Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Fashion - I don't understand it

I don't normally buy women's magazines, but recently (for different reasons) picked up copies of Harper's Bazaar and InStyle. Harper's Bazaar was for something to read on the train; InStyle was solely for the 20% off LK Bennett coupon inside (I reckoned it was worth paying £3.20 for the magazine to get £45 off the new coat I was going to buy anyway). Thanks are due to the shop assistant in LK Bennett at Canary Wharf, anyway, for the tip! I flicked through both magazines, as a matter of interest.

Both magazines were concentrated on fashion, for want of a better word, though InStyle was more concerned with showing how you too could achieve a similar look to, say, Paris Hilton or Cate Blanchett. At least they showed clothes on real people (inasmuch as Paris Hilton is a real person), rather than six-foot tall models. Both catered towards the higher end of the fashion market, though InStyle also gave a few nods towards the high street shops such as Top Shop and French Connection as well as towards the more designer labels.

I don't understand fashion. I can see the appeal in shoes, hats and bags, though my ceiling price for buying such items is fairly low (though rising, now that I have more money available to spend). I don't understand how leopard print in any fabric can be anything but tawdry, nor how anyone could think that Mischa Barton is some kind of style icon: she's a skinny, pretty actress who always seems to be photographed in baggy clothes that are too big for her. I don't understand why a Lorus 18 carat gold watch can cost less than a tenth of the price of a similar Christian Dior watch: Dior is known as a couturier, not a watchmaker, whereas Lorus make watches.

In fact, the best fashion advice I've read recently has been in Annalisa Barbieri's column in the New Statesman: which probably says more about me than about so-called fashion magazines.


Post a Comment

<< Home