“Many pitfalls of frumpiness can be avoided by not mixing shapes within an outfit.”
A few years ago, I made the above remark without a satisfactory explanation. Yesterday, I was feeling frumpy. Now I have lost the previous article. Oh well!
In the previous article, we established satisfactorily the link between unflattering fit and frumpiness. Unflattering fit and mixing shapes within an outfit are closely related. Both create silhouette problems.
The key to a flattering silhouette is maintaining a recognizable shape. Different theorists have developed different silhouette profiles; I like the system taught in The Triumph of Individual Style
But I don’t think that is my problem.
The word frumpy implies:
- unflattering fit,
conservative or matronlyfabric too stiff or too drapey,outdated (as opposed to classic)less current than the critic would prefer ;),- inappropriate to the setting.
In this case, I am my own worst critic. And, before putting money and energy into Fall/Winter 2013/14, I will be revisiting the Three Fashion Cycles. Because I think my offense is against principle number 3.
Frumpy to me is baggy and ill fitting and dated.
I’ve wondered what exactly defines frump as well.
I would agree it’s definitely fit. But define “conservative” and matronly. FLDS as conservative? Absolutely. Homeschool mom denim jumper crowd as conservative? Depends on the jumper and woman wearing it. “I” look frumpy in jumpers. The fabric’s too stiff. I know some women who look incredible in them. How do you seperate modest from conservative? To me they are the same church, different pew kind of thing. As far as outdated vs. classic, who gets to define either of those? I’ve seen things called classic that look like they are the trendiest things goin’.
As for frump, I would say you become frumpy when you ignore fit, silhotte, fabric type, hem length AND appropriateness for the situation. I can look fine at the office, but frumpy in the same clothes at a party 5 hours later. Frump is also related to your hair and accessories.
Yeah, I don’t know whether conservative or matronly calculate into frumpy or not. I do think one can be matronly without it being unflattering necessarily, for example a 16 yo in a black one-piece swimsuit.
I think modest and conservative are very closely related, but can you imagine someone who was dressed immodestly being called “frumpy”? Likely the term used to describe such a look would be equally unkind, but different.
I think the reason you see trendy looks called classic is because they recycle and then become “of the moment”. But, like you, I don’t see any crime in wearing something flattering that’s not “of the moment”. I think where people get in trouble, largely, is with stuff that wasn’t a good idea to begin with: like the women continue to wear over-sized polyester shirts with monster shoulder pads over leggings. Back in 1990, that looked normal, because our eyes had adapted to that look. But it still probably wasn’t a good idea. lol
Appropriateness is a seriously good addition to the list! And I agree about hair and accessories, just haven’t figured out all the details. Sometimes wearing the hair too neat and tidy seems frumpy, but on the other hand, frumpy is often described as ungroomed.
This is interesting. I’m been mulling over this lately – I am not in the age category where I’m concerned about looking “too old” (I’m in my mid twenties) but I’m sometimes worried about dressing too old for my body and age or making my body look “dumpy”.
I don’t have a perfect body – I carry extra weight, I have curves all over, and I am short-waisted and not tall, so I have to worry about not looking “dumpy” with imperfect fit or proportion. I also feel like I’m often walking a fine line between trashy and matronly because of my chest size, and I usually opt to be on the conservative side so I’m as cleavage free as I can be – but I can’t wear necklines up to my chin either without making my chest looking even bigger.
Swimwear is the worst. I need to wear a one-piece swimsuit due to my midriff, but I haven’t found one in my budget range that actually supports my bust, and most necklines either come so low that I have much more cleavage than I’m comfortable with, or else they are too high on my body, and it’s always tough to find a cut of leg and lower back on a swimsuit that doesn’t make by bum look deformed.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to get into massive complaint mode – but just wanted to extend the conversation to point out that “dumpy/frumpy” issues aren’t necessarily tied to making oneself look older/younger. For me, it’s entirely about attaining a flattering and appropriate body shape.
Frumpy is also determinedly, deliberately, obdurately sexless. I attended a meeting where a lithe, lovely woman of 40 or so wore an acid-wash wraparound denim skirt (falling about 2 inches below the knee), a baggy XL white man’s tee, and white athletic socks with white crocs. She was dumpy, all right.
The skirt would not have been too bad with a fitted tee or blouse.
What is the opposite of frumpy? The French have a wonderful word, “sortable”, which is untranslatable in one word; it means “dressed to go out”- the sense is of more ‘slickd up’ than merely presentable. I love that word.
She wore that to a meeting? Why do some people intentionally make themselves look bad?
Because at’s how she dresses all the time. I think she likes to look ‘natural’ which is a slippery slope to frumpy.
Hmmm. Yes. First you have a nice casual wardrobe. Then you don’t get rid of anything or buy much, but that’s okay because you still look respectable. Then pretty soon you’re just dressed.
“Timeless” is another slippery slope, perhaps not quite as steep.