I am a huge Oscar nerd so I absolutely had to mention the fashions on Hollywoods biggest night. Personally I felt that almost everyone looked absolutely stunning this year. There were no desperate for attention get ups (hey Cher) no dreadfully dull gowns (hey Jennifer Aniston) and no "what were the thinking" moments (hey again Cher) all in all starlets looked fresh, actors looked polished and I had no complaints. If only this could happen every year. I was also pleased to see a slew of young designer labels one doesn't often see on Oscar night, its about time we saw some Proenza Schouler and Marchesa amidst the sea of Armani.
Miss J's Best Dressed
Gwyneth Paltrow in Zac Posen, Reese Witherspoon in Nina Ricci, Rachel Weisz in Vera Wang, Emily Blunt in Calvin Klein, Rinko Kukuchi in Chanel Couture, Cate Blanchett in Armani Prive, Queen Latifah in Carmen Marc Valvo, Nicole Kidman in Balenciaga
All these girls look just so gorgeous I can't even pick a favorite dress of the evening. Emily, Cate and Rinko (who has been wearing amazing Chanel pieces all awards season) leave me breathless but I actually gasped when I saw Rachel Weisz (can we talk about that jeweled neckline) and Gwyneth. Queen Latifah shows us that horizontal stripes can be a major fashion do, Reese gets a special prize for wearing Theyskens and Nicole's Balenciaga makes me wonder why Nicholas Ghesquière never shows stunning gowns like this on the runway. Perhaps its performance anxiety but something tells me that maybe Nic just wants to keep all the goodies to herself.
Oscar Night Risk Takers
Jennifer Hudson in Oscar De La Renta, Eva Green in Givenchy, Kirsten Dunst in Chanel, Jennifer Lopez in Marchesa
I must admit I did not enjoy Jennifer Hudson's silver capelet at first. The words "hated it" immediately flashed into my mind and even now I'm still on the fence. Overall, the shape detracts from an otherwise appealing bronze gown but I'm glad she took a risk and did something different. Too often we see the same old thing on the red carpet and that blast of metallic python was fresh. I also really enjoyed Eva Green and Kirsten Dunst's gowns though the fashion police may disagree with me. Eva wearing a gown from the Givenchy couture collection, previously featured right here! What I love about this is how she takes such a dramatic couture piece but she really brings it to life. Its nice to see someone wearing something that avant garde especially to an event where fashion conformity is rewarded on some levels. Kirsten's dress was dissed everywhere from E!'s Fashion Police to US Weekly but I love it. Its so utterly coquettish and very Chanel. Not for everyone but I love it. And J.Lo's Marchesa was perfect, very few people could pull off that bling neckline but she is most certainly one of them.
Who did you love Oscar night? I know I'm forgetting about ten gorgeous gowns but I've already cheated my top 10 into a top 12!
The cover in and of itself is a disaster. Why does she look like she's screaming for dear life? Why is her hair all over the place? Why did they airbrush on really bizarre collarbones? I fear answers to these questions do not exist and if they do they're hidden in a secret location only Andre Leon Talley and Anna Wintour know of. No one is ever going to convince me that this was the best picture they had of Jennifer. Unless the camera broke midway through the shoot and they had to take this shot with a $3 point and shoot disposable camera someone picked up at Duane Reade.
I was excited for this because quite frankly it could have been an incredibly positive thing. Instead they took a beautiful girl and made her look horrid. Check out her Essence cover if you want to see her looking gorgeous as per usual. I'm still pleased to see someone who isn't razor thin on the cover of Vogue but wow, we've got a long way to go.
Two days in, and a week that started as a slightly safe, if chic, trip down memory lane with Paul Costelloe and Caroline Charles revisiting the ladylike portions of the 1960s (think Jackie O, false eyelashes and swinging coats rather than, well, swinging) has taken a turn for the bizarre (as London always does) with Manish Arora's tour de force of a show, which finished barely an hour ago. (When I say hot off the press, I mean HOT -- I have dashed from the catwalk to my keyboard to file this story.)
