Whilst reading my latest edition of Lucky Magazine, I encountered several trends I don’t understand, appreciate, or intend to embrace. They are as follows:
1. Flat oxford shoes on women. I hated this trend when it first reared its ugly head (in my fashion lifetime) during the 80’s. Flat, shapeless leather oxfords make a woman’s feet look misshapen and lumpy and just… odd. They don’t curve the foot into a pleasant form, like ballet shoes or sporty kicks. The worst offenders are those cut-out or perforated ones in nude/white/pale pink every fashion mag in the world seems to tout. Bleah. Stick to Skechers, kids; you’ll look cuter and your feet will be just as comfy.
2. Pleated, baggy trousers. Another nasty, unflattering trend that came around in my formative years, aka the 80’s. I blame Annie Hall (Diane Keaton) for both these looks. Here is the cold, hard truth – pleated pants look bad on everyone; man, woman or child. I’m okay with the high-waisted trend, as long as they’re flat front. In fact, costuming-buddy-Sarah was sporting a GORGEOUS pair on Monday that made her waist and hips look teeny-tiny, yet curvalicious. However, if you were to add pleats to the mix, blamo! Instant ugly.
3. Large, square-shaped tops. As a short-waisted person, nothing is less flattering than this look. Pair it with baggy pants, and it’s like I gained 15 pounds overnight. Sure, these tops will camouflage tummy rolls, but at what price? You’re better off looking for a well-structured, form-fitting blouse in a material that skims over your lumps and bumps. I like New York & Co. for style and price, and my StepMom likes Dillards for elegance and durability. However, we don’t have a Dillards in the TC – AND DON’T GET ME STARTED ON THAT.
4. Overpriced jeans. The most I’ve ever paid for jeans is $98 for a pair of Lucky Brand over 3 years ago. And I still wear them all the time – trying to get that cost-per-wear down, don’t you know. Jeans should not cost over $100, I don’t care how good they make your butt look. THEY’RE JEANS. If you want the premium denim, but don’t want to pay the premium price, check out higher end consignment shops like Nu Look in Minneapolis and Elite Repeat in St. Paul. Plus, select TJMaxx and Marshalls carry new, premium jeans for about half the price of retail.
One thing I love about Lucky Magazine (besides the funny and endearing writing style of most of the contributors) is the info about inexpensive shopping sites. Here are a few featured this month:
1. Heritage1981.com. Lucky references this site at least once per edition. This month, it was in regards to a flouncy, black lace skirt for just $19, located on page 62.
2. Shopthelook.net. The mag featured some lovely, crocheted earrings from this site, priced at a low $14. (In the same article, they mentioned two Etsy stores. Don’t forget about Etsy for cute, inexpensive and one of a kind jewelry.)
3. Tulle4us.com. This fashion-blogger-staple has awesome sales and super-cute clothes. On page 117, they pictured a cute floral sundress for $63, which will hopefully go on sale any day now…
And that’s what I pondered after reading my Lucky Magazine this month. That, and WHO IN THE HELL INVENTED PEEP-TOE BOOTIES? I’d like to find that person and kill them dead. Least cute shoe ever.
6 Comments
I’m going to disagree with you about Skechers. They don’t look age-appropriate on anyone over 14.
However, AGREE AGREE AGREE about oxfords. The only girls who look good in them are the ones who would literally look good in a burlap sack. File it under things you wear when you want to look current. Which is a separate file from things you wear when you want to look flattered.
I agree!! Thanks for the websites as well, I love Lucky Brand Jeans!
I would place the peep-toe booties right up there with those fugly “gladiator” sandals that were so big last year. If I wanta bootie, I obviously want my foor COVERED. If I want a sandal, I want my foor UNCOVERED, not trapped in a dozen hot sweaty straps that cut into my feet as the heat makes them swell. And this new think in all the magazines with socks with heels (non bootie or oxford style)? It hasn’t been cute since Judy Garland rocked the blue socks under Ruby Slippers and when was that, the 40s?
AGREED on the large, square-shaped tops and big, pleated baggy pants. And on a plus-sized diva like me?? Absolutely ICK-a-riffic. Clinton Kelley from “What Not to Wear” has always drummed into viewers and fans, advice very much like what you said — a nice, well-fitted structured jacket is a great piece for all. Baggy, pleated pants on a larger lovely like me would only make me look like I was pregnant, or like I just ate a few basketballs. NOT the look *I* want to go for.
Wow, proving once again that regardless of how bad a fashion was, it is bound to come around again in 25-30 years. Ugh. That’s just awful. I will NOT be wearing any of those things (but I will continue to wear my tie-dye dress, especially to Phish shows, say what you will!).
I love lace up shoes – and not just running shoes.. I’m tired of shoes just hanging on me, giving my arches no support. I see no problem with any lace up shoe – but then I probably fall under the dress for practicality not just to be mordern – classic. Give me sweater sets, khaki pants, blue jeans and tee shirts, any of those, and I’m happy. I don’t necessarily need to show my butt or legs, I go for comfort. I would rather be comfortable and relaxed than dressed to kill any day of the week.