Friday, November 21, 2014


Clothesclothesclothesssssssssss! Bee-oo-tiful clothes! I haven't done a clothing post in such a long time, so I have three outfits to catch up with, and some new designs I sketched up (now i want to be a designer! yay career confusion!). Here's an old dress of my mom's that had lived on various closet shelves for over 20 years because no one realized how easy it was to repair! And, yes, I did the repair!

                               This is an Emmanuel Ungaro 80's dress, with some fabulous shoulder pads. I think the pads are subtle enough to not look too SUPER CAREER WOMAN POWER SUUUUUUUUUIT!!!

                                   This is a gor-juice flapper dress I purchased at an estate sale. I love how colorful it is, and it has an odd 60's look, since many of the hippies resurrected vintage 20's- 30's looks from thrift shops.

                                   My gorgeous, fantabulous, cutey patooties wittle tiny kitty cat princess best friend; she is perfection materialized (even though she scratched my hand yesterday!

                                   Sketchbook of moi. My favorite models and Diana Vreeland:

                                 The December issue of Vogue is even better than the last; I loved the articles about costume designers, like Sandy Powell and William Ivey Long; I very seriously recommend reading Long's story in the 2014 Met Gala Vogue Special Issue. He moved to the Chelsea Hotel just to meet Charles James!

                                   How the beading on the Divine dress:

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Me: An Update

                                            Lately I've been pretty confused. And have felt unproductive. I do my school work, talk to friends, do some reading, and listen to music (my latest music adventure has been the Stooges), but I haven't been doing much myself, especially on my blog. I still love fashion. Yesterday I bought the November issue of Vogue; Natalia Vodianova was so beautiful on the cover, in her shining gold Chanel dress. And when I opened the magazine, the first thing I saw was an image of Karlie Kloss, painted pure white with roses on her head and breast. It dazed me, and  brought my heart up from the slightly blah place it has been in lately. Dazed is my favorite place to be; something special, significant, poignant, whatever, strikes you, and for a few moments in time, its just you and that something (the Stones, David Bowie, Karlie *yes, first name basis*). But I also feel unsure. Fashion will always be a part of me, but I feel my interests straying occasionally.
                               Music became a more important part  of my life this past summer. I saw a documentary about Ed Sullivan, and seeing the Stones perform such amazing music really changed me. I had finally found a missing piece I only distantly knew was gone. Then, I started reading about them and seeing pictures of them, so then I saw who they hung out with (Bowie, Iggy, Lou) and it was an upward spiral from there.
                               But I don't think music will ever be a career for me. I can't sing (I lip synced my way all through church choir), and writing about it is too hard. You don't want to worship these people, because 1: they could be a super jerk with a super talent to match, so it would be best to just see their work as work itself, unless you meet them and they give you a flower garland and say some stupid poem that you pretend means something, or 2: no one should be put on a pedestal, and celebrity worship leads to, at the least, acceptance of all their work, good or bad. And I feel like I'm still in the worshipful stage of fandom. In order to be a good music writer, I need to dedicate my life to music (not something I am willing to do) and defend it, which often times means criticizing it (or acting like a stuck up jerk and being the only person not dancing in the arena). How could I possibly break it to Mick that *gasp* ''Dancing in The Street'' was kind of campy? Or did they mean to be that way?
                             I also started writing poetry, about lost rock stars, myself, and other people I see laying on my neighborhood high school's football field. And I write about dresses and clothes, the way you can get so lost in them, and how that makes them awesome. This essay or whatever it is is starting to sound confusing and convoluted, but I guess that shows how I feel right now.  I don't know exactly what I want to do with my life, or even my day. I just know it will be something creative, stylish, and inevitably something ''rock'n'roll'' related. I'll probably be a writer of some sort. Whatever.
                         Anywaysie daisie,   heres a list of things I really recommend, am inspired by, and have been up to:

1.) Lorde's new video:

2.) Basically anything Rolling Stones/Stooges/Led Zeppelin related

3.) And I started knitting this tank top (and yeah, it is kind of weird to end a list at four, but WHATEVER, DUDETTE):

                                          This is the back of my tanktop (starring my cute little toesies)

                                    Here is the front in progress:
                                     And this is my pink mohair yarn I am using:

                                   Selfie with my precious Bowie book; so, so many valuable life lessons:
                                   And finally, wonderful, fabulous Natalia. The pictures (especially the cover) were stunning, but it made me angry that her name was at the bottom of the cover, while last month Reese Witherspoon's cover had her name right at the top. Let's face it; models have a special way of wearing clothes and being stylish that no one, NO ONE, can touch. And they deserve that honor.*dramatically leaves podium without bowing* *cymbals*