Paul Costelloe's show yesterday was, as stated, safe and chic, but still divinely wearable. The clothes may have been sent down the catwalk layered over gold spangled long-sleeved bodystockings, but it doesn't take much imagination - or sense - to remove the gold bodystocking portion of the look and stick to the classic silhouettes and fabrics he showed. Hemlines had dropped to the knee in this collection, and shapes played it safe with classic A-line shifts being the order of the day rather than the "sack dress" styles we have seen elsewhere.
It was a fairly colour-free collection - the occasional tomato red or hot pink trench seemed oddly out of place amongst the muted browns and golds - but the soft colours matched the classic designs perfectly.
Caroline Charles' show opened similarly with swingy coats and a Jackie O retrospective feel (even the soundtracks to the two shows could have been the same), which is to be expected from a designer who first came to prominence in that decade, but somewhere along the catwalk we went from oversized A-line satin dresses in jewel tones, accessorised with PVC headbands anbold, round earrings; to looks that can only be described as "Russian funereal chic". Nothing ground-breaking, daring or fashion-forward, but plenty of classic pieces for those who love an easily wearable capsule wardrobe. I particularly enjoyed the opening series of babydoll dresses, and later, the richly coloured satin shirts styled with loose velvet trousers.
Ben de Lisi followed, and I refuse to comment on it because I don't believe anyone wants to wear a 1980s prom nightmare cocktail dress in velvet and taffeta, unless I'm judging fashion's pulse entirely incorrectly... (Although there was one look, the floor-length blich pink tulle-and-chiffon evening dress, that was just perfect, if safe. When it's right it's right, and when it's wrong, well when it's wrong it's a velvet, lace and taffeta shiny leopard print combo that no-one should have to see or wear.)
After such inaspicious beginnings, I was concerned London was starting to play it safe. Would Gareth Pugh renounce his previous collections and show us a series of tame cocktail dresses? Was Giles Deacon going to send chic, simple gowns down the catwalk? Was Christopher Kane's bubble finally going to burst, a year after graduation? Thank goodness then, for Manish Arora. Where Sunday had run a bare 15 minutes behind schedule - yawn - this show started an hour late: the first signal that the week had found its feet. The tent pulsated with excitement - it was the first time the tent had been truly packed, and the first time any designer had made use of the mirrorball...
The mirrorball span...the lights went down...the music (pumping house, hardcore nu rave, banging beats) kicked in...and the models stepped out.
Imagine, if you will, dropping acid and watching Pucci on crack, and you're somewhere in the vicinity of the riotous colour and panache of Manish Arora. Models sported straight-fringe bobbed wigs in tomato red and lime green...except those in glittered skullcaps with bejewelled foreheads. Bat-wing satin blouses in gold-and-black zebra prints were worn over leather or PVC leggings; whilst the ubiquitous 1960s A-line tunic dresses took a turn for the psychadelic with lime-and-black prints, multi-coloured metallic designs, or appliqued metallic shapes.
All of these looks were, strange as it seems, utterly wearable. (Okay, perhaps the lime green puffed Bacofoil coat with hood would seem out of place at the supermarket, as might the fitted futuristic leather-and-mesh fighting shirt.) Nothing was skintight except leather and PVC leggings, but these were designed to be worn under flattering tunic dresses and not on their own. Dresses were neither skintight nor baggy - nothing is less flattering to the plus-sized woman than the "cover it all with an oversize kaftan and hope for the best" look. It makes all of us look like sofas, sofas under dust covers at that. These dresses were loose to be sure, but they had a shape to them.
Even the leather trousers - an item one usually associates with skintight, when one isn't busy associating them with ageing hipsters and rocker dads who should really know better - were styled loose and pleated, draped and folded to flatter the curve of the leg, and let the skin breathe. Madames Gres and Vionett would have been proud. 1960s babydoll dresses proved to be a running theme, but here they were so much more exciting. Where Costelloe and Charles played the retro theme safe with classic colours and retro accessories, Arora opted for modern fabrics and near-garish prints, taking the babydoll into the 21st century and beyond.
