exit does not exist

NBC nightly news reports that one of the only consumables that has had positive sales is, lottery tickets (followed closely by alcohol). Their rez expert lady likens the scratch-off spike is more like when movie ticket sales increased in the 30s, saying that people want a bit of escapism in tough times. The fantasy that their life could change over-night. What else might also be on the upswing? I am calling for sex and hallucinogens. I am crossing my beer chilled fingers for the day when someone makes a valentines day gift basket of all four vices; guaranteed sell out. Retailers peep that.

pre-teen schadenfreude

Tiiiiight! NyMag informs that, oh noes, nearly all of the Kira Plastinina stores in the US are closing! I am not usually one to tease, mock, or cackle at the barely legal- that is my younger sister's department- but when you are the bored youth of a Russian orange juice jillionaire and decide you need to bring even more unskilled z-list celebrity trashion to the U.S. it's fair game. This predicament is not surprising when you are trying to push off forever21 style at an Urban Outfitters price point. Scoping out the Kira Plastinina website shows that the clothing isn't really too far off trend for the age group, but it's marked way up for what it is. Let's nerd out on the below dress: -Wool fabric of indeterminable quality: given country of origin (the site does not list fiber contents or country of origin of it's wares. tsk tskkkk) probs $2-5$/yd -Indeterminate strap quality: Let's say its a knit trim as it appears to be 1-ply and has no construction stitching: $.30-$.90/yd -Likely pleather applique: $1.50-$3/yd -3 metal zippers- $1/each -4 serged seams, no apparent darting or fit attention, so a sack with straps- this would take a skilled worker maybe MAYBE 5min to construct since there is no need to change stitch or thread (applique stitching withstanding, that would be maybe another 10min), so 15min construction at a pay rate of, let's be generous and kind, 10$/hr, $2.50 So, entire garment cost, at the high end 10$. However, the dress, which originally retailed at $118 is now on sale for $29.50. That, is still $19.50 in profit, but given modern factory sewing and pricing scales, the probably real cost of the garment would hover around the 5$ mark. All of this would be well and good for the Plastinin's, IF PEOPLE BOUGHT IT. America is already hyper-saturated with fast fashion and trend driven teen apparel and really, another brand pushing the exact same merch at a higher price point is not exactly take the U.S by storm. Apparently, the 70 Russian outlets of the store are doing well, not surprisingly as it is their local fashion and Russia is the New Jersey/Vegas of Eurasia. Hopefully, this will serve as a warning for those with the means, but not the skills to decide that design is the new easy, fast, fun career outlet; looking at you Katy Perry, Sheree from RHoA, random celeb's A-Z.

plastic surgery on the decline; much like patient's neck skin

Both NYT and W have pinned plastic surgery as their page turning fodder for the present. One, NYT, about the horrific decline in such luxxxuries as getting to have your face poked at every week and W covering the decline in patient's desire for carnal pleasures after getting their face poked at. I am, gleefully, more interested in the NYT article, but I'll get to that. W is pushing the thought path that today's patients don't have much time outside of their micromanaged eating plans and board meeting plans for freaking plans. Noting, that patients rank sex below work, diet, and excercise on a scale of importance and instead gauge internal hotness on how many people are leering at their deform-o body slinking down 5th ave. Firstly, what sane, non-serial killer man likes a woman who's face, and likely body, is taped and pinned together? Maybe ones that enjoy their sig.other as a vanity piece more than an agent of love. The bright spot, comes at the end of the piece where doctors note that some patients cannot wait to get back into the sack after surgery and end up causing themselves some serious harm. The patients are older men with much younger girlfriends. Maybe you don't find it funny, but the idea of a mummy wrapped old dude and a idiotic gold digger-who is likely enhanced herself- kind of tickles my funny bone.
NYT, slightly more scholarly in their prose, brings in a little logic starting off with bringing a little reality to a highly fanciful lifestyle; "On television, reality shows like “Extreme Makeover” and “Dr. 90210” normalized vanity medicine, making cosmetic operations seem cuddly and carefree. Meanwhile, lenders rushed in to offer specialized lines of credit for cosmetic procedures."
Though, the article is not without some quotes that may as well be pointed jokes at the target viewer. Pls see; “Let’s face it, if you don’t look great, you are not going to your reunion and you are not going on Facebook,”. The individual then describes that she now takes gym classes instead of using a personal trainer, but anti-wrinkle injections are a MUST. Another woman, (no men were quoted on the cutting back on their botox and boob jobs) proudly states that she got a haircut that includes BANGS(revolutionary!) to conceal the botox evaporating from her furrowed brow leaving her with what likely looks like a quick sand pit under some highlighted fringe. Also, I would like to note that she mentions reunion and facebook as a hand in hand activity; If you are old enough to have a class reunion, have botox, you need a life, not facebook status.
The luxury beauty business, proceedures included, started out in this friviolty decline sitting pretty, reasoning that while a client may not be able to afford an 800K watch or 150K organza top, they will never forsake their face and will make room for little cosmetic luxuries to pad their safe room that sits below their penthouse suite. But, not so, every luxury avenue in the U.S is hurting; people are buying cheaper cosmetics, mixing and matching nail color, using at home acne remedies as opposed to laser treatments. The beauty bubble, along with the luxury bubble, have burst. Mainly, I am psyched for the day when covens of augmented powerhouses's faces appear to melt off with small Nelly band-aids holding their noses in place and breasts erect in last season's frock. Aren't you excited that these events are how a reality clip show will classify our current time period? It'll make for exciting tv atleast.

