What wonderful, thoughtful comments. I find myself nodding my head to everyone's points! I hope to come back to say a bit more later on this evening, but at this moment, Nancy, I just wanted to say that we seem to be soul sisters as well as style sisters.

I knew that I wanted to write from the age of 8 (when I started writing). But I stopped when I got to university. Partly that was because I was afraid, and intimidated. I could suddenly see how very much I needed to learn and to experience, and I lost confidence that I had anything to say.

Not only that, but people constantly told me that I looked like: a lawyer, a teacher, a junior leaguer. (Okay, we don't have junior league in Canada, but they said the equivalent.) Like you, Nancy, I was fair and perhaps conventionally "pretty" (at least on a good day) and I was also drawn to classic clothing—partly as a matter of taste and partly as a matter of cost; my simple classic pieces seemed more practical to me for the kind of mix-and-match wardrobe I could afford. It was then that I took to haunting the vintage shops, in an effort to inject a little "oomph" to my style at a price I could afford. Trouble is, people STILL thought I looked like a lawyer.

Does looking like a lawyer prevent you from being a creative person? No, of course not. But if no one sees you as creative and you doubt your own abilities to create, it can become a vicious circle.

I spent many years paralyzed, hiding my true self from the world.

When I turned 30 I started to write again. Not coincidently, I also enjoyed a few years of fashion fun; that houndstooth jacket photo dates from that time. I was full of hope and joy that I was finally pursuing my real dream.

But then, life got in the way, in the form of work, parenting, step-parenting, and the hard reality that it takes an awfully long time to learn to write well.

It was seven years before I had my first publication. Another ten years after that before my first book was published.

Meanwhile, I still looked a lot like a lawyer. Or everyone's stereotype of a lawyer. Which, as we at YLF know better than anyone, is WRONG: just look