Catch Some Rays

For some reason, the other day I woke up convinced I need a pair of sunshine yellow sandals. I think I'm blaming this on the English Rose, who sent me a link to a pair of adorable yellow sandals that she bought not long ago.

(Speaking of which -- if anyone has any ideas on how to get red wine out of yellow suede, the Rose and I are all ears.)

How cute are those? They're from Jonathan Kelsey and she bought them in London. I couldn't find them anywhere here, so sorry for getting your hopes up. They do carry a selection of his shoes at Saks, including a wicked hot pair of black shoe-bootie type things that are extremely on sale right now and that could find a very happy home in my closet.


Anyhoodle, me being me, I figured that if I want yellow sandals, then you must want yellow sandals, too! Right? Of course!! So here are some.

A classic espadrille from Dr. Scholl's, of all people, and you won't believe how cheap they are!

I really like the combination of yellow and natural leathers.

Flat & fancy. And fun.

Cute with a denim skirt.

Great runnin' around shoe with a rubber sole.

Yellow and gray -- intriguing combination.

These are almost good, but the flower on the toe looks too much like a bunch of cantaloupe seeds & kinda skeeves me out.

See? Cantaloupe seeds!

Great shoe. I like the idea of these with a nice air of khaki bermudas & a breezy white blouse, topped with a big-brimmed straw hat.

So super cute -- I would love to wear these to a garden wedding.

Barefoot Tess Maynard Sandal (Yellow)

These are from Barefoot Tess, which means they come in large sizes only. Cute classic little thong.

Another great, simple, classic silhouette, without the thingie between the toes (which I happen to loathe.)

Completely in love with these. Great sandal in a slew of colors, with Nike Air technology & a cushy rubber sole. Doing any traveling this summer? Thee would be perfect.

Fantastic. Love the covered wedge and the tortoise links. Crazy about these.


So there you have it -- a little sunshine below the ankles!

YSL, Meet JNY

Wow. I am rubbing my eyes in disbelief. I mean it, my mouth is hanging open.

I was reading Sydne's great blog Think Through Fashion when what to my wondering eyes should appear?

This cute top from Jones New York. Of course, that in and of itself would not cause disbelief, Sydne posts lots of great stuff. The disbelief is because of this




Yves Saint Laurent skirt that I own and have posted about here once or twice.

Um, yeah. That is the same fabric.

My skirt is from YSL Resort 2008. The Jones New York top is current. How on earth did it ever come to pass that the mill that created this fabric sold it to YSL and then two years later to a mid-level department store line? I am puzzled by this. Don't the high-end houses get exclusives on their fabrics? How did this happen? Anyone have any ideas about this? I think I'm going to try calling the YSL boutique in New York tomorrow and see if I can get any info.

So -- good news! If you loved that skirt but didn't manage to scoop one up, well, here's your chance!

The even better news? It'll only set you back about an eighth of what the YSL cost.

Seriously, I'm slack-jawed. Mouth. Hanging. Open.



Update: Have just spoken to an extremely nice young man named Chris at the Mad Ave YSL boutique about this. He took my information and is going to pass it on to someone else, who I hope will get back to me about it. I'll keep you posted!

Modern Life

In the morning, I slather my entire body with this:

And then later, I slather my entire body with this:

Is it just me, or does this strike anyone else as mildly ridiculous?

::sigh::

A Stirring in the Graveyard

I've used a lot of adjectives to describe clothes from Valentino, and the talents of its original designer: beautiful, impeccable, gorgeous, stunning, incomparable, delicate... Lately, unfortunately, I've also use words like uninspiring and repetitive. But I never thought I'd use the words "hot mess" to describe a Valentino couture collection.

Well, that day has come.

Hot. Mess.

Holy cow, was this bad.

Yeah, whatever -- just because you're wearing some sort of face-obscuring headwear doesn't make the work cutting-edge or hip, people.

After Maria Grazia Chiuri and Pier Paolo Piccioli's first couture colection for Valentino after the summary dismissal of Alexandra Facchinetti (whose work I loved), mine was not the only review who called them out on their ossified approach and their regurgitation of Valentino's Greatest Hits. It appears that these criticisms were heard and taken to heart and that maybe the PTBs, realizing that the world does in fact go 'round and les femmes d'un certain age who thrive on a diet of Valentino's classic little suits and floral chiffon dresses will not be around forever, and perhaps they might start paying attention to the possibility of younger women wanting to buy Valentino couture, especially given the enormous percentage of the couture sales that are accounted for by young globetrotters from "emerging" economies. That's good, they should do that. But this is not merely taking into account a younger audience -- from the looks of things the folks at Valentino have decided to hasten the demise of their traditional clientele by throwing her under a dingdong bus.