conglomerate cop-out

Looks like with Conde Nast folding some of its papers and consolidating others, W -the magazine I formerly loved in the flush of youth, now I'm getting annoyed with it's bad habits in old age- is fast becoming a catchall for all the offal the other doomed diaries leave behind. To back track to the upsets at the Conde Bldg. here is a run down of their current troubles: Portfolio has less issues a year, Men's Vogue is being folded into Reg. Vogue (take that Sean Avery!), Rumors of Anna Wintour leaving as EIC of Vogue only to be succeeded by none other than CARINE ROITFELD (I fucking hope!) AND! NO HOLIDAY PARTY!
Back to W, seriously, it's getting old. It's no better than American Vogue anymore. Celebrities on every cover for at least the past 6 months, my hands down favorite being Angelina Jolie on the cover of the ART ISSUE. Even my brainy, art imbibed, sig other-who is usually impervious to women's magazines-scoffed and sighed when he saw the nonsense they were peddling in that particular issue.
This issue, December, which I have yet to even get all the way through because, at my age, I am NOT interested in some tv-drama character-ess pouting through the pages because she, apparently, with being conventionally pretty and fairly tall, is a model now, but you know, she has a career too, like, doing stuff.
Not to be out-shone by the clever cover lines and cover choice, you also get what seems like A MILLION FUCKING PAGES OF WATCHES. Ranging from a modest $84,000 (Chanel) to an aspirational-or asphyxiational depending on who you ask- $800,000 (De Beers). Seriously, watches, as an item, are for the poor; for people who need to know what time it is. To have a watch that costs more than a NYC condo is ludicrous. If you are that rich you have no use for the construct of time; you can pay someone to wear your bedazzled time piece(as fancy watches are called) and tell you the time in the native tongue of whichever far flung locale you are currently detoxing in. To top it off, the watches themselves aren't even all that great to look at! They are so adorned that even a rapping guest on Cribs would find the piece a little outre.
Oh, but it's not over, you then are treated to a food article that I can sum up in 10 words: Who is a thin, pretentious, glutton? So sorry, not you.
A stimulating two pages of "Celebrities are rich, thin, eat astronomically expensive and rare food, but not pedestrian items like spinach-artichoke dip. I would rather die, or give up the treat that is cold bone marrow, than eat that slop. Though, ramen noodles are cool because they are kitschy. Oh, exercise 2 hour a day and maybe you wouldn't be such a poor, fat-ass, dear reader. P.s. you're POOOORRRRRRRRRR and uncultured! lol"
W is becoming that girl in middle school that thinks she is so cool because she has her mom's hand-me-down Coach bag and is totally getting a Beemer for her 15th birthday even though she doesn't get her license for another year (yeah, she failed 1st grade, but that's because the teacher didn't see her true genius). She is the leader of the popular girls despite the fact she has a dog-face and frizzy hair; the other kids probably only like her because she has a trampoline and her parent's let her read Cosmo and watch Cinemax.
In a nutshell, or a $3000 Tumi hat box, W, you've got to go. We really can't do this anymore, pack your monogrammed luggage, take those Cheetos you are hiding behind the water heater and get out of my house. I don't want to see you anymore, you need an intervention, you're out of control, and I just don't love you enough anymore to call and get you on the show. Sorry, it's not me, it's you.

i want this dog

This is Martha Stewarts new pupppppyyyyy, (lookathimm!), GENGHIS KHAN!!!!! Is there nothing that woman cannot make covetable? Kmart? Luxury jail time? Mongolian raiders?! I would hate her if I didn't slavishly envy her table-scapes and drapery/upholstery combos. See you on the morrow!Don't booze too hard.

i wanna be your dog

Iggy Pop has the right idea; regarding his move to Miami; "I was fed up after 25 years in huge, dark, media-centric cities. I decided to find a house and move here. I was looking for something in a kind of elegant coma with a lot of peace and convenience," (via jezebel via cnn) Even though I dog on Art Basel, is Miami becoming the new New York? Celebs and Icons, young and old, are scoping sunny properties in the penis shaped state and the paparazzi are not nearly as plague-like which I'm sure is a selling point. Though I love pastel stucco and vitamin D, I would rather follow suite with how Thurston Moore and Kim Gordon live in a beyond enviable house in the middle of the woods. Forest creatures and the like are more up my alley than leather skin 30yr old grandma's and JLO jeans. Contemplate, if New York and LA didn't exist, where would the new apex of culture and scene be? While you're at it, look at the google LIFE archives from the 1880's that depict Wallance Levinson's Brooklyn hood as little more than a trees and tall grass.

hand in hand; arm in arm

Hot on the heels of the news that Louis Vuitton is lowering the cost of its luxury wares, by 7%, in Japan due to the country's 'economic problems' and LV's policy to 'offer its products at appropriate prices' (say whaaaaaaa) is the news that condom sales are on the rise (say yehhhhhhh). Which would you choose, a Richard Prince edition LV for several thou or a roll (or several rolls) in the hay? I guess this goes with the current mantra of staying in and making do with what you've got, you know, instead of going out and dropping cash on a fancy dinner, eat in; instead of buying the latest 'it' bag/shoe; eat out.

fly flare

Fred Flare is getting a lot of lip service this month. First fashionista rep'ed their fashion origami, then Critical Shopper took a heart melting look at the bright boutique. Their main page has christmas shopping on lock with shopping by theme feature with categories such as 'black', 'kawaii', 'eco', and 'crafty'. I would fall into 3/4 of those and will likely do a large chunk of my holiday shopping from their unfailingly cute site. Free shipping on orders over $75 doesn't hurt either and totally leaves me enough cash leftover to grinch my own presents from OAK after Christmas. (picture straight ape'd from critical shopper. but it's so cute!)

super shops

Ok, so, last week I was busy being 13 and hanging around at the mall and saw a 3x life size Express add featuring what appeared to be Caroline Trentini. This week I see K.Kloss pouting for Topshop (picture above). Hot on the heels, is the news that the newest Vic. Secret angels are none other than mamacitas muy caliente, Arelenis Sosa and Sessliee Lopez. Are mid-market retailers hoping that by shelling out buckets of cash for these high fashion faces they will entice more shoppers into their tumbleweed ridden stores? Granted, though, Express is the only one of the three that has been consistently hurting for business. Kloss for Topshop makes sense since she is age appropriate for the consumer and T.Shop has Kate Moss for Topshop, elevating their brand above that of -ahem- Express. I hope the new angels read their contracts for Vicky's well, as the Wexner mondo-brand mandates that the girl's cannot change their look in any way shape or form while under contract. Granted, for two fresh faces the only more lucrative contract would be a fragrance/beauty campaign. I should also note that Gap has a ton of perfectly symmetrical faces for their Christmas adds: Angela Lindvall, Erin Wasson, Anja Rubik, among others. If this trend keeps up, I am calling that mid-western women will get up in arms (again) about the unrealistic standards of beauty that, this time, Gap/Express/XYZ are pushing on them. Hey, no one ever hated on Cindy Crawford for Kmart people!

to commemorate this special day

PUPPY CAM! h-bday to me. time to booze. catch you later.

Live video chat by Ustream

tricky tricky girl

Fashionista commented on newish clothing site, FarFetch.com, which culls fucking hard to find garb from around the world and places it at your luxury-deprived fingertips. The shop is a virtual mix of oak-opening ceremony-and lord and taylor with brands ranging from aforementioned opening ceremony and henry vibscov to balenciaga and christopher kane. The site is also segmented into 'personality' tabs with divisions like 'luxe', 'lab', and 'cult' with steers you towards designers more up your alley. The only fault that I can pin on FarFetch is a fairly major one, their price gouging is worse than Shell Oil. They list a MbyMJ cashmere sweater for $450, which considering the ever mind-boggling dollar signs on Mssr. Jacobs wares doesn't seem out of place. One click over to barneys co-op will gladly sell you the same sweather, on sale, for 180. Ksubi are also listed on FarFetch as being $450, which is at the high end of their mark up spectrum and they can be had elsewhere for close to $200. Though, this is all forgivable when you see that they have a nice collection of Margiela, See by Chloe, Vibscov, Bernard Wilhelm, and Surface 2 Air; designers that are hard enough to find in real life let alone in online. Farfetch does offer free shipping and the inflated costs can possibly be attributed to the fact that near all of the boutiques who's wares they cull from are in europe (currency conversion be damned). Until, then I will just have to be content with staring at the screen until either our economy inproves or the rest of the world's just gets worse.

big whoop

NYmag is semi-losin' it over Ya Girl B(eyonce) wearing Gareth Pugh at the MTV europe awards. Jez and Fashionista both commented on this as well. None, however made a deal about her wearing the Balenciaga gold plated outfit (leggings also owned by Terrence Koh). To be a performer who can command crowds in the katrillions at 70$ a head and be tied to HOVA, one needs a little flash. If she wants to wear Pugh Klingon uniforms, Herchovich trashbags, or Westwood bondage, good for her. At least a contemporary music artist is taking a bigger fashion risk than suspenders or prom dresses and trainers and there's nothing wrong with bringing a little avant guard to the masses. Mizz Thang below. (photos from NYmag and myfashionlife.com respectively) peaceeee.

quelle surprise! le recession!

