur apparels were made of luxury blends of cashmere and wool, including basic luxe turtleneck sweaters at 3 for $200. It became suddenly clear to me that this store isn’t kidding around with its products. Yet the mink coats were still boggling my mind. I only see those kinds of prices at places like Holt Renfrew or Ogilvy, but not a boutique on Ste-Catherine, home of the strip clubs, fast food joints and cheap end shopping (H&M is not even a block away). It was busy enough to have several women sifting through the racks including one woman who had a black fox fur coat draped around her shoulders, so very 1940’s.

Interesting to say the least, but will it survive? Only time will tell.

Image credits: histoire de plaire, loulou magazine

If you take a look at my Pricephile page, a summary of my fashion purchases this year, I have bouts of not purchasing anything for an entire month. Such is the case for October, since I am still recovering from other non-fashion related expenses.

But since the recession and a purchase of a new kitten, my priorities over fashion have shifted significantly. I have donated and got rid of 3/4 of my wardrobe to Le Chainon, and the rest in the garbage. I realized that buying many clothes is not the solution, and that to be “in fashion” is purely subjective. This is especially apparent when Montreal’s winter is right around the corner, and it is especially then that to be fashionable in -20C weather goes right out the window.

In times of financial constraint, one must prioritize. And like my decision for consumer electronics, I have decided to wait out on my wardrobe until there is an absolute need for replacement.

The statement of not shopping not only demonstrate a great deal of will power against the onslaught of marketing and advertising, but I’m also trying my best not to consume and pollute so much. To buy less means to consume less and in North America, the mantra is all about being a consumer. We buy things to excite us, to make us feel good about ourselves because we associate that what we own is what we are. To think that we are not materialistic, if living in North America, is just baloney. We are more materialistic than we have ever been.

It is this greed of consumerism that drives the retail market. Sure, it creates a lot of jobs, I have no doubt about that. Is there an alternate way for people to work in something else? Absolutely. Do I know what they could be working in? No. I’m not an anthropologist. Humans have developed such a complex life system beyond the basic needs of shelter, food and clothing. Some for the benefit, others only for propelling the greed for money and fame.

Fashion Waste

While it is nice to see the new creations of fashion designers, think of all the waste that they produce in the long run. How many unsold designer garments and non-designer garments are created each year and wasted because of over production? The immediacy that shoppers seek to satisfy their shopping cravings is getting to be beyond ridiculous.  It would be much more economical to have designers take in exact orders of what is needed rather than produce in large (even small) quantities, only to have the left overs discarded to the discount bin and then eventually to the trash can. Because something that is time consuming “costs a lot of money”. But wouldn’t it be worth it?

Because of this, I’m doing my best to only buy essentials (underwear, socks, the likes) in terms of clothing. Any more is indeed superfluous. It is true that clothes are a reflection of one’s self and taste but who are really dressing up for? Ourselves or for others to compliment us? It’s time to reflect and truly think about our choices when it comes to fashion.

My run for Pricephile has another 2 months to end for 2009, I do not intend on buying any more clothes for the rest of the year. For 2010, I intend on spending much less on fashion clothing, perhaps replacing a worn out skirt that I had bought from R&W (cute skirt, but cheap quality). I would only purchase to replace worn or unrepairable clothing.

How will you change your shopping habits?

Image credit:  NYtimes.com

As an advocate for well-made clothes and shoes, there are always exceptions to the rules of “the more expensive, the better”. We assume that price should be an indication of quality: the more expensive, generally, the superior the product. But we all know that there are plenty of ready-to-wear designer garments that do not live up to its retail price tag. It’s especially eye-popping when said product is mass-produced in countries like China, Vietnam, Cambodia and Bangladesh.

But what happens when it is a question not about style but comfort that comes into play? More specifically with shoes.

I realized that designer footwear are clearly not made for my feet no matter how gorgeous they looked, or how well-crafted they were. I  had bought a pair of Christian Louboutin slingbacks and a pair of Stella McCartney pumps. Both pairs are gorgeous, but they are not the most comfortable shoes I’ve ever worn. In fact the Stella McCarntey ones are incredibly uncomfortable. Both pairs are made in Italy, an assumption that we are purchasing a superior product. Yet amazingly, Nine West, which are mostly made in the third world countries and considered the fast fashion of shoe brands, is able to create stylish shoes with an added bonus that they are also incredibly comfortable to wear. My toes spread out naturally and are not confined to a narrow foot design. I own 3 pairs of Nine West shoes, and I would choose them over my Louboutin simply because they fit my comfort level to a much greater degree. The bonus is that they cost a fraction of the price. I might as well put my Louboutin under a glass case for display instead.

Whoever said that we must suffer for fashion is rubbish.

We should never suffer for fashion.

It’s unfathomable to conceive that we pay several hundred dollars for designer brands that ill-fit the human foot. I expect my product to be superior in comfort, yet they obviously are not. I even tried to dispell that my pair of slingbacks are just a fluke. I tried on another pair at Holt Renfrew, the strappy booties of this fall’s collection. That pair was even more painful to wear! Superior product? I don’t think so. And what about those easily scratched red soles? Well those are just poorly made soles.