Oh, sure, the couture work is still impeccable, the detailing exquisite and even jaw-dropping at times:

But what is it in the service of? This????

It doesn't matter how fantastic that lace is and how gorgeous are those delicate chiffon ruffles -- that outfit is awful. It's awful for a middle-aged woman, it's awful for a young woman, it's awful.

Chiuri and Piccioli have done their homework. They've looked at the Balmain shows.

And the Givenchy shows.

Am I intrigued by the idea of lace evening shorts? Yeah, a little, I have to admit. For Valentino? Not so much.

The full-length pieces, of which there were far fewer than usual at a Valentino couture show, were simply tragic.

Boxy, ill-proportioned -- basically unattractive, despite the obvious quality of the materials.

The trend of sheers, lace, and under as outer was important in this show -- obviously, this is something that is going to be with us for a while. Here is how it was handled by John Galliano for Dior:

Light, whimsical, cheeky, yet still interesting and obviously springing from an actual idea, not just an urge to appeal to a demographic.


And here's the bustier dress as executed by Chiuri and Piccioli at Valentino:

Humorless, clunky, and frankly -- oh, it truly hurts to say this -- a little trashy.

Trashy!! At Valentino!! My friends, the earth itself is wobbling on its axis.


This was the first thing I saw come down the runway that I liked. It wasn't very Valentino, but I liked the silhouette and the simplicity. But look closer -- check out her shoulders.

There's some sort of GIANT ruff attached to the back that stands up behind her like a weird, gloomy peacock tail. Or worse:

Good googly-moogly, it's an haute couture reptile. And this wasn't the only example of this particular misjudgment:

As I said to Wendy B, that is the butt-bow to end all butt-bows. If you wore that dress on a breezy evening, your date would have to attach a string to you.

It took me a moment to see the frill on the black sheath dress, because as you may have noticed the entire collection is nude and black, and the set for the show was also black. Here's an idea for the folks at Valentino: when you're showing a collection of clothing, how about creating an environment where we can actually SEE them?


And do you know what made me saddest of all? The shoes. The shoes! The shoes at Valentino have dependably been some of the most fantastic, gorgeous, drool-inducing beauties in the business on a regular basis. I have a pair of my own that are some of the most beautiful shoes I've ever slid my little hooves into

And yet, in this collection, they didn't even get the shoes right.

Really, that's a bit much. And we know that I'm a lover of an extreme shoe. But that's just silly. And worse yet, appears once again to have been copied from another designer:

And these:

Feathers! On your shoes! What a great idea! And what an awful execution of a great idea! Here's how it's done well:

And there were more...

Seriously -- what the HELL is that????? The really, really bizarre thing about this failure in particular? Chiuri and PIccioli used to be the accessories designers for Valentino until they were bumped up into chief designer duties.

For which, I am sad to say, they were clearly not ready. Valentino is in trouble. From season to season we're seeing these huge stylistic pendulum swings that give the impression of the house being completely unmoored, and despite the still-living Valentino himself being available for input and guidance, they seem to have absolutely no idea of where they're going and what the house is to become. This makes me all the more infuriated that Alessandra Facchinetti was not given more time to work her magic for the company. I felt like the few collections she did were absolutely note-perfect and was astonished that they cut her loose so quickly. I have read that the reasons Fachinetti was let go have as much to do with her personality as her design chops -- there are rumors of her being a slavemaster and a prima donna and that the workers at Valentino were suffering mightily under the yoke of her tyranny. Of course I cannot speak to that in the least, I've never met Ms. Fachinetti. And if it is in fact true, I suppose Valentino & his partners should be commended for looking out for their employees. But what of their legacy? It may now be peaceful in the Valentino workrooms, but it's the peace of the graveyard.




Style.com, SydneyWildlifeWorld.com.au, Style Spy, Net-a-Porter.com

Sentimental Education

As I'm sure you can understand, I was disappointed not to have been taken up on my offer to model for Christian Lacroix's Fall 2009 Haute Couture show, but I am too big a person to let that color my feelings about the show itself. Besides, I'm sure it was just an oversight -- no doubt things at the atelier were absolutely tornadic for the last month and I'm sure someone just forgot to respond to my e-mail. I'm more than willing to forgive and forget.

Surely, M. Lacroix has bigger fish to fry than one small-potatoes fashion blogger's thirst for catwalk glory. The House of Lacroix is in the French equivalent of Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, put there while its owner, the Falic Group, sorts out what's going to happen next. Without a buyer to step in and take over, the situation is precarious. There are rumors circulating that luxury goods Godzilla (and one-time owner of the house) LVMH might step in, but so far nobody's sayin' nothin'. (There are a lot of folks in government who could learn a thing or two about zippin' the lip from fashion industry insiders -- it's like the mafia or something with those people.)

