Aussie image consultant Imogen Lamport shares a list of questions to use to evaluate whether your wardrobe is dated. But just how important is it to avoid looking dated? And why?
Lamport says:
One potential danger zone and image wrecker is looking dated. Old fashioned clothes = old fashioned ideas – so if you work (or would like to work) in an industry that prides itself in being up with the times, or even ahead of the pack, then you must be careful that your image is not saying “I’m living in the 70s (80s or 90s)” as your credibility is at stake.
There it is: “if you work in an industry that prides itself in being up with the times …”. I would go so far as to say, and maybe this varies with location, that being a SAHM these days is such an industry.
However, I believe it is important to note that a person CAN look somewhat dated and still be beautiful and comforting to be around.
Have you noticed that in some “industries”, ministries, what-have-you, looking “dated” can actually be a plus? Conservative-thinking decision makers sometimes distrust new styles and the people who follow them.
So, all that considered, is it important to you to look current (or even a bit ahead of the pack)? Why or why not?
I try to avoid the “so last year look” because it’s very tired and stale. I also avoid the “fashion victim” look, because I hate to look like a clone. Other than that, I mix and match current and dated according to my personal taste.
I think that the key to succesfully wearing outfits from the gone years is avoiding those elements that are unflattering and have begun to look ridiculous today. For example I’d do the ’80s but skip the shoulder pads or the big hair.
Ikso think that it matters whether the person is old enough to have really lived in the ’80s, ’70s or ’60s (and thus has fashion habits and clothes from those times); or is young and just going for that look. In the latter case it’s clearly a fashion choice, while in the former case the perspn may actually be caught in a time warp. Often a chic haircut, and a few small changesmay be enough to make the outfit look “retro” and not “dated” or worse, frumpy.
Everything has a context, but in the paid workforce, where change is rampant, looking like you haven’t changed in a decade or two, won’t help you get ahead.
We all make assumptions about others within the blink of an eye, this is not shallow, but a survival instinct. We all (well most of us) watch tv and movies, where characters’ personalities and state of mind is expressed via their costumes. We can all read clothes – one questoin is – what do you want others to think about you?
As we all have to get dressed (not living in a nudist society – thankfully) we choose our clothes, and make a conscious decision every day how to express our personality via our clothes.
As a SAHM, where income is not reliant on being current, it’s not as important as it might be in some industries, but still the people you meet, whether other mums or just the people in your neighbourhood, will be judging you on your appearance (usually in a fairly subconscious way).
Whether you want to look like you’re living in the noughties or the nineties is up to you.
This question has been on my mind a lot. Partly it’s a between my peers issue. What are the people wearing with whom you associate? If what you wear is understandable to them – not necessarily the same as them – you are alright. There is one woman in my neighborhood who is retired from working as a teaching assistant. She is tall with a large sturdy build and a very pretty face with a dimpled smile. She is known as Pastor but does not have her own congregation. I doubt she owns a single pair of trousers. Her skirts are always long, at least midcalf. They’re never pencil skirts but they’re not gathered. Nobody else in the neighborhood is wearing her style of clothes – and I know most of it comes from thrift shops or friend’s pass alongs. But I think everyone who would look at her is accepting that she is a churchwoman. I can’t remember anything about her outfits but she takes care with them and always looks nice and is more formal in her dress than most everybody but is not overdressed. Hard for me to explain the distinction. She doesn’t look like she’s off to be a member of a wedding party. Her clothes are simple and structured and she wears becoming colors and usually a simple untrimmed hat. She is very much of her peer group even though she fulfills a role that most people don’t.
A lot of the people who are critiquing the out-of-date look may run with a fast fashion crowd or they may be out of step with their community because mentally their community includes people like Victoria Beckham.
I was people watching in Philadelphia yesterday. A nice day and always lots of tourists around, many of them daytrippers like us. The greatest proportion of people wore shorts. It was unusual to see anyone who looked as though they’d overthought their outfit. There was one pretty young woman who had an outfit similar to what you might see on any of the street fashion blogs. Her clothes were close fitting and layered. All of the components were variations of black and white geometrics or sometimes black and grey. Lots of stripes and checks and plaids. More, but I couldn’t take it all in without becoming dazzled. She looked good, along the lines of what I described but something about her outfit was jarring to me – besides the crazy pattern mix that I could appreciate. Thinking over this subject I realized what it was: everything she had on looked brand new. It was especially obvious because her companion was another young woman in ordinary casual clothes that were certainly not new.