French Elle, known for being somewhat more accessable than Vogue Paris, but less accessable than US Elle, has a micro article on wardrobe adapting for the recession. Granted, it was sandwiched between a wheel-barrow-full of 'price upon request' items, but still contained 'tips' that US Yanks know and love. Such bon mots as, 'repair old clothes', 'share items with friends', 'buy quality, not quantity', and the cold war favorite, 'jazz up old outfits with crispy new on-trend accessories' (my words, not theirs, clearly.) There, however, were no fun tips on dumpster diving or stealing from your loved one's closets and just beltin' it to you new lean depression era bod. Considering, Europe is no where near the apocalyptic situation that is the US economy, (hey! the Dow jumped 5000 points wednesday. woop woop!), it seems odd that such a fashion-centric country would offer any amount of glossy pages to 'cutting back'. Though, as someone who has been documented several times over as willingly choosing style over sustenance; cool over comfort, I want to see MacGuyver-y articles on stealing cable, using so many coupons you end up getting paid to buy groceries, and listings of all galleries that are giving free booze and hors d'oeurves. Recession be damned, I still have needs! French Elle needs to step it up.

normal posting will resume tomorrow

the DOW jumped 5000 points today...we have a new president, Barack Obama and not to be corny a lot of fucking weight off our shoulders. sleep tight. see you in the A.M. Fuck yes.

craptastic crab ads

Joe's Crab Shack, mid-priced Texas based theme eatery, dissatisfied with just having tacky slogans like 'I got Crabs at Joe's' et al now they have submerged themselves into the waters of ham-handed misogyonstic television commercials! The commercials often play during evening prime time and have two veritable Shakespearian story lines; one depicts a vapid, some what crazed, nagging female telling her male dining companion that he has shit on his face, he grimaces, eye rolls, flicks his eyes in the way that is male code for 'bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks', and neglects to tell his attractive female companion that she has half a crab leg stuck to her fore-head. The second, is 20x more suggestive and gag-worthy; it opens with a pneumatic blonde with huge harry forearms cracking crab legs and being generally puzzled on how to rend the tasty crab flesh from its pointy shell. The viewer soon finds that the arms belong to a male dining companion who appears to have the female sitting on his lap which he wraps his arms around her, cracks crab legs, and wipes grease and bits of shell on the woman's prominent chest. Clearly, Joe's Shit Shack wants you to know that women should keep observations to themselves and look good so as to not spoil the classy atmosphere of a chain-restaurant where the cuisine is mildly warmed under salamanders and the kitchen are apt to spit in your food for fun. Perhaps their Ad-team of 13yr old boys step it up from immature, jocks who are more likely to eat at buffalo wild wings to the unemployed, video gaming market next! They can have 3am ad spots and totally naked women rolling in vats of melted butter, but have their bodies be slightly geometrically topographic for gaming familiarity. Game Over.

crispy critcs

I've highlighted NYT critical shopper reports before; sometimes with delight and sometimes with disgust, but, perpetual smart ass critical shopper contributer, Mike Albo is all good (in the hood). Now, before I get started, I have no ill vibes for Cintra Wilson's acid tongue and epic taste levels; Mike Albo is just fucking on all the time. To the point: Albo's current review of the Gap flagship (which occurs after Wilson's review of the Mcqueen store; how fair considering the Dow is plummeting faster than Brett Michael's hair line is receding). Quoth Albo re: the economy and our aging child star american sportswear brand, beloved by yours truly, Gap: "...o my right, a Frenchman wheeled a baby carriage onto my foot until I moved out of his way. There must have been 100 Europeans in this store: men wearing sweaters tied around their shoulders, women wearing sunglasses inside, entire families chattering and pointing. All of them had rapacious looks in their eyes because they knew time is money. They needed to buy as much as possible before the increasingly global financial meltdown turned their powerful euros into a currency as pathetic as, well, the United States dollar..."
This installation of critical shopper is a rarity in which the reviewer does not have a positive opinion at all of the selected store upon arrival, but is mostly pleasantly surprised; "..and if I were a literature grad student visiting from Strasbourg, I would have bought all three and then gone home and worn them while smoking loose tobacco cigarettes and reading Houellebecq."
However, being the whip quipper, Albo does not let some fug merch slide by, "..One look at those items and I wanted to breathe into a paper bag....a perfect purchase for someone who works in catering or an office and needs at least to pretend to care about his job."
Though, marring Albo's final assement is his realization that in Gap, like every other box brand in the U.S/earth, you will never look as good in the clothes as the visuals people dress the manniquins, unless you invest in a basket full of binder clips and pin the extra folds of the off the rack garb to your flesh. Albo's verbage on the matter: "..it is my hope that during the next presidential administration I can form the Truth in Visual Merchandising Commission and put an end to this travesty. Be warned, retailers: End this deceitful practice now! Either stop clipping or tucking your clothes, or get fatter mannequins!"
Outside of nymag:sex diaries, this is easily the best archive to pour over while pretending to work in those last eternal fifteen minutes of work.