Because the finances of the business are in such dire straits, orders for the last two collections from department stores have been canceled and the clothes will not be produced, which means that Lacroix's boutiques worldwide will have to be shuttered -- they will have nothing to sell. This makes me unspeakably sad, not just because of all the craftspeople and sales staff who will lose their livelihoods, but because M. Lacroix's clothing deserves to exist. The world needs more joy, and Lacroix is a bringer of joy. His clothing is merry, exuberant, bursting with life. I don't know about you, but I could do with a little bit more of that in the world.

The Falic Group did not want Lacroix to stage a couture show this season, but Monsieur was having none of it. He was determined to create work for all of the seamstresses and craftspeople who bring to life his marvelous creations. To that end, he called together all his suppliers to ask if they could help out, and they did. Practically everything in this show was donated, from the hats (Cheri Bibi) to the shoes (Roger Vivier) to even the venue of the show itself (a suite of rooms at the Musée des Arts Decoratifs). Whatever fabrics didn't come from the Lacroix storerooms were also donated by high-end European producers. Only the models were paid -- the minimum sum allowed by French law, a paltry €50. (I think even Linda Evangelista would have gotten out of bed for M. Lacroix in these circumstances.)

I'm sentimental at heart (Stop laughing! I do SO have a heart!), and knowing about all this makes me warm & fuzzy inside. It's wonderful, of course, to hear about folks being nice to one another -- we can never get too much of that. But it also warms Style Spy's cockles to know that there are people in the world willing to make sacrifices for fashion -- for the Goddess of Haute Couture whose death is predicted again and again in an annual cycle of pessimism and surprise. I feel very strongly, for reasons I've nattered on about before so I'll spare you, that couture is important. Like any art form, we'd be less human if we lost it.

And Christian Lacroix is one of our great artists. Take a look at what he can produce even in these circumstances...

I just love this. It certainly is much simpler than what we usually expect from Lacroix -- absolutely no bells & whistles. But this is really very much my sort of thing, that trapeze shape and beautiful ink-blue silk.

And this dress -- also gorgeous. Both of the above dresses were described in reviews as having very low backs with bows tucked in strategic places. I couldn't find any detail shots anywhere online -- I don't know if it's just too soon or if the usual sources just decided not to provide them -- but I'm hoping I'll track some down soon.

The collection was described as "somber" by a lot of reviews, and it certainly did lack the usual Lacroixian riot of color, pattern, and embellishment. But even so --

this is what passes for somber at Lacroix. We should all be so somber, huh? Oh, that Yves Klein blue! It's like a living organism, it's so vibrant. Je l'adore!


Especially interesting to me after the lingerie delirium of Dior was how much lace and sheerness was on display in this collection.

It's time to go shopping for nice new underduds, ladies, because apparently we're having a see-through moment. It's been going on for a bit now, done in interesting, unexpected ways like the laser-cut leathers that have been all over the place, the patent-leather grids at YSL, the hypnotic, Rapunzel-like fringe at Jil Sander; as well as the more tradition chiffons and tulles and point d'esprits. Remember Miuccia Prada's seminal laces from Fall 2008? That may have been where it all started.

But this isn't lace in the service of irony, or surprise, or subversion. This is really just lace in the service of beauty. Good googly-moogly, that makes my heart skip a beat, it's so lovely.

Breathtaking.

We all know I'm a fool for tulle. (Apparently, I'm also a poet & don't know it!)

I think I'd like to get that printed on a t-shirt: Fool For Tulle. Actually, I think I'd just rather get this dress, which makes the point in a more interesting way.

This just makes me crazy. Because it's perfect, that's why.

And this may be my favorite thing in the entire show.

It's a wearable Franz Kline painting! That is so crazy-chic I wouldn't know what to do with myself if I got to wear it. I'm pretty sure in that dress my French would improve leaps & bounds. It probably comes with a glass of Pernod and a Gauloise. I have to say, I'd probably wear it with red shoes, but that's just me. It would also be brilliant with black knee-high boots.

Lacroix, sweetie:

A recognizable silhouette, yet only done in blue, black and white. That's about 43 colors short of what you usually find in a Lacroix dress of this sort. This is certainly a reason why Cathy Horyn & others proclaimed this collection to be more subdued than Lacroix's usual, and they were certainly right. Even so, these are beautiful, happy clothes. (And if you don't believe me, how's about we put me in that black & white number & see how happy I get? Dude, I'll make Cuba Gooding at the Oscars look like he just buried his grandma, I'll be so happy.)




For a great wrap-up of the Lacroix situation and some thoughts from M. Lacroix himself, check out this terrific article by Hamish Bowles on Vogue.com.



Images: Style.com, NYTimes.com

More Mad Genius!

