skip to main |
skip to sidebar
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 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.
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)
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...
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
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.
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)
