All right, folks, I'm on temporary hiatus until things smooth out a bit more. Just started my job as a camp counselor and we just GO GO GO alllll day and alllll night (my bus broke down today and it's only the second day of camp woo?). I am officially working 12 hour days and don't get paid for shit BUT it's entirely too much fun (I do get paid to go to Six Flags and stuff like that, so I guess there is a trade off). Needless to say, I wake up at 6:30 am and come home exhausted. Sorry, dear readers, but it's not going to happen for a while.
So sad too, because I've been working on some great stuff about Czech fashion in movies, and hipster identity. And working on some article submissions. We'll see how it goes.
Tak cao, for now!
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Slipdresses of the 1990s
I own a wrap dress. And the tricky thing about them is, when you sit down the dress opens up smack dab in the center, revealing a very unflattering side of any woman in a casual setting. I have worn this dress before sans slip but today, I decided to try it. I only have a half slip but moral of the story is, I must invest in more.
And then it got me thinking - why don't women wear slips anymore? I remember going to Walmart one time looking for a cheap full length slip, thinking I'd be overwhelmed by the colors, designs and varieties I'd procure (I wanted something sexy for the after party, folks). Instead what greeted me was one of two varieties: the beige tone girdle slip (HELLZ NO) and the polyrayon blend, virginal white with rosettes disaster (rosettes have never been sexy, ftw). I left, dismayed - did this mean I'd have to wear someone ELSE'S underwear in order to achieve a throw-back-in-time design?
The answer, is yes. The only decent slips are the ones you find in a thrift shop.
Now this goes without saying, you don't want to pick up your slips at the Salvation Army. Granted I did my research and will soon be trotting off to Midtown to some shops that specialize in vintage lingerie. These places dry clean or wash by hand personally last decade's skivvies. I think I'm in the clear.
But this also got me wondering about the evolution - and ultimate death - of the slip as a practicality. The 90s made a comeback of the slip dress and I am very interested in this topic. Thus, potential topic of study:
Slipping into something more comfortable: Critical usage of the slip dress in film of the 1990s.
Think about it: Clueless, Scream, Wild Things, even the Naked Gun moves. All used the slip dress mainly as a form of seduction.
I think I'm on to something here.
Neve Campbell, Wild Things, CO IMDB.com
Alicia Silverstone, Clueless, CO leavemethewhite.com
And then it got me thinking - why don't women wear slips anymore? I remember going to Walmart one time looking for a cheap full length slip, thinking I'd be overwhelmed by the colors, designs and varieties I'd procure (I wanted something sexy for the after party, folks). Instead what greeted me was one of two varieties: the beige tone girdle slip (HELLZ NO) and the polyrayon blend, virginal white with rosettes disaster (rosettes have never been sexy, ftw). I left, dismayed - did this mean I'd have to wear someone ELSE'S underwear in order to achieve a throw-back-in-time design?
The answer, is yes. The only decent slips are the ones you find in a thrift shop.
Now this goes without saying, you don't want to pick up your slips at the Salvation Army. Granted I did my research and will soon be trotting off to Midtown to some shops that specialize in vintage lingerie. These places dry clean or wash by hand personally last decade's skivvies. I think I'm in the clear.
But this also got me wondering about the evolution - and ultimate death - of the slip as a practicality. The 90s made a comeback of the slip dress and I am very interested in this topic. Thus, potential topic of study:
Slipping into something more comfortable: Critical usage of the slip dress in film of the 1990s.
Think about it: Clueless, Scream, Wild Things, even the Naked Gun moves. All used the slip dress mainly as a form of seduction.
I think I'm on to something here.
Neve Campbell, Wild Things, CO IMDB.com
Alicia Silverstone, Clueless, CO leavemethewhite.comMonday, June 1, 2009
Review: Bravo's The Fashion Show
Bravo! recently debuted their newest fashion-reality-tv show endeavor, The Fashion Show and I must say, I've been watching but not loving. It kind of feels like my relationship with Real World Brooklyn - I watch because the topic is relevant but in reality, it's just not a good show. True, there have been only 4 episodes to date but at the same time, something just doesn't sit right with me and this series.
Host Isaac Mizrahi is perfect for the show - he's bubbly, knowledgeable about the industry (he's a fashion designer, albeit for Target but a well known fashion designer all the same) and keeps it interesting, he's one of the reasons I feel I should watch it. Co-host Kelly Rowland on the other hand, was a poor choice in my opinion. I don't know what her connection to fashion is, other than the fact that she wears it, but even her style on the show looks frumpy and off the target rack. Plus she doesn't sound genuine about anything at all unless asked her opinion on whether or not she'd wear something a designer made. Her presence confuses and annoys me. Isaac could - and should - hold the show on his own.