crispy critcs

I've highlighted NYT critical shopper reports before; sometimes with delight and sometimes with disgust, but, perpetual smart ass critical shopper contributer, Mike Albo is all good (in the hood). Now, before I get started, I have no ill vibes for Cintra Wilson's acid tongue and epic taste levels; Mike Albo is just fucking on all the time. To the point: Albo's current review of the Gap flagship (which occurs after Wilson's review of the Mcqueen store; how fair considering the Dow is plummeting faster than Brett Michael's hair line is receding). Quoth Albo re: the economy and our aging child star american sportswear brand, beloved by yours truly, Gap: "...o my right, a Frenchman wheeled a baby carriage onto my foot until I moved out of his way. There must have been 100 Europeans in this store: men wearing sweaters tied around their shoulders, women wearing sunglasses inside, entire families chattering and pointing. All of them had rapacious looks in their eyes because they knew time is money. They needed to buy as much as possible before the increasingly global financial meltdown turned their powerful euros into a currency as pathetic as, well, the United States dollar..."
This installation of critical shopper is a rarity in which the reviewer does not have a positive opinion at all of the selected store upon arrival, but is mostly pleasantly surprised; "..and if I were a literature grad student visiting from Strasbourg, I would have bought all three and then gone home and worn them while smoking loose tobacco cigarettes and reading Houellebecq."
However, being the whip quipper, Albo does not let some fug merch slide by, "..One look at those items and I wanted to breathe into a paper bag....a perfect purchase for someone who works in catering or an office and needs at least to pretend to care about his job."
Though, marring Albo's final assement is his realization that in Gap, like every other box brand in the U.S/earth, you will never look as good in the clothes as the visuals people dress the manniquins, unless you invest in a basket full of binder clips and pin the extra folds of the off the rack garb to your flesh. Albo's verbage on the matter: "..it is my hope that during the next presidential administration I can form the Truth in Visual Merchandising Commission and put an end to this travesty. Be warned, retailers: End this deceitful practice now! Either stop clipping or tucking your clothes, or get fatter mannequins!"
Outside of nymag:sex diaries, this is easily the best archive to pour over while pretending to work in those last eternal fifteen minutes of work.

kittttiez

Conversely to W, this months FLAUNT is pretty righteous. The cover(above) is done by Hisham Bharoocha, artist, RISD grad, former member of Lightning Bolt and Black Dice, and pretty much an all around enviable dude (see this on point Vice interview esplaining this). The entire thing is devoted to aural pleasures, including a fashion piece where looks are illustrated and paired with songs, ex illustration of a designer outfit which exemplifies part of an Ariel Pink song. On top of all of this, a thoughtful look at the life of Prince. Really, I am not asking much from printed media, just for it to tell me more about things I am interested and maybe show me some new tricks. Flaunt, for sure, consistently delivers.

W-tf

W, wtf. This month's issue is about some shit: blah blah blah..anne hathaway..blah blah blah..dakota fanning..blah blah blah...ralph rucci. Which is well and good for a fashion/culture magazine. It is only natural that they would profile a few iconic, emerging, notable figures that would hold some relevance to their audience. However, what is puzzling and vaguely offensive is the way their writer's handle the diction of their interviews. In the editor's forward regarding Anne Hathaway, there is not only gratuitous mention of Mlle. Hathaway's disastrous love life (she essentially was conned by some guido who was also conning everyone else), but in the same breath of prose they paint her as a bratty naif AND manage to highlight the erratic nature of male actors that have little to nothing to do with Hathaway, but are featured with interview later in the issue. Then, close their run-down of 'emotional disorders of the rich and famous' with "a note to Hathaway: he's single".
In the Ralph Rucci article, they manage to make the designer seem at times anti-current, neurotic, self-effacing, and subversively ego maniacal. Also, they take a stab at Margiela (oh NO you didddnnttttttt chica) who is very anti-publicity -ex: corresponds in to his rare interviews via fax and is never photographed- by calling his activities 'schtick' while using his product a few pages later in an accessories report.
Despite my general, neutrality or minor-distaste for the featured figures in this month's W, I cannot get over how thickly smarmy their coverage of these individuals comes across to the reader. It is as though there is a recurring subtext of, 'these people are totally NOT cool but we felt like doing a good deed and deigning to let them into our aspirational pages, but fyi we still think they are L-O-S-ERS'. Even though W, is more of an industry magazine than Cosmo, and often is elitist they really shouldn't make reading through the lines so easy that, even hung-over at 8am on a Sunday, I can be creeped out by their actions.

"vintage" balenciaga

Fashionista had a post about Balenciaga mag-ads from 2000 and today. I am kind of partial to the 2000. There is wear-ability, directness, accessibility with out losing the air of luxury. I still appreciate the molded forms from ss08 and the de-constructed ease of fw08 and surely I will find beauty in the offerings for ss09. My point lies in that these ads are shown, most often, in up-market women's magazines, vogue, W, harper's bazaar, et al which, especially in American, you cannot throw a Chloe bag at the editorial section without landing on a page that is entirely recreating a Balenciaga runway look. So, why rehash the same look for the ads? The consumer has seen, most likely, the $3000 dress on the runway, in the editorial, and now must see the same thing posed against ad for horse-face's newest vomitous fragrance. Ads are inherently for sellin' and I appreciate the ads that make that a possibility for the consumer. The 2000 ad below and it is kind of refreshing to see two gorgeous people, a dog tee shirt, and a horse without the haughtiness that luxury ads can often impart.

schematically thematic

Peter Jensen showed last week in london for spring 09. Peter who you may say? Peter our new paramour. Each season he devotes the entire collection to a rigid theme which ends up ruling my brain once i see it. Last spring (08 season), vastly ahead of trend, he channeled the heroines of John Waters movies. Pops of bright, drop crop, light wash denim, fringe; he had it all! All looks were on-point, pre-trend, and wearable, but still cohesive to a tangible theme. There may be nothing I love more than adherence to a concept. Rigid follow through and excellent outcome. Making it centric to J.Waters is just an added bonus. For spring 09 it was all about Jodie Foster. Each look paid thoughtful, affectionate, patronage to every film Mlle Foster has appeared in from Taxi Driver to Silence of the Lambs (that new one where she played a futuro assassin was excluded). It is so refreshing to see a designers spring09 theme that isn't intentionally a mass cash cow digression: ahem...the various permutations of prada lace; its expensive to make, but still exists in every price point from 5$ to 50$K making it easy to adopt the trend which can go ridiculously wrong and will most likely make you look like an (attention) whore if you dare to err on the cheap end of the spectrum. Anyways, below are images from P.Jensen's spring 08 and 09 shows which are fresh to death and in homage of Cry Baby and Taxi Driver respectively.

kenley makes me want to vomit

how the fuck are you going to argue with LLcoolJ about what is and is not hip hop?! i am so glad she is getting ripped a new asshole behind her back right now. fashion schadenfreude on p.runway right now takes it to the top. after hearing that lindsay lohan is a guest judge on the upcoming lifetime network proj runway and that some other hills skank face is getting a tv show for nothing (fun fact: the hills one with fake tits, whitney, and possibly that other one, were told at san fran art institute that if they wanted to be famous designers the needed to move to LA. ie: you are unskilled at design so try your hand at parlaying your vapid lives into cash. congrats), this short 15minutes of reason is trying it's best to put things right. look for a regular post this weekend.

like a truck driver goin to church

how on earth, has bravo gone from the bane of my existence to the apple of my eye in a scant few weeks? oh with the rachel zoe show, dastardly villians of proj rungay, and new season of top design with special guests from PROJECT RUNWAY! it's like a fictitious reality design-gasm.

firstly, re: rachel zoe: lovable genius. lovable because her earnestness is genuinely believable. genius because this mico-series, following her and her associate and assistant, shows that she is a real live person and not a harbinger of the apocalypse. also, girl knows her shit. and! invents hilarious and steal-able slang every episode. example: witch vibe. i am using that. now.