TFFF welcomes the newest member of our team the divine Olivia, reporting straight from London Fashion Week, giving us the scoop on all things Brit. Here she sounds off on British Vogue's response to the skinny model debate.
Vogue vs. Logic by Olivia
So farewell New York Fashion Week, and hello to Le Fwuh, as I am so wittily calling LFW. We kick off on Sunday with Paul Costelloe , the off-schedule kicks in on Monday, and Marc by Marc Jacobs sees us out next Friday. London has three free daily newspapers and all the national papers are based out of London, so naturally with Fashion Week around the corner the size zero debate is gearing up for round two and we are surrounded by headlines and debate.
Vogue (UK March issue) has a six-page feature on the issue, which prevaricates between admitting that the industry is deeply flawed, and pretending like everything's okay because fashion is their business, and it is a business .
On Wednesday we saw that even famous faces are not exempt from the problem. When one talks of models and eating disorders and dying from being too skinny, one thinks of the more anonymous models, ones that the fashion-obsessed might know of but Joe Public can't put a face or a name to. The average girl can't name a Luisel Ramos or an Ana Carolina Reston until they see the names in a news story on model deaths. However they can probably recognise, if not name, Natalia Vodianova, Daria Werbowy, Gemma Ward and Lily Cole because they have contracts for major perfume, beauty and high street campaigns that reach even the non-fashiony person. If 'name' models haven't the power or status to be whatever weight they care to be, what hope less powerful models? The only possible exception is Kate Moss, but she is an exception to just about every rule.
Kate will never die from being too skinny. She might die from: cocaine / Pete Doherty contracted STDs / exhaustion / overexposure / choking on her own vomit, but not from starving herself. She is by no means a healthy woman nor one with a high BMI. But she's also Kate Moss. Her nose is caving in; she lost every contract going after her nose candy parade; she is not looking good; she's phoning in her recent campaigns and yet...mo' money is not leading to mo' problems with La Moss. She's untouchable, and should any designer be fool enough to say "Katie, honey, lay off the pies would you sweets?" she could have them killed.
At a recent London College of Fashion debate chaired by Alexandra Shulman, featuring Roland Mouret and Lily Cole, the subject of "zoinks -- models sure are thin!" arose. Mouret explained that in a catwalk show, to ensure nothing distracts from the clothes, the clotheshorses have to be uniform in size and appearance. (Hence the identical hairstyles and make-up looks designed for a show.) I can understand Mouret's point, but why must that uniformity be based around thin?
There is a certain impact to be had with uniformity. Remember this?
Linda. Cindy. Naomi. Christy. Same size, same shape…supermodels. Just watching this video shows how strange and unattractive size zero really is. Viva la 1990s!
One of Vogue's arguments is that designers simply can't afford to make more than one size of each sample. Let me just dissect that for the bullshit that it is:
ONE. If you can barely afford to make samples, and are making just one of each look, why must the sample size of choice be a 2, 4, 6, 8 decision? Alberta Ferretti makes sample clothes in a UK 10, US 6. I'm fairly certain the fabric of society (and her clothes) has not been torn asunder by this and designers could go further and make 12s or 14s. (I'm talking in UK sizing here.)
TWO. If we're talking haute couture and the gown is sewn by blind seamstresses in Paris ateliers out of woven unicorn hair and gilded with the tears of orphans, perhaps you can only afford to make one.
But I've seen a lot of sample clothes. (See, stroked, coveted, contemplated stealing.) Very often, extraordinary design aside, they are ordinary. Worn by model after model after model and steam cleaned daily and flown hither and thither, within a few weeks they begin to disintegrate. They are made for two shows, a dozen shoots and a few personal appearances, not for sale.
