Now Playing: Marie Claire Hurt Me, Hurt Me!
Topic: Beauty Thoughts & Reviews
I am a fashion moderate--stuck in the middle of several different styles. I am a mash up of looks. I'm neither a sex pot nor am I androgynous like Tilda Swinton. I prefer pants over dresses, and consider myself more Katherine Hepburn than Audrey Hepburn but I do have my girlie girl accotruments like lip gloss, dangly earrings and manicured toes. I am a New York City girl with a strong penchant for wearing black and other neutrals, but I do love my colors. For example, I rock a baby blue peacoat in the winter and a red fur Kangol newsboy cap in the fall. (I even have turquoise shoes and a pair of orange sandals!)
So, with all these fashion ingredients that make up my syle, I was utterly baffled and scared by the extreme and singular fashions featured in the August 2009 issue of Marie Claire magazine (U.S. version). (It was as terrifying and domineering as MC's fashion director Nina Garcia's television persona.) There was a fashion spread featuring all black and hardware laden shoes and purses. Another fashion story revealed a growing trend (I hope not) of studded accesories that makes Pinhead from the movie Hellraiser look downright cuddly. $700 leather gloves covered in safety pins? Round toe flats with pointy grommets? Really? Into S&M much?
Check out the Iron Maiden pictorial on page 36; the frightening shoe hybrids on page 44; and the letters C (chains), G (grommets), M (metal heels) and Z (zippers) in the A to Z accessories story.
I am wondering why there's extremism in the August issue? Are these harsh accesories supposed to protect us from the harshness of the recession. Perhaps it is a backlash agsint the feminine yet classic fashions of first lady Mrs. O? Probably a little from all of the above. But no thank you MC. I'll stick to my tomboyish slacks, ultra fem blouses and bright colors.