Recently talked with an acquaintance, an older (past retirement age) woman who says she has absolutely no interest in clothing or fashion and spends maybe 40 a year on clothes. She's European in origin, maybe German, and a dealer at a huge outdoor flea market. She doesn't look like she wears makeup and I don't notice her clothing. My recollection would be men's style cotton pants, maybe a muted plaid roomy shirt - everything dun colored. Rumpled bucket hat. Winter gives the same impression but with heavier fabric, woolens, a boxy thick dun colored jacket. Don't recall shoes but am guessing are sensible lace ups, also dun colored. Hair is sort of mousey brown greyish, somewhat curling, not overly short and not to her shoulders.
Now, I know another woman the same age who is taller and straighter of figure. I've seen her buy what I'll call encrusted almost flapper style dresses to wear to the casino. I'll wager she looks great in them. Although her daily style is very close to what the above woman wears with a difference of a narrow brim trilby hat. What is really the difference? Although I love *her* style, which is also quite masculine.
Is the difference in bearing? One proclaims no interest in clothing or how she looks and the other has an obvious interest and, I would say, an awareness of her effect on others.
It's a little like talking about the tree falling in the forest because I want to say that NoStyle is refusing to consider there's an audience. We point all the time to people who have ageless individual style that resists trends but those people are still known and sometimes photographed. I think NoStyle is whatever fits, washes up well enough, whatever someone gave you that's handy that fits. It's warm or cool and practical for you and doesn't cause any commentary.