Samples are sturdy, but -- crucially -- not precious. The finished clothes may end up costing $7,500 in the shops but the sample is not worth that money. Yes, it costs more to make two. But that cost is: (a) not twice the cost of the finished product when it becomes available to buy, because that's not how samples work, and (b) what cost is worth women's mental and physical health?
THREE. Since for most fashion houses the clothes do not make the profit -- it comes from the key-chains, the bags, the shoes, the perfumes -- losing a little money on a sample cannot reasonably make a difference. Launch a diffusion perfume and bang! money recouped.
FOUR. New designers are sponsored by enterprises like Lulu Kennedy's FashionEast or Topshop's NewGen. If corporations are prepared to pay to put on a show, they should be prepared to pay for as many sample sizes as it takes. Topshop makes a mint out of its associations with high fashion and new designers; they have the cash to splash to make larger samples. They owe it to their customers.
Vogue says: "Hollywood should ask itself about the body image it promotes and the size it insists upon; yes, magazines such as Heat are unhelpful; yes, there is a hypocrisy when newspapers moralise about the dangers of skinny models, only to print photographs of them at their skinniest, alongside purposefully unflattering pictures of celebrities who have put on weight". It goes on to point out that Vogue does not employ models who are under 16 and thus haven't reached their adult weight. In other words: look, we made a concession! And say, lookit all these other factors we can blame! Vogue rulez ok! Etc.
There is certainly more than one factor to blame, and we have all learned new ways of seeing, unconsciously or not, from magazines and television, that make certain healthy sizes look 'fat' to us, and we have to unlearn these. But aside from who to blame and why this is happening, I have another question. Not "why thin?" or "why fat?" or "who's to blame?". But this: why women? London Fashion Week begins tomorrow. Let's see if it brings any answers.
Jennifer Hudson is clearly the woman of the hour. After securing an Oscar nomination, a Golden Globe and a Screen Actors Guild award for best supporting actress for her role in "Dreamgirls," the "American Idol" runner-up has landed the March Power cover of Vogue. Hudson was photographed by Annie Leibovitz at the Apollo Theater as part of a seven-page photo essay inside, but the chances of one of those photos ending up on the cover were high even before Hudson won a Globe late last month. But, presumably, her win helped seal the deal. Vogue has featured only two African-Americans on its cover since December 2002 — Oscar-winning actress Halle Berry and model Liya Kebede.
This is HUGE. For plus sized women, for minority women, for all women. I can only imagine how refreshing it will be to open up the worlds most celebrated fashion magazine and see a woman outside the standard magazine comfort zone represented as beautiful, sexy and fashionable. I can't wait till it hits newstands!
Fingers crossed they don't airbrush her into oblivion.
I have always loved Natalia Vodianova. From the moment she came on the scene she's been one of my favorite models. Its hard not to appreciate a face as hauntingly beautiful as hers and over the years I've followed her work be it the ads for Calvin Klein or her editorials in everything from Vogue Paris to W. She has always stood out amidst the crowd and has come across as intelligent and articulate, whether she's speaking about her charity work or the remarkable transition from fruit stand sales girl to one of the worlds most prominent faces. It is always nice to know that someone is more than just a pretty face, particularly in an industry wherein pretty faces abound.
My all time favorite shots of Natalia, pregnant and absolutely glowing
This week Natalia spoke out as part of a CFDA panel on super thin models. She talked about her personal struggles with food and body image as a model as well as the pressures to remain thin, particularly after giving birth to her son.
""At 19 and 117 pounds I gave birth to my son Lucas" Two weeks later Natalia was back on the runway" My weight fell to 106 pounds. I was nervous, oversensitive and I had thinning hair. I wasn't even aware I was unhealthy. I didn't know there was something wrong with me. I thought I was just doing my job,"
...
Vodianova explained how growing up in Russia, she viewed food as a necessity. "But then I arrived in Paris as a model, and my relationship with food changed. Conversations with other models revolved around diets and going to the gym. It had never occurred to me to think of food in this way. I began to pay attention and compare myself to other models. "It happened to me without me realizing it."
...