secondly, re: top design, how do you confuse blade runner and blades of glory? one is post apocalyptic L.A. the other, shitty will ferrel movie. fat georgia dude and Wisit, the song bird he is, had to design a window display for Jeffery Sebelia. J.S. , sportin an epic 'stach, rightly hates the pink and yellow twee puke fest that the contestants constructed to sit with his sleek modern jacket and knife-ish pant outfit.

maybe i am relaxing taking these shows to be the frivolity and fun that they are; maybe i have a lot of free time; maybe its nice to hear illuminated industry professionals rip minor assholes into the people that you feel need to hear it most, but on any given night there is something cattily current on channel 53. someone tells me that a tv show about hair on this station is equally venomous and a good cathartic hour of visuals.

post script:
OH MY GOD JOHNATHAN ADLER'S FACE DURING THE ELIMINATION OF TOP DESIGN! it is like he smelled a fart at a funeral; he doesn't know if its cool to call someone out on it on account of the over-arching stench of death.

rungay

Jezebel is giving the rundown of last nights eposiode of rungay. Tracie is on the proj run beat for the site and her comments are exceptionally excellent, as always. regarding my new most-hated character ever, Kenley,"...what Kenley needs is a heaping spoonful of shut the fuck up. She is so argumentative on the runway, it's embarrassing. Because it's ultimately disrespectful!". Jez has all of the pictures of the outfits up in the post, which is worth checking out. Kenley got in an argument with the judging panel, interrupting them and raising her voice, like always and stated the gem that she 'doesn't look at collections' therefore doesn't believe-seriously, she was not accepting that her outfit was unoriginal, even when M.Kors listed the designers that each piece she made was knocking off-that her vile outfit was knocking off things that had been done before. Just because you don't deign to look at it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that someone, or EVERYONE, has done it better and before you. The most galling thing about last night's episode was not Kenley's head up her ass, Suede talking about Suede, or even Michael Kors saying that Suede is not established enough to even THINK about referring to himself in the third person. It was that, all of these yo-yos cry and whine that no one understands their 'vision' or 'taste' (what, that neither exist?) in other challenges, but when they are given the carte blanche of creating a true avant garde outfit no one brings it. shameful shameful.

push it! push it real good!

spring 09 runway time! just as the first cool night, signaling the beginnings of fall, comes around it's time to think of next years effusive frocks and sculpturally winding sandals. so far just NY has shown and there is a heavvvvvvvvy homage to el-80s; mutton sleeves and stiff shoulders galore not to mention a quick return to body concious silhouettes. out of the gate there appears to be three camps of trend: 80s lady as just described, future forward with clarity in form and saturated color, and a mind-fuck of 90s executed as an archival design direction and not something that just recently happened. salt n' pepa's push it music video came on as i was flipping through runway photos and every member of the video's outfit was represented one way or another for sp09. innovators in every way. below are my favorites thus far. you can see i am erring my favor more towards future-90s. also, scope the marc by marc jump rope web necklaces. (designers l-r: chris benz, dkny, jenni kayne, marc by marc jacobs, rachel comey, vena cava; images from style.com)

le freak c'est chic

maybe you have noticed, stayin' up late at night, watching cops or re-runs of cheaters, interspersed between ads to talk to hOt cHixXX in yr area and bowflex commercials are poorly directed spots for 'chickdowntown.com'. maybe you haven't noticed. if so, totally your loss. these commercials look like they should be for high class call girls and if it weren't for the micro-designer run down at the end of the commercial. i gather it is a shopping website since it lists brands such as see by chloe, current/elliot, among others. they also have two page ads in lucky, elle, etc. have i gone to this website? hell no. if they have see by chloe and current/elliot, two brands that are oft sold out then, why do they need to advertise on late night cable television? i can understand the magazine ads, but even those are just a rundown of the brands the site sells. print and television ads are pricey and not something you see generally trusted high-end retailers-barneys, saks, bloomingdales-throwing cash into. what consumers are they trying to reach? ones that aspire to mid-range fashion pages and love joey greco (im not hatin')? that consumer sect doesn't usually have $400 to drop on a brocade miniskirt and would sooner buy the 'designer inspired' version from forever21. if you are trying to expand your customer base there are less sketchy ways of doing it that don't involve product-placing yourself between phone sex line commercials and erectile disfunction ads, just sayin'.

pls, allow me, to geek out for a piece

so! News! Wwd reports that Phoebe Philo is designing for French brand Celine! Philo was most recently designer for cool boheme french brand Chloe. During which she posed classic French chic-itude with nostalgic mid-century silhouettes a la demure virgin suicide attire. At the same time the juggernauts that were/are the paddington and the less apocalyptic bay bag dominated the accessory scene. Philo designed for Chloe after Stella McCartney who in turn was after K.Lagerfeld all of whom-along with current designer paolo melim andersson-have all put their own twist of laissez-faire cool into chloe. Chloe is doin' alright with andersson's effusive looks anchored by semi-cubist architectural shoes and accessories, but Philo is so good! Which is why I am freaking to hear that she is lending her talents to Celine (owned by lvmh. Previous head of rtw design was michael kors. Started as a made to measure childrens shoe company). Not too much has been going in with Celine which is why I am psyched that Philo was chosen. She is perfect to bring the house back to the future with a clean effortlessness and tight style.

Disgust and laughter: down by da beach

I thought waking up to the sounds of waves, labor day sunshine and the fifty pound fall fashion issue if W would be a good goodbye to summer and hello to fall. Little did I know that ten-ish pages into the actual articles (which start a good 100pages past the ads), I would be near vomiting from the overtly cloying article on the nonsense that is San francisco academy of art. I am typing this from my phone-that's how much I think you need to know about this-so instead of going into great detail I am going to bullet point the offenses:
-an instructor saying graffiti started in the west coasts-knowlege much?
-it is a for profit private school with open enrollment
-those c-mdumpsters (sorry mom) from the hills tv show went there, but atleast they dropped out
-an instructor defensively prefacing herself with "I've written two books on illustration" chill, if you were confident in your former students work you wouldn't have to freak on yourself so hard
-full sports program; what? That makes no sense
And the two biggest crimes
-Saying "we can teach good taste...we can teach anyone to be am artist"
-followed by an ADVERTISEMENT to enroll at the school a scant 25 pages after the article