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Giambattista Valli Spring 2015

                                  Before I start this review I wanted to say how sad I was to hear that Oscar de la Renta passed away yesterday. He was one of my favorite fashion designers, and even when outfits in his collections weren't to my absolute liking, the beautiful ones were so poignant and blew anything sub par out of the water. He is a classic American designer (not from America, but his career was mostly here), and learning about his career and life is essential to even the most basic fashion education.
                            Look 1 was a favorite; how rarely that happens! It was a cute little short number, in a white, creamy shade with delicate flower buds and black pop art drippy black shapes. 2 reminded me a lot of the dresses from Chanel's recent Texas themed collection. Woven and patterned with little white, black, and patterned leaf shapes. It did have a stiff shape, but the feathers gave it a very light, shell-like look. 4 looked cool all together, but when you don't have the necklace with the giant silver circles, how exciting would the top really be? 5's top was beautiful; it had the same idea as 1's print, but with green buds and white with black outline shapes. Look 6 may have been my most favorite. It combined the drippy shapes from 1 and 5 that I love so much, with the woven dress of 2. The black shapes without flowers made it simply delightful. So modern and just plain elegant.
                         I didn't really understand the fringed looks, especially 8. Fringe taken out of its hippie or cowboy style looks out of place and cheap. 9 had a very Christopher Kane look, with the circle flowers on the skirt. 12's top was torn, or at least it looked like it. Was she subjected to a bear mauling? 15 was very different from previous looks; the top had shapes related to 1's shapes (maybe their cousins?), but this time they were all scattered together, very Jane Miro looking. The skirt had little lilac flowers falling down the skirt. 17's combination of chaos was way, way too much. I don't think the shapes even fit together. 19 didn't help at all, adding fuzzy texture to 17's soup.
                         After these looks we just got a bunch of bad rip offs of Keith Haring style squiggles and just wrong prints, like in 23. It looked like badly combined wall paper. 30's short jacket was a breezy combo of dark blue and white; I loved it, and found it very stylish, but it looked a lot more ''winter'' to me (though it didn't look very warm). Most of it was pretty disappointing after this, but 36's pants were metallic, white, blue, and floral. The shine wasn't too shiny, but certainly not understated. Very chic. The last look, 44, was okay; the flowers were pretty, but it just wasn't exciting. Or terribly original.
                         The first looks of this collection were beautiful, spring, and modern. But this collection was bogged down quite a bit by strange patterns, bad combos, and wrong shapes. 

Monday, October 13, 2014

Stella McCartney Spring 2015 Review

                             Like Simone Rocha, I have always admired Stella McCartney's designs SO MUCH, but have never gotten around to reviewing any on this blog. Well today, I shall start!
                          I really loved look 5. The way it wrapped around the neck at the top with the belt buckles wasn't too ''tough'' looking, and the dark blue simplified the look. 6 was a little too plain and baggy, and unlike 5, the belt buckles really stuck out, since the dress was pure white. I didn't get the holes in 7 and 9. They just weren't exciting, and the outfits still looked plain. After this there were a few sloppy looks, but 15 was amazing. The denim was so blue that it didn't look too cheap (as very expensive clothes trying to look ''down to earth'' often do), and the four little fuzzy lines and zig zags were cute additions.
                       Look 21 was gorgeous. Short, dark black, and silky. I have never seen a black outfit this feminine, this girly and fun. 23 had a kind of ''inside a seashell'' look to it, shimmery pink with a little blue on flowing, light fabric. 25, disappointingly, was quite ugly. The hot pink/blue plaid dress looked like a garbage bag, and the jacket was torn up like an over-filled one. Many of these looks were very ''pajama-like'', and distressed in the most unflattering ways.  They honestly just looked tattered. 33 was a very airy slip dress, with cut outs that weren't too big. I really loved the combo of black with the holes; they made the dress look even more light.
                  Look 35's sweater would have been really pretty, with the little blue branch shapes on white, but the illusionistic parrots looked out of place. 39, I'm sure, was my most favorite of this whole collection; all the different prints were put together like a rainbow. 40 had kind of the same idea, but was shorter and the prints were in more darker and cloudy shapes. It was such a wonderful collage.
                   What I loved about this collection was how perfectly ''spring'' many of the looks were, while still being very different from each other. I didn't like the sloppiness of other looks, and the ''grungy'' or ''distressed'' looks just looked torn up.