She regained her health with the help of supportive friends, but her agency told her that her weight gain of 9lbs was being criticised by designers. "I was lucky enough to be very much in demand, so I could ignore the criticisms. But if I had not been in such a fortunate position, that could have affected me badly, just when I was getting better," she said.
...
"The next season, I got healthy again, but when I returned to work, my weight was questioned," she said. "Some fashion houses called my agency complaining that I was two centimeters over [in measurements]. I was extremely upset since I felt very healthy and good about myself. I defended myself, saying it was crazy to consider measurements like 33-27-34 to be normal and not to expect some change.
...
"Most of these girls come from poor backgrounds, they are young, they are very lonely and they are trying to help their families. They will do anything to keep living this dream."
She said most models were "normal girls" who developed issues around food because of industry pressures.
9 pounds. You gain 9 pounds on a frame that is already underweight and people are calling your agency to complain. It boggles the mind. Name one other industry wherein this type of behavior is considered acceptable. I am so glad Natalia spoke out on this. Its refreshing given that in just about every other interview about this CFDA conference someone is pushing the blame on someone else. Be it designers blaming agencies, agencies blaming parents and parents scratching their heads back in Moscow, Malawi or Michigan thinking "Um. We haven't even gotten to see our daughters in months." Its about time someone spoke up especially given that girls are dying just to fit into idiotic sample sizes. Its high time something was done about it.
Across the board this season we are seeing the kind of refined elegant looks that hark back to the nonchalant, ladylike glamour perfected by women like Jacqueline Onasis and Lee Radziwill. Every where you look you there are shades of grey, chic gloves, furs, extended hemlines and other trademarks of classic American sportswear. One might say that after seasons of baby doll frocks and frou frou fashion has finally grown up. Or at the very least realized that no matter how big the youth market is the true spending power lies with the parents.
Of course with every trend or in this case movement, there are different interpretations. On the one hand we have the true master of American gentility, Oscar De La Renta who tweaks and alters his flawless formulas each year to provide us with a visions of perfect taste. And on the other hand we have the new guard led by the king of grunge himself, Marc Jacobs who oscillates wildly from unexpected trend to unexpected trend with a foundation rooted in classic sportswear.
1. Oscar De La Renta You can't really complain about an Oscar show. Its always gorgeous, his atelier is astounding, the details are ravishing and everything looks just as luxurious as it should. This season was no exception. Everything screamed "polished" it just screamed it. My notes on this collection read Pants = Kate Hepburn, Dresses = Audrey Hepburn and I think that sums it up nicely. These are classic clothes that bring out the star within. There is no gimmick save the idea that you'll look glamorous without ever being fussy. Look how unadorned the styling is. No poufy hair, no bling, no extreme makeup. just some simple gold necklaces and a few clutches. Perfection. There may have been very little in excessive adornment but the details more than made up for it. Fur and sequins were everywhere as well as bold flashes of color like the hot pink jersey dress and royal blue floral print number. Check out the gorgeous detailing on the cowl neckline of gown Vlada is in, I just love how it swoops over her shoulder for that perfect drape and the print itself is so bold, so rich that it practically leaps off the dress. It was unexpected much like the the subtle metallic jacket over the evening gown look that struck me as an almost Ralph Lauren-esque touch, very Hamptons. Both practical and impractical at the same time. Say what you will about his clothing but there is something remarkable about his consistency. Best of all Oscar goes up to size 20 and you know I love that.