How much did that school just PAY to give themselves a better image? Hard work and actual design acheivemet is so last season

john waters: better at soundbites than even Kaiser Karl

"I stay at 165 pounds and cook everything out of Cooking Light magazine. I only eat irresponsibly on Saturdays, which means bacon and candy. I am against [nips and tucks]. If you have bad plastic surgery, it looks like you were brought up poor, moved to LA and didn't make it. If it's good, you just look like somebody else." — John Waters. via jezebel via page six

come back FTW: brand extentions and controlled equity

Short story: American Mall Sportswear; goin' for the (amex)gold. Long story: Coach is buying back a BILLION shares to 'increase economic value for shareholders' i.e. increasing the individual value of shares, there-fore increasing brand equity and giving the overall brand a more profitable appearance. This is effectively, Coach buying themselves back from the shareholders, since they are a privately traded company they can't 'own' themselves, but buying back that many fucking shares really helps then guide who does own them. Since when did Coach become worth over a bill? Who do you know that has recently bought a Coach bag/boot/whatever? Coach was one of the first (after A&F in '98) 'mall' brands to reinvent itself as a up-market retailer with prices creeping in the the $1K territory for limited edition-or "heritage"-merch.
Following on it's heels is Jcrew, who opened its men's only "liquor bar cum haberdashery" in Tribeca. Again, exclusive merch such as vintage tie clips! Globe Trotter luggage! pre-chewed pencils by famous writers!!! Complete with a visuals scheme approved by Andy Spade.
This is in immediate timing with reports that J.Crew will issue an accessories only catalog replete with Norwegian leather goods and real gold and precious stone jewelry. These choices made to, apparently, increase the brand's perceived worth by the consumers while growing their customer base.
Even Gap is skipping along with brand boosters! Are you shocked? Probs not. The Gap flagship is partnering with Collette to make limited edition products which err more on the Collette side than the Gap side. This may be lost on what was Gap's majority consumer; seemingly more intended for consumers who (a) know what/where Collette is and (b) are probably buying their basics from Alexander Wang or at least Velvet. Though, still in the vein of making their products more worthwhile to the consumer.
All of these brands, with the exception of Coach (to my knowledge), have previously been playing the fast fashion game and turning over cheap, new, trend driven product by the truck-full to middling results. Gap suffering the most for the poor design judgment. Now, all seem to be making a 180 (that likely took 12-18 months to plan) away from un-sustainable design and trying to entice the consumer's limited budget with quality and not necessarily value. This all comes at incredibly good timing for the above brands as fast fashion retailers are being whipped with a cat-o-nine tails for contributing to the insane amount of waste on the earth! While, some articles read closer to the thesis that forever21 should be blamed for all the world's ecological problems most are dead-on with bringing to light that, yes, selling shitty product that has a minute shelf life will cause people to throw these items away faster. With notes on small movements for 'local' design by sustainable, independent designers who's pricing is a little higher due to the higher cost of NOT outsourcing to elementary school children who will never see an actual school. A movement that is encouraging to hear, but yours truly is still skeptical that in country that still pushes quantity over quality these brands will get off to a running start with their extensions and growth options. Though, I would love to be proved wrong.

again. with the rationalizing.

Below I already discussed H.Bazaar's take on the sinking economy -buy expensive! you can just buy less cheap shit!- but this morning New York Times' fashion doyenne, Cathryn Horyn, has another reasoning system consumers can ascribe to as we near the beginning of the most expensive (to produce and consume) fashion season of the calender year. Keep buying the same things, just buy the ones that are negligibly less! Follow the trends, but buy expensive because you wouldn't want to look tacky in a knock off of a 850$ gold sequined Proenza Schouler skirt that you'll likely wear twice (cost per wear is only 425! a steal!) BECAUSE YOUR ASS IS COVERED IN GOLD SEQUINS. People tend to remember a look like that. I digress, you can also buy the premium M.Jacobs velveteen trousers for $1100, but, caution shoppers!, don't tread into iconic french house Lanvin's territory in Bloomingdales! Their tweed, also timely, trousers are a whopping 150$ more and you know, in these times, we really need to limit ourselves. If you are spending over $1k on pants. Pants that may or may not last more than a season, 150 really isn't that much more to spend. That amount of money is so negligible to these designers that it will not even buy you a coin purse from their accessory lines. Do I deny that the economy is hard times for fashion houses, designers, and avid consumers? Not at all. Do I dislike any of the people or designers listed above? Bish pls, you know me. It is just laughable that the wealthy are buying down into 'cheap' categories where a blouse is still 495-695 in a feeble show that just comes off like 'See the rich! They're just like us! They are hurting! They can't take a private jet to pre-shop fall collections in invite-only showrooms! So sad!' Though, if they looked or at least instructed their assistants to look, they would find impeccable merch from new designers where the retail cost accurately reflects the worth of the garment and not the perceived worth of the label stitched inside by tiny ladies situation around 38th st and 8th ave. Though, with that much net worth, one does have to keep up appearances and cannot shame their family by wearing anything not found in Lord & Taylor or the pages of Vogue. That might insinuate that one is a liberal hippie with a rouge streak for designers not sanctioned by years of breeding and privilege. They might even be communists. Fall fashion is dangerous business. On a serious note, the article is well written and might help you put your own buying habits, or fall wardrobe acquisition plans into perspective.

no mayle

Mayle, the fashion brand by Jane Mayle, former model, is outro. WWD reported this morning that the ten-year old brand is closing up shop- literally and figuratively for the Elizabeth st retail location- after resort ships. Bad news bears

best product name of all time

Olympian swimmers have broken more world records at this seasons games than any other season EVER! Is this attributed to performance enhancing drugs? no. Zero Gravity water cube where they compete? no. It is the "Speedo LZR Racer"! Which is the compression suit almost all of the swimmers are wearing this year. Compression capri pants for men and slick looking matrix-y jumpsuit pieces for women. Like spanx, but for competition that falls outside of squeezing your ass into the last pair of size 25's on the sales rack. As someone who values living fast and being fast, this is a HUGE benefit to these athletes and brings the level of competition up to a zeus-ian level.

Harper's Bazaar: unlikely Gap enthusiast

Harper's Bazaar the magazine who's official motto should be 'price upon request' is pushing Gap HARD this fall. I love Gap, I really do. What other 10yr old saves their chore money to buy gapkids straight leg jeans and jelly sandals? Have I bought anything at Gap recently? No, however that will change this fall with the new fw08 reworked collections. But I can't help, but be wary when HB has all 8 pages of the Gap fall ad-campaign, complete with Julia Restoin-Roitfeld-as in CARINE Roitfeld's baby-as in Editrix of Paris Vogue Roitfeld. Not to mention the mag prominently displaying a Gap woven top in the 'Newest Hottest Latest' picture rundown. Also, noting the Collette pop-up store that will be outside of the Gap Flagship til Oct. 5th in the NewHotLate news rundown. AND verbally propping Gap in the editorial titled, "New Buys You'll Love Forever" which is most odd as it is an editorial that aims to hand-hold the reader as she swipes her AMEX black for the new Hermes messenger bag because 'its an update on a classic! its cool! you'll have it forever! think of the money you'll save on not buying shitty bags like Coach or Tods!" (buy that 900$ Stella McCartney blazer instead of that ratty 300$ jcrew one! It's good for you!) All of this pressure only 309 pages into the 620+ pages that is the fall fashion tome. I am not hating on Gap's PR for getting choice spots in a magazine that doesn't exactly speak to their current consumer as much as who they want their consumer to be; it's good to grow. Though I do find fault with (a) the instances of Gaps brand placement being so close together and (b) that it appears that PR is not confident that the designs can sell themselves. Seriously, 148$ for a heather gray flannel puff coat that is slimming and chic!? I am fucking there!! I want Gap to rise again and bring accessible American sportswear in the face of a fast fashion pool being over-run with forever 21s and their ilk, but I can't help but feel like pushing something so hard is jinxing it.

disposable fashion squared

NYmag kindly pointed towards an ebay listing of an authentic Marc Jacobs condom. The condom, if won from the auction, comes with a signed note from MJ encouraging safe sexxx.