Thus, if fashion is really a matter of personal style and taste, why is it that fashion editors continue to shove down our throats of what’s supposed to be cute and not? Shouldn’t we be able to decide for ourselves what that is? And if we go against the grain - not jumping into the same bandwagon as everyone else to acclaim something is beautiful or awful - are we being unfashionable or just plain honest?

I have the right to say that something is ugly. I don’t care how much time the person spent designing the garments, if it doesn’t please me, I don’t buy it. I’m sure people will defend what they love and retaliate with “You don’t know what you’re talking about,” or “You just don’t get it”, which are vague attempts of justifying one’s choice.

My friend over at The No Shopping Experiment brings up a great topic about Makeover shows. How they are trying to conform certain individuals with “poor taste in fashion” to make themselves more presentable to the world. Yet personality wise, there is nothing wrong with them. And Makeover shows such as “What Not To Wear” belittle these good people by objectifying them based on their looks.

It’s funny many people in the fashion world are so in touch with fashion yet have poor personalities. Perhaps we should be focusing on what really leaves a lasting impression: our selves.

Image credits: Style.com, TLC.com

Based on previous designer collection frenzy at H&M, this year’s Jimmy Choo Collection will be handled differently.

Fashionistas prepare yourselves.

According to a friend of mine who works for the Swedish giant retailer at the downtown Ste-Catherine location, there will be massive crowd control from the get-go. Everyone who lines up before the doors will receive a color-coded bracelet, each bracelet will allow shoppers to shop for only 10 minutes before they are kicked out. Thus limiting only a certain number of people to shop within the new Jimmy Choo collection, and avoiding nasty catfights.

Shoppers are NOT allowed to select 2 of the same items, which will prevent eBay scalpers from reselling the goods at a stratospheric amount.

This will probably mean that a long lineup will mean a long wait. But for the sake and sanity of H&M workers and everyone beside them, I think the company has taken good steps much like Uniqlo +J approach to give everyone a chance in getting a piece of the new limited collection.

Be prepared to fork out $275 for bags, and about $125-$175 for the shoes.

So the price range is about the same as you would shop at an Aldo or Nine West store for a pair of shoes. Are they worth it? I wonder.

Jimmy Choo hits select stores Saturday, November 14, 2009.

You can also take a look at Sonia Rykiel’s upcoming unpractical lingerie collection at Nitrolicious.

Image credit: H&M

The film industry has been a buzz about the fashion industry ever since The Devil Wears Prada wowed audiences in 2006. Since then, a few more fashion oriented films have attracted fashionistas and world premieres within fashion weeks to give them yet another level of exclusivity.

Among the films shown in the past decade (and that I’m aware of that has made significant impact on myself) are of the following:

Signé Chanel (2004) - Documentary about Chanel’s 2004 Haute Couture show, focusing more on Chanel’s legendary seamstresses under Karl Lagerfeld’s direction

The Devil Wears Prada (2006) - Meryl Streep’s performance as tough as nails Miranda Priestly is allegedly based on Anna Wintour’s character at Vogue.

Sex and the City - The Movie (2008) - Dedicated fashion followers have been waiting for years for a cast reunion of this infamous HBO series.

Valentino: The Last Emperor (2008) - Documentary chronicling the life of Valentino Garavani up until his last show that celebrates his 45th anniversary in the business.

Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009) - Comedy film that couldn’t come at a worse timing during the recession. Not particularly insightful, but definitely followed in fashion footsteps.

Coco Avant Chanel (2009) - Biopic of Gabrielle Chanel prior to her ascent in becoming one of the most iconic fashion figures in history.

The September Issue (2009) - Documentary chronicling behind the scenes of Vogue’s 2007 September Issue, their biggest ever, tagging along with Anna Wintour and Grace Coddington.

Upcoming Films

Sex and the City 2 (2010) - The sequel to the first movie, the casting of extras for this movie along had generated huge buzz among fans already. We’re not sure if the 40-50+ cast can whip up the magic a second time on the big screen.

Schmatta: From Rags to Riches to Rags (2010) - HBO documentary about the fall of the New York garment district in 40 years. Garments made in America went from 95% to a mere 5%.

Now there is yet other news that Ridley Scott, famed director of Academy Award winning film Gladiator, is set to film about the Gucci Dynasty. Though there is no official script yet, Variety.com reports that the direction plans on following the tumultuous lives of the Gucci family up until Maurizio Gucci’s death.

Of course these are simply the big budget movie films that I’m announcing. For a more artistic approach towards fashion film, you should definitely check out The Business of Fashion’s Top 10 Fashion Film list of some of the most innovative short films that has happened this past year.

Image credit: Valentino film

It happens a lot in fashion, we look back to old roots for inspiration and add a new spin on things. Designers do it all the time. But it’s not just designers who go back through time, sometimes it’s people like Danielle Meder (professional fashion illustrator), author of her popular blog Final Fashion, who has confectioned something really fun and retro.

The paper doll with exchangeable clothing. It’s harks to the times way before Barbie arrived.

She’s actually going to release a small premium paper doll book with designs of her favorite designer some time in November when she’s completed the set, along with a few free downloadable PDF versions. Like most things in fashion, vintage will always be new again.

Left: Designs by Brazen Hussy for Spring Summer 2010

Image credits: Danielle Meder of Final Fashion