2. Marc Jacobs I love when Marc does classic. As fun as it is to see his technicolor metallic jackets and mod acid toned dresses, there is something much more intriguing (at least to me) about the times when he keeps it simple. My all time favorite Marc moment would have to be his Secretary inspired collection way back in F/W 04. It was everything a collection should be; inspired, innovative, chic and most of all wearable. There wasn't a single piece in that collection I didn't want in my closet. I'm feeling that credit card breaking urge once more with this collection. What's not to love? Once again Marc is taking classic elements; the oxford shoes, dainty cardigans, over the knee skirts and he's making them his own. This time around the ideas are very 1920s/30s I see hints of Chanel (Coco, not Karl) and touches of Art Deco. I love the oversized circles on the leather belts and the dramatic edges on the collars of the shirts. Unique little touches that let you know its Marc. For me the coup de grace was the burgundy cocktail dress on Shalom Harlow. Its like something out a dream; the color, the draping, the gathering it all works And I can't talk about this collection without mentioning the accessories. Who would have ever thought we'd see so many beautiful classic hat shapes again? These are brilliant. As trendy as these hats will no doubt become there is something adorably grandma about them. Each season the MJ team really out does themselves in terms of accessories. Personally, I can't wait to get my hands on the bags. The clutches and shoulder bags are to die for!
All week lil ol' Miss J has been under the tents at NYC's very own Mercedes-Benz fashion week. Look for exciting coverage of this event coming up very very soon. Along with tips on how to adapt this seasons hottest new trends to your body! In the mean time check out some of the inspiration behind the collections along with designer sketches at Style.com
Couture season is the time of year when we put aside all our notions of clothing being functional and appreciate fashion purely as art. One may not have the inclination to wear an origami dress or the cash to pay 100K per gown but we can all appreciate the beauty and artistry that goes into creating one of these treasures. Here are a few of my favorites from the past week from the three shows I liked best. Each piece is as glamorous and magical as it should be.
1. Givenchy I find Riccardo Tisci's vision for Givenchy to be more Cristobal Balenciaga than Hubert de Givenchy but the fact that I can't imagine Audrey Hepburn in any of these dresses is not a detriment. On the contrary I love almost everything Tisci puts on the runway because it isn't tied to nostalgia, his clothes are modern in a way that is edgy and exciting. I almost feel as though Tisci is bringing a little bit of the goth-romanticism Oliver Theyskens used to do over at Rochas but with a heightened sense of drama. Look at the acid yellows he's using. Were seeing a lot of yellow lately but usually its more subdued, these dresses just scream "notice me" but without being vulgar. There is something very other-wordly about his use of print as well. This singular abstract print (its quite aquatic, no the theme was the journey from "sailors to mermaids") adorned suits and dresses, its one of those great puzzle pieces, it makes you look closer to try and discover its secrets. I love the white to black cape as well, I do believe its the single most vampiric piece of the entire year. Quite a feat.
2. Dior John Galliano's imagination never fails to amaze me. Every season its something wildly innovative, from the styling to the music, to the makeup a Dior show never disappoints. Who doesn't look forward to their couture offerings each year?! This S/S was no exception, the theme being M. Butterfly. Now Galliano & Co are too inventive to merely do geisha redux so instead they chose to focus on origami inspired pieces with hints of good ol' fashioned British frou frou. I loved every minute of it. The detail on these dresses is amazing. I hope and I pray that someone ::cough:: Jennifer Hudson, Kate Winslet, Cate Blanchett :: cough:: dares to wear one of these stunning creations to the Oscars. My absolute favorite of the entire collection is the red and black tiered number, its equal parts Scarlett O'Hara and Cio-Cio San.
3. Armani I surprised myself with how much I enjoyed this Armani collection. I have always considered Armani to be more along the lines of my mothers taste than my own. The clothes are always lovely but they always seem to look better on older women. I lack the sophistication and elegance to pull off those delicate dresses and perfectly cut pantsuits. Unlike De La Renta or Chanel, both of which are sufficiently girlish enough for me to see myself in, Armani has remained elusive and aloof. This collection however seems perfect for anyone. The theme, Marakeesh meets Milan has an almost transformative effect, it makes you look refined and worldy in spite of everything else. Look how cosmopolitan the normally cute n'scruffy (I'm lookin' at you Morgane) models seem in these gowns. They're like princesses. I love how the intricate beading on the gowns calls to mind saris without ever copying them. What a beautiful tribute.
What were your favorite couture moments last week?
2 ... 2 ...