This comes to the forefront right after flesh-ionistas trying to revive the mid-nineties 'band-aids as accessories trend'

While I may pout and/or sigh over not being able to acquire MJ or Alexander Herchovich stylez, I am more apt to buy-down into accessories instead of health aids. But I mean, i've yet to read the 12-step program for fashion junkies meetings. They clash with my napping and tee-vee watchin'. It also begs the question: are these legit brand extensions or smirking jabs at the consumer willing to pony up for these disposable items?

daily ricidulous

Daily Candy LA sent out a news letter this morning about FACERCISE exercises for idiot women who are internally paralyzed with fear of aging and wish their tan mug would catch up. The facercise website has such classic images as the ones above, but really, why are you paying any money or even time to this pipe dream? The new age-iness of the whole thing is belied by the portrait of Carole who looks like she has had more botox than the dented can of chickpeas in my cupboard circa my kindergarten ballet recital. Oh, if the instructional video and audio tracks aren't enough to whip your face-flesh into shape you can pay for a one on one session with Mme. C herself. Aging is a part of being ALIVEEEEEEEE. The only way to stop wrinkles is to die. You wrinkle because of loss of collagen that supports your epidermis on your skin and the natural degradation of muscle fibers. Not because your face watched too many episodes of Oprah and sat on it's face-ass instead of exercising. Even Dr.90210 gives better misguided medical advice than this nonsense.
UPDATE: nymag makes great assertions on this young face-stick body phenomena of middle age women. the types that would yoga-lates kick flip onto this band wagon of facercises.

american apparel brand extention that EXCLUDES hitachi magic wand

American Apparel has a new money makin' outlet that is neither vibrators (they've got that, obvs) nor overpriced thrift store sunglasses (ditto)! I'll give you a clue, it's what the average american apparel consumer wears with their glitter hot-shorts and tube bras. Give it second to sink in...IT'S RE PURPOSED THRIFT STORE GARMENTS! Is my usual curmudgeon-y self angry, irate, or even minorly peeved at this? No, because yours truly loves a good cash cow and that, my BFFs, may as well be a license to print money. The micro-offshoot is called 'California Select' and is an ebay store that contains hand selected cleaned up garments sourced from salv. armys and thrift outlets across the globe. The clothes are modeled on the spaced out ladies of questionable age that we have grown to love/loathe from AA's current ads and conveniently one can also buy sample AA garments. The items for sale are mostly dresses that appear to have been shortened, which makes sense as changing the skirt length is the fastest way to modernize a vintage garment. While they have quite a few items worth watching or even bidding on, don't expect to nab a stellar deal. A vintage Chloe dress just sold for over 250$, but most items can be had for under 50$ before s&h. It still begs the question, wouldn't you rather just get your own thrift store jams and alter them for 3$ total? Though, I would wear the above dress from Cali-select to it's and my own spotty death bed.

money shots

You have 60seconds to make a good first impression and half of those opinions are culled from looks alone, make that nine tenths if you are making fashion impressions. The same holds true for fashion product as well as fashion people. The presentation of the object/item can intimidate or endear the intended user. In ye olden days, personal shoppers at lux shopping outlets started throwing couture pieces on the floor in front of the customer. Laying all the hundreds of thousands of dollars of product at the clients feet. This stripped the clothing of its perceived in-attainability, which as you can guess, ended with a large ka-ching and the clever sales staff gaining some mad commission. This is still done and now, with some boutiques relaxing their employee dress code, carries over to the employees combining the ultra premium with something that may or may not have been pulled out of a sewer grate. The same effect is achieved by breaking down that regardless of cost, it is still clothing; it is meant to be worn. First impressions can be whatever you want them to be. Which is why I appreciate when full advantage is taken of situations. I am mainly segueing into product photography. Great product shot can make your (maybe just my) mouth foam and my hands itch while I am digging around for my credit card. When done well, really well, it is akin to sorcery with insanely good lighting. The shots that I am salivating over presently belong to OAK. They look like they belong in an editorial or better yet are photo-realistic illustrations of the product. The wearer is not totally removed from the shot, but they are instead used as an animated prop to high-light the details of the item. Is OAK necessarily a cheap store to begin with? No, but the impression lended to their target consumer more than just makes the product seem attainable, it makes the product seem like it is already integrated into the wearer's wardrobe and that it is the great mystery of the 21st century that they don't own it already. Which is invaluable in it's own right and extremely valuable to the mind that chose to go that creative direction.
(photos obviously from OAKNYC.com who are incidentally having a big sale right now)

literally Bravotv, you are going to make my head explode

Bravo picked up a new reality series called "American Artist" which will be in the style of ProjRungay where contestants have to produce a painting, sculpture, etc to be judged by a panel. Sarah Jessica Parker will be hosting and/or producing. I AM GOING TO VOMIT BLOOD EVERYWHERE! THERE IS SO MUCH WRONG WITH THIS PREMISE! Here, I will make you a handy list in ascending order of criminality:

1. SARAH JESSICA PARKER IS NO TIM GUNN and has NO art leverage. She went to school for design and had a perm. She has line at Steve & Barrys which manages to be condescending to the customer AND hideous! Her hook nose self was fortunate enough to land a role where her wardrobe was dictated by someone with actual talent.Nice resume.