I have always been uncomfortable with new looking clothes and I don’t like the look on anybody else, either. In my old neighborhood I belonged to a huge synagogue with about a thousand families. Some few of us held a separate more traditional Sabbath service in an unused classroom. On major holidays, though, we would all join together. The main sanctuary was full of people I couldn’t recognize. The cantor used to say that every Saturday there were about 200 people in the main sanctuary but it never seemed to be the same 200 people. It was as though folks said, “I can’t come this week, Charlie, You take my place.” This was probably because with so many families there was a bar or bat mitzvah or an engagement every week. And the guest list changed. But on the holidays, there wasn’t anything else scheduled. The people were not dressed to attend a reception of any kind afterward. The sanctuary was full of women in immaculate dressy suits and coordinating hats. They were often in white or beige.
What they wore looked perfect and probably they had the same degree of perfection in all their other outings. But it always looked strange to me – as though they had put on a costume.
And maybe this is part of the answer. If you are wearing so many new style clothes or old style clothes – all of which are from the same time – then you look like you’re wearing a costume . People are supposed to be dressed to be doing something. The activity you are pursuing is not supposed to be the act of getting dressed in itself. I think that wearing retro when retro is just your old clothes is probably okay. Wearing retro *because* it is retro is just another trivial pursuit.
I think there is a key difference between classically dressed and looking dated.
I agree. I met a lady who teaches classical piano. She was ninety years old and she wore a medium-pink skirt suit complete with dark stockings and those lace-up heeled shoes you see in movies from the forties. She was adorable.
I’d rather be able to date someone by her clothes than to suddenly see her face and realize she’s fifty-five instead of twenty-five.
But do you want to look older than you are? None of my clients want to look older, most want to look around their age or a little younger (they certainly don’t want to look 25 when they’re 55, but they’d be happy to look 45).
Looking dated ages us. I’ve seen plenty of 30 year old mothers at playgroups or MOPs or the like who I look at and think are older than me, based on the clothes they’re wearing, old-fashioned ‘mom’ jeans, sloppy, oversized sweaters and the like. Yet when I talk to them, and they reveal their age I’m surprised at how young they are (I’d thought they were over 40), and they’re surprise at how old I am (I’m 39), because I don’t dress out of the previous decade, but dress in today’s silhouettes.
It’s not about following fashion fads to the detail, it’s about being aware of the length of trousers, general shape of trousers and shirts, that kind of thing.
Dressing from the 40s, if that’s your style is great – it’s not ageing because it’s timeless, what is dated is dressing in out-of-fashion clothes from the past 20 odd years.
My, I’m feeling fortunate to work in a conservative field with virtually no women!
The guys wear chinos, a starched shirt of one of the approved upscale brands, and highly polished shoes. A professional costumer or stylist could probably tell you the difference between the cut of 1998 and 2008, but it’s not visible to the untrained eye.
This is one of those issues where I just refuse to play the game of worrying about this year’s cut to my own trousers. That’s partly because I’m taller than many chains’ Tall sizes, so I’d never be able to get dressed at all. The cut of my triple-pleated wool or silk dress slacks has not changed in my entire adult life; and the length is that they break across the instep of my shoes. My goal is to look classic, elegant, and in charge. Whether I always meet it is open to argument, but I think a certain amount (possibly most!) of women’s fashion is aimed at being “fun” rather than conveying power and authority. Nothin’ wrong with that if it’s what you want… but it doesn’t meet my workplace goals.
There’s a difference between looking dated and looking conservative/serious/sober — the latter has elements of timelessness to it.
It would not be an asset to most people to look like they tumbled out of 1980 into the current decade. It might be an asset to be conservatively and seriously dressed. I know a woman who is nearly 70 now, and has only replaced her navy blue skirt suits every decade or so. They’ve changed very little over the years: pencil skirt just below the knee, nipped in waist, soft shoulder. Classic. Timeless. Completely and utterly conservative and unthreatening.
Never, never, ever dated.
Even as a SAHM I try not to look dated, but not sure if I pull it off or not. My fashion radar isn’t the most accurate (which is why I come here!). And usually by the time I get up the nerve to try something “new” it’s on its way out. Trying to get past that and keep to a classic+current look. But I don’t want to look like the careless mom at home.
I think if you only buy clothes that flatter you, you probably won’t look dated. It’s the extreme in clothes that date us, as early as wearing last season’s trend the following year. Honestly, I think most people just notice if someone looks good, and not whether they’re up to the minute in their clothing choices. I suppose that may be true in fields such as fashion.
Clothes are too expensive to completely replace in 3 to 5 years. And I have yet to work in an industry where people seriously cared what I wore unless it was inappropriate. I sure wouldn’t wear my heavy shoulder pad 80s jackets but often the skirts were simple, classic pencil skirts that, with a little tailoring MIGHT be ok for today.
Has anyone, like me, ever worked with someone whose clothing choices were abysmal. One women I knew, highly successful, dressed like a hooker. She was a very, very talented woman and went very high in the company. Her dress style caused some consternation amongst the conservative male bankers but no one ever called her out on it.
Pingback: The Space Between My Peers » Choose Flattering Over Fads