I enjoy the challenges, it's great to see what people can come up with in a matter of a few hours and see the process as it comes along. However as a whole, there are very few talented designers. My favorite is Reco, followed by Anna. Why? Because both know how to sew and execute their designs well. Both I have been impressed with as far as their designs go, they are professional and know their craft. Least favorites? Haven - can't sew and has ugly ideas. Merlin - crazy, annoying, does well at sewing but his pieces are too circus-y for my tastes. James Paul - annoying as well, way too avant-garde and his pieces are NOT wearable, although I will give him credit in that he is innovative and can pull his items together. I am also coming to my wits end with Daniella - she causes drama and her designs look trashy to me, but the judges don't think so.
The show is obviously edited - poorly at that rate - and when the judges deliberate it is obviously scripted and predictable as well. What's worse is how the final decision is made - completely on marketability. It is said that who wins each round is based off of the audience vote and the judge's final decision. My reality television instincts say otherwise. The winning piece has a "version" (of which I also don't appreciate) sold online at Bravotv.com. All of the pieces that have one so far have been simple enough to be marketed to viewers but are by no means high fashion nor fashion-forward. What's more, the purchaser doesn't even get a copy of the actual garment - it's a version that doesn't even resemble the original most times. If I am going to be paying top dollar for a designer piece, I want it to look exactly like what the designer made, not some copy thought up by a no-name.
Even the quality of the surroundings and filming are not up to par. I am not an avid watcher of Project Runway but the few episodes I've seen, The Fashion Show desperately pales in comparison. There is a classier air to PR that lacks in TFS, especially in its contestants. What I also don't understand is that the goal of the show is to end up with a line of clothing as the winner. Yet many of the contestants already have their own fashion line and businesses. What's going to change? Promotion? If you can afford pattern makers, seamstresses and drafters then you don't need to be on this fucking show, honey. You've already GOT your own line going.
Overall, I've got a lot of questions for the fashion show and I'm not getting the best answers. My assumption is that Bravo lost one of its highest rated shows to Lifetime and is trying to overcompensate with this mediocre knockoff. I'm hoping in the coming weeks it gets better - but that's what I said about Real World Brooklyn, and look how that turned out.
You're telling me I should pay Bravo $200 for that piece of garbage?
Host Isaac Mizrahi is perfect for the show - he's bubbly, knowledgeable about the industry (he's a fashion designer, albeit for Target but a well known fashion designer all the same) and keeps it interesting, he's one of the reasons I feel I should watch it. Co-host Kelly Rowland on the other hand, was a poor choice in my opinion. I don't know what her connection to fashion is, other than the fact that she wears it, but even her style on the show looks frumpy and off the target rack. Plus she doesn't sound genuine about anything at all unless asked her opinion on whether or not she'd wear something a designer made. Her presence confuses and annoys me. Isaac could - and should - hold the show on his own.
I enjoy the challenges, it's great to see what people can come up with in a matter of a few hours and see the process as it comes along. However as a whole, there are very few talented designers. My favorite is Reco, followed by Anna. Why? Because both know how to sew and execute their designs well. Both I have been impressed with as far as their designs go, they are professional and know their craft. Least favorites? Haven - can't sew and has ugly ideas. Merlin - crazy, annoying, does well at sewing but his pieces are too circus-y for my tastes. James Paul - annoying as well, way too avant-garde and his pieces are NOT wearable, although I will give him credit in that he is innovative and can pull his items together. I am also coming to my wits end with Daniella - she causes drama and her designs look trashy to me, but the judges don't think so.
The show is obviously edited - poorly at that rate - and when the judges deliberate it is obviously scripted and predictable as well. What's worse is how the final decision is made - completely on marketability. It is said that who wins each round is based off of the audience vote and the judge's final decision. My reality television instincts say otherwise. The winning piece has a "version" (of which I also don't appreciate) sold online at Bravotv.com. All of the pieces that have one so far have been simple enough to be marketed to viewers but are by no means high fashion nor fashion-forward. What's more, the purchaser doesn't even get a copy of the actual garment - it's a version that doesn't even resemble the original most times. If I am going to be paying top dollar for a designer piece, I want it to look exactly like what the designer made, not some copy thought up by a no-name.
Even the quality of the surroundings and filming are not up to par. I am not an avid watcher of Project Runway but the few episodes I've seen, The Fashion Show desperately pales in comparison. There is a classier air to PR that lacks in TFS, especially in its contestants. What I also don't understand is that the goal of the show is to end up with a line of clothing as the winner. Yet many of the contestants already have their own fashion line and businesses. What's going to change? Promotion? If you can afford pattern makers, seamstresses and drafters then you don't need to be on this fucking show, honey. You've already GOT your own line going.
Overall, I've got a lot of questions for the fashion show and I'm not getting the best answers. My assumption is that Bravo lost one of its highest rated shows to Lifetime and is trying to overcompensate with this mediocre knockoff. I'm hoping in the coming weeks it gets better - but that's what I said about Real World Brooklyn, and look how that turned out.
You're telling me I should pay Bravo $200 for that piece of garbage?