2. Project Runway has, unfortunately, secured a trend-crazed audience who knows very little about actual fashion or actual design. So now, everyone who can pair a shirt with a pair of pants thinks they have the talent to be a designer. Art is even more of a vicious world where a smaller percent of actually talented individuals receive any credit. Just because you can write your name this does not make you an aspiring artist. I see enough of these doodling assfaces IRL anyways I don't need this show to bring more out of the wood work. You know, the ones who bring their sketch book to bars, to do 'portraits' of women. Cause you know, dudes that can pencil in your visage as seen through the downs-syndrome photo shop filter are worldly and you should be so lucky to bed them. (If you would like to see actual working artists who actually do shit on tv, pls see vicetv: art talk)

3. I am EXTREMELY skeptical that these contestants can create anything of merit on the spot. Why? because art is generally starts as a feeling, a response, and provokes the same. I would call what these contestants produce 'visual representations' and not art because to have 30minutes to concept and map out then however long, 12hours probably, to produce is not enough time. Even on P.R. they have behind the scenes help, sure the contestants look like they are doing all their own sewing and patterning and steaming and finishing, but again. 12 hours from concept to product. Are they going to have someone prime the canvases? make a base wire structure for the sculpting, pre-mix all the guache into the desired colors?
And then to have it judged by a limited panel and all of middle america? That is an accident waiting to happen. Who in the art-sphere would actually BE on the judging panel? My high school art teacher? Bob Ross? Not even Bravo has a big enough budget to get anyone worthwhile on that panel at least anyone who ever wanted to work again. Because art is subjective, everything can be construed as art as long as it retains concept and follow through. Example: Was Vito Acconci masturbating under a false floor while fantasizing through a loudspeaker about those walking above him art? Yes. The viewers of the tv show will get themselves in a rabid fervor decrying that this is art and this isn't art and this is but this isn't. So even, if by some fluke, a genuinely talented individual is on this program their portfolio will get torn to shreds. Though, given Bravo's producers 5 season history of accepting just-forward enough as to seem creative to the midwest singles that are the shows primary audience, but not forward enough as to actually do anything lasting, I don't think that will be a problem on 'American Artist'.

This entire premise trivializes, in the public's eye, the work of actual artists and designers. The contestants are immature in talent and mentality and that is how the viewers 'see' any artist or designer. Art/Design is not a made for tv drama it is hard work that deserves a little more respect than a horse face show host and a prime 1 hour time slot. What will be the next show premise? Next American Industrial Designer? Where the applicants feel that because they have sat in a chair and have rode in a car that they are qualified to design the two?

And to think I woke up feeling like maybe I wasn't going to drink today...

up-fucking-date re: the hellish mess that is proj runway

ARE YOU KIDDING ME! ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?! I am watching this shit-show right now. main take aways:

Table linen = table cloth, Jerry; don't try and put a pig in a prom dress with your phrasing. Not even the most eloquent of prose will make your god awful raincoat-and-latex-glove american-psycho-morton-salt-girl-get-up tolerable. Oh wait, you got eliminated. There is a god.

Stella, you took cheap garbage bags and made something closer to your personal aesthetic, which happens to look exactly like cheap garbage bags. You got saved, you better watch your Jersey cawing possibly black tar heroin addled self.

Girls with dyed black hair and nerd-girl-prob-clear-frame-glasses' numbers 1,2,3,4,... you are neither interesting nor forward thinking. I don't even want to shame Flavor of Love alum's 'Thing 1 & Thing 2" by giving you that nondescript, patronizing moniker. Though, I may at a later date.

Blayne, girlicious spewing long lost triplet to the Chip & Pepper twins, your romper looks like the Abdominal snowman got stuck in the front crotch region. M Kors says 'It's not cute'

Kelli ends up winning with a still yawn-worthy ensemble. If you put that much time into dyeing vacuum cleaner bags and burning coffee filters please try and make something not so played out. Burberry Prorsum meets Karen Walker painterly acid wash much?

I want to vomit//read soon on the news that all of these people were shipped off to Easter Island to 'Lord of the Flies' all over each other.

Phrases to look forward to from future episodes, none from contestants, all from judges/Tim:
"hey slutty slutty" M.Kors
"it looks like a gay pterodactyl from jurrasic park" Tim
"this looks like a school project" Heidi

Summary of this entire season best stated by M Kors and Heidi during judging: "It's a yawn", "I am not impressed" for fucking real

first, a non sequitur

Poppy King,made up and make up lady, muses on the Joker's lipstick choices: Jack Nicholson was "the power woman's Joker. He way overdoes the lip liner—very eighties." And the latest iteration? "Heath is the post-post-feminist's Joker. He is so deconstructionist with his red lipstick, it almost comes right back around to the Renaissance!" (via jezbel via style)


Now for some meat, the new season of proj-rungay started last night and I missed it. Not on purpose, but because (1) I was doing something that the contestants are largely unfamiliar with: work and (2) the tee-vee didn't tell me about it. There have been speculations that since this is the last season before P.R.lame moves to Lifetime (yes, orphan kidnap plucky heroine daytime drama-rama station), Bravo is not nagging the viewers to watch the latest season. Which, I don't blame them. It is not as though the contestants get better with the show's age, they just blur the line between fashion designers and 'people who think they work in fashion but are really just on the Real World'. Also, uncle nag-bag stated last night that "you guys are a bunch of slackers" regarding the contestants desperate grabbing for table clothes from the choices made in the heres-75$-make-some-atrocious-nonsense-outfit-from-things-found-in-the-grocery-store. I am half saddened I missed the premiere episode now, especially since there are characters named "blayne" and "suede" ; all given names I'm sure. Why do I watch this show despite it making me scream at the television when someone half-assedly sets in a sleeve or portrays their 'conceptual' side with frayed chiffon? because it is a guaranteed 15 car pile-up every episode. Not to get all fashion high-and-mighty(but kind of) actual fashion work not like television. Not even a little. It is oft grimey, underpaid, unglamourous, sweaty, and full of too much or too little food. It is a lot of running around to make someone else look good and, sorry dear contestant, but you, like everyone else who thinks they are going to be the next Marc Jacobs or Cristobal B., have to put in your time. get in or get out; preferably the latter.

resort 09 oh mine

Damn gina, resort 09 already? I guess that makes sense since it sets in November. Then again I don't generally know what year/month/day it is so I am not all that surprised at my own shock. This year's offerings are ridic wearable and seasonless. Which, considering consumers are taking sales staff's suggestions of buying resort because it can be worn nearly year round with the addition of a coat or removal of a sweater. This coupled with the fact that consumers are just not buying bigger items right now makes resort one of the few cash opportunities for both young and established designers. Resort originally started out as being a cruise-wearish season with the implications that the wealthy would be it's main clientelle. Since, they are more likely to buy those linen hot shorts and silk sarong to wear on their annual winter vacation to the Ivory Coast. Now, resort is becoming more ready-ready to wear. It is trend driven, but not trendy nor will it probably be included in most magazines 10lb fall fashion issues, despite it getting to stores at about the same time as fall deliveries. Young designers, who already have spring/summer fall/winter lines, are expanding into resort that will cover gaps in their shipping times. This will allow retailers to buy smaller amounts from the designers and turn that product over faster, refreshing their assortment, and supplying the designer with a steady stream of income. Though NYmag reports that the sale of many young designer's wares is, unfortunately, extremely low. So low that there are rumors that the young designers will be holding intimate showings of their spring 09 collections instead of showing at the tents. They also note that consumers are saving up for larger branded items (prada, lanvin, etc) when they are making a purchase instead of going for smaller designers like Alexander Wang and Phillip Lim. Despite these bunnies having superb shows with fantastic reviews they are hurting too. Moral of the story, buy resort; buy young. It's good for your closet and good for fashion.
(imgs l to r: ADAM, alexander wang, balenciaga, 3.1 phillip lim; from style.com)