Yippee! It's Couture Week -- Spring 09 is already upon us -- in Paris and it started off with a bang at the salons at Dior headquarters on the avenue Montaigne. Instead of the usual enormous show venue, Galliano presented his collection in a much more intimate environment.

Which was appropriate...

...given that a lot of the clothing was, well, intimates.

Inspired by photos of Dior and his models & seamstresses in the 1950's, the collection mingled the wild fantasia of Galliano's Dior with the images of half-dressed models preparing for presentations. Does that sound outlandish?

It was, a little.

But in the most wonderful way.

Stephen Jones did the hats, which were magnificent.


Some of the lingerie references, like the one above, were blatant, but if that was too much for you, how about this?

Just a hint of a slip in the most gorgeous, creamy silk with lace that probably cost my rent peeking out. Lovely.

I have a lot of slips, but none with this kind of quality. Suddenly I'm really feeling the lack.

Oh, that hat!!

Where on earth does a person wear such a thing?

Wherever it is, I want to be invited.

I'm not a big bustier/corset person ordinarily -- frankly, I don't have the bust to make it worthwhile. But this? Is so beautiful that this weekend is going to find me rifling through my favorite vintage stores looking for something along these lines to play with.

Look at all this beautiful hand work -- just stunning.

Not every look featured lingerie. Some of them were just plain old garden-variety heartstoppingly beautiful clothes.

There was a lot of super-saturated color, which I of course loved

along with the details you only find in couture.


Cathy Horyn talks about this dress in her review of the collection.

This is a deceptively simple dress, but as Ms. Horyn points out, it's all about that lapel. Look at it -- how it starts off as a traditional notched lapel and then somehow melts into a cowl. That is amazing.

I sew -- I've made a few notched collars in my time -- and I can't begin to imagine how that was done. Look also at the set of that sleeve, how it elongates the line of the arm. These are the things that make the difference in clothing, and these are the things we have almost completely lost thanks to mass production. Why do designer clothes cost more? Because of this. Yes, the Dior dress you buy at Saks is still going to be factory-produced, but not at the same scale as your average department or discount store garment. And before it got to the factory, more time was spent on these sorts of details -- the placement of a seam, the set of a sleeve, the angle of a collar. Those things take time, skill, and money, and there's no getting around it.

Plumcake and I are going to get together with a bottle of wine and hold hands and look at this collection and cry, I think. I do believe she & I could get into one mighty girlfight over this here dress. (I'd put your money on me -- I'm scrappy and not above fighting dirty, especially where couture is involved.)

A lot of the looks fell somewhere in between on the lingerie scale, using sheer fabrics to reveal just a little.

Yes, please...

This makes me want to run mad...

That blouse is one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen. Like I said, I'm not a big one for underwear as outerwear, it's just not usually my thing. But something about this positively intoxicates me. I love that it doesn't really shoot for "sexy" in the way we've come to think of it -- the overexposed bosom, the thigh-high slit. This is coquettish, a bit naughty, amusante. These clothes are a light-hearted afternoon tryst in a sun-filled pied-a-terre with the curtains open on French doors that overlook some grand Parisian boulevard. That kind of joyful, giddy sexy when you're laughing out loud and not in the least ashamed.

And what's completely insane? I'm looking at this thinking, "Hmmmmm... I have a couple of great jackets. Maybe I need to get some tap pants. I won't go the whole garter belt route, but maybe some opaque tights instead..."

But there you go. I'm seriously, insanely considering it. Like I said -- intoxicated.

But the best bit? The whipped cream on the sundae? The shoes. THE SHOES!!!!

Aaaaaiiieeeeeee!!!! LOOK AT THEM!

They have those tiny little rubber snap closures like you find on old-fashioned garters & girdles!! And that pink!! That perfect nude/ballet pink!!! What is prettier or more feminine than that? Oh, I cannot express how these shoes have shredded my sensibilities -- I'm going to start saving NOW for a pair of these.


So there you have it -- more of our boy Galliano's wizardry. I've read a few reviews and comments complaining that this is nothing groundbreaking, it's too retro, that Galliano is revisiting old territory. And no, it's not cutting-edge fashion. It's a glorious tribute to a beautiful tradition designed by a wonderful mad genius. Which is sure as hell good enough for me.


PS... (And remember how I told you Cathy Horyn's commentors could be long-winded & tedious? You must check this out. I mean -- what the what???)

Images: Style.com

Wherein Style Spy Overshares a Bit

The noise I made when I saw these shoes for the first time was positively pornographic. I know this because I was unfortunately in public when I discovered them and my, er... vocalization elicited comment from a few of my neighbors.

Black Skye Pump

Yeah. The shoes. I loves 'em a leeeeeetle too much.