Sunday, October 5, 2014

Let's Get Down To Business

                   Finally- FINALLY I HAVE AN OUTFIT POST! I love writing fashion collection reviews, but I hate scrolling through my blog and seeing nothing but text; It's boring! It needs to be mixed up! Anyway, I really love this new-yet-old skirt suit; it had a  light and dark blue hound's tooth pattern. I especially love the bow at the collar; I consider it very Schiaparelli.

Christian Dior Spring 2015 Review

                              Raf Simons has made many of my most favorite outfits in the world, but lately some of Dior's recent collection have been a bit plain. This one fortunately had some very elegant, obviously ''spring'' looks, but also some filler and odd looking shaped dresses.         

       This collection started out with a lot of plain looks; black dresses, white dresses. 6 was ugly. Normal top, and then some wacky blimp shaped skirt? No thanks. I really loved 7, though, with its pure white color, wide skirt, and little black and white roses. Very couture. After this there wasn't much but filler (black jackets, plain white jumpsuits, strange shapes), but 17 was short enough to not cover too  much, and the wide sleeves, print, and white color made it look so comfortable. Almost like you could sit down and tuck your legs inside. The jackets of 18 and 19 were too boxy, and just with the shape would look over sized for the wearer. 23 was a pale, pretty shade of blue with a classic beyond classic signature Dior curve in the jacket. I want Elle Fanning to wear this!
                        The first thing I got excited about with 25 was the embroidered pockets; They look like the same plant and shape, but one side is just hot pink and the other is yellow, blue, and pink. I also loved the shape, the way it hangs off the body but still keeps the curve of the bodice. It also made the whole pinafore/overalls trend bare-able. After this was more filler and plain colors, and 32 had an ugly color combo with metallic blue and black. It reminded me of a cheap t-shirt. Thankfully, 34 was a vibrant, floating sleeveless robe/long vest in  shimmering hot pink with white flower embroideries. Spring in the most celebratory way. I also liked 35; it was a cute little pink jacket with a perfect ''Dior curve'' and purple embroidery on the bottom half of the coat. 39 was way too ''sporty'' ; sports gear is fine as an inspiration, but when it gets literal, it also gets really bad.
                         Look 42 was way, way too long. It looked like a baby wearing her dad's shirt. I can't really explain 46's color, but it was a kind of white metallic, almost silver. Very long, with long wide sleeves. I loved it, but I don't think it fits in spring. It was more Snow Princess. I didn't get 49 and 50 at all. They look just like coats, and are very long, but have no sleeves whatsoever. Why?
                      I loved this collection's pretty spring looks, and interesting shades. The filler and weird shapes did bog down the fun a bit, though.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Rochas Spring 2015 Review

                       Smooth, creamy, light, and soft; that's what I think about when I see a Rochas look. This collection had plenty of this, and some delightful florals.
                  Look 1 was extremely simple. It didn't have much structure, but the belt brought it all in and oh, the lightness! 2 was shapeless...but the embroidery was so amazing! It had daisies and leaves, but somehow the plant shapes looked a bit celestial; I saw some moon and sun shapes. How more spring can daisies be? 6 was perfection; everything more, nothing less. Same embroidery as 2, but the sheer fabric was over a silky white dress, with a popped out top above the chest. 7 could have been an excellent coat, but why the silver strap tightened above the chest? It made no sense! 23 was a cute black sleeveless tunic-like dress, and the sheer fabric looked very elegant at the bottom. Many of the looks near this one were just odd pieces with strange straps and annoying super sheer parts
                 I really loved 33's top; it had this gorgeous burnt gold shade (almost brown) with a cute little ''R'' on the left shoulder. Unlike some gold looks, this one wasn't SUPER SHINY, so it didn't upstage itself. 34 was extremely strange; what shape exactly was the top? It looked like a big knot! 35 was the burnt gold shade I love so much, but this time it was a nice long coat, with a slightly cinched in waist that made it beautifully curvy, but at the same time subtle.
                 I loved the light and airy pieces from this collection, and my new favorite color (burnt gold!) was very unexpected and delightful. But the strange shapes and odd looking top parts of dresses just looked out of place. This collection is worth looking at for its standout pieces.
              (on a completely unrelated note, I plan to have some outfit posts up soon; I just found an adorable purple skirt suit and a Mondrian (unfortunately not by Yves!) dress, that I can't wait to show you!)