Looks like I am settling in to a M, T, W, then “Throwback Thursday” blogging schedule 😉
Likely it is not necessary for me to explain why I have chosen this detour in my mini-series on Vogue cover art. I’m sure you’ve seen the Uma-in-bikini, June 2006 Vogue.
Shop Amazon – Buy Eligible Print Magazines 
So, why not do Oprah? For a dose of reality dressing, her looks are closer to where most of my peers live.
First principle I want to highlight is that of line in the body. It’s no secret that Oprah’s body is primarily soft, curved lines; notice how the smooth stretch fabric of her clothing harmonizes with her soft curviness. Perhaps you are already employing this principle in your own clothing choices.
- Identifying your body lines: Look for soft, smooth curves (like Oprah’s); harder, muscular curves; or the straighter lines of visible bones. Many people (like me) have predominantly straight lines above the waist and curved below; you could also be the other way around.
- Creating harmony with fabric: Drapey fabrics, such as smooth knits, flatter soft smoothness; crisper fabrics, such as cotton twill or linen, suit more skeletal bodies. In the case of the combination, my preference is to dress to match the top half (after all, the face is the natural focal point of every outfit).
- Creating harmony with tailoring: Among other considerations, line in the body contributes to preferences for straight or angled details vs. rounded lines in things like necklines and collar construction.
- Creating drama with contrast: Once you’ve assimilated this idea and feel comfortable working with it, you may want to try the opposite for dramatic effect.
Okay, now for something simple. How about the color harmony? Monochromatic (Oprah’s own coloring is monochromatic). And a bonus thought: Note how the line movement in the print relates to the lines and shapes in Oprah’s hair and features.
my mind is spinning. SPINNING! i’ve never considered any of what your’e discussing here. must process.
Yes but what about us harder, muscular curves folks? One thing I read in an older book, might be the Spillane Color Me Beautiful Looking Your Best that I think Sewing Plum had liked, is to keep blouse, top and jacket texture tightly woven and crisp because looser weaves can make you look broader. I’m a sucker for tweeds but I also hate to feel hulking. Flatter, less drapier, smoother, more molded knits seem to suit me better in general. I’m not a fan of jersey for me. I have one skirt in ponte that I wear a lot but never can shop for more ponte because I can’t get out of my mind its resemblance to the pull on stretch knit pants with the stitched creases of yore.
It makes sense to me that fabrics with both body and give would work well for the muscular type. So tightly woven, stretch tops would work with that advice. I would think a muscular body type would feel restricted in some of the very crisp tops. My daughter prefers 3/4 sleeve, I think for this reason.
And I think tweed would work, as long as the entire look is balanced: enough fullness in the hair and keeping within a good silhouette 🙂
Also, cuz this is an old post, I think the personality, and related movement, aspect is much more important in fabric choices!
Yes, personality and related movement. I’ve been in a rejecting mood toward style books and am thinking of purging them. Have been skimming through many. Found that I at first I agreed with something said about it being not so important what you’re wearing and your smile is more important. To me that translates as confidence and strength. But I thought about people for whom dignity is more important and even perhaps distance, privacy. And venue, not always appropriate to be going around smiling in a comradely way to everyone.
So I thought about posture and shoulders more specifically. There was a recent art project – lots of male frontal nudity – where the subjects were asked to pose showing off body elements they were proudest of and then to pose (all of this nude) hiding or protecting these parts from gaze. I don’t think the second versions were successful at all – too staged – but it did get me thinking further about stance. If you take Tuttle’s 4 energy movements, you don’t even have to have dignified set of shoulders but could have relaxed confidence, instead, for example. All this to say that if we feel good about what we’re wearing, for whatever our reasons are, we stave off judgment.
I’m suspicious about all that research showing that people evaluate others on appearance within so many seconds. If so, aren’t they just trying to suss the other person out as someone who’s judgment of them, the viewer, won’t be a threat?
Belonging. Who belongs where, with whom? I think this is why I and many others find a traveler, just passing through, posture and appearance fascinating. It’s signalling that you belong somewhere if not exactly here. 😀
And aggressiveness. I’ve been thinking of that in regards to clothing. I’ve soured on gamine style ever since I read an analysis that I thought was spot on, saying that it incorporates a kind of rebellion, a nose-thumbing. I could suddenly see that – androgynous clothing, too. To me that’s all one more elegant step away from slogan tee shirts that force everyone to receive your message. (both the androgyny and the gamine). And of course, the hipster irony of taking cherished traditional garments and wearing them ironically/mockingly.
And most of the Advanced Style folks, with the pink hair and the cacophony of colors. They put me in mind of Hadley Freeman’s book where she denounces brightly colored coats. At first, I was put off, remembering a beloved hot pink coat in the 60’s. First I knew that coats didn’t have to be sensibly colored. Could be frivolous. But lately have been taking a leaf from Hadley’s book and don’t wish my clothing to invade someone’s personal space. There’s still a lot of style advice out there saying that women can get away with a red power suit.
But why? Why would anyone want to put up with looking at that all day?
*chuckle*
Indeed! I have that response to the idea of driving a red car. OTOH, I have been thinking alot lately about how everything I remember preferring as a child was brightly colored: Dr Suess books, Disney animated films, psychedelic prints, the yellow/orange paint job on the 1980ish Camaro. Wondering whether I have been rejecting color because a color analysis included the spoken phrase “because of the muted”, creating a belief in me that muted ness is the most important aect of my coloring. Which doesn’t even make any sense, looking back: my hair was nearly black and my skin luminous ivory. But back then there was no such thing as a brown-eyed, Caucasian Spring or summer.
Apparently the ability to distinguish colors is physiological and age-related?
But I also like how this article seems to question how people are supposed to relate to colors emotionally.
http://www2.ca.uky.edu/hes/fcs/factshts/HF-LRA.151.PDF
I just picked up the bottom portion of my below the shoulders hair and flung it across my forehead as though it were sideways bangs and was startled at how much darker and redder it was than my now greying and fading hair color. I tend to like a medium contrast in outfits but if I don’t color my hair – I never have – then I suppose I am going to be liking gentler contrast. I don’t know how I feel about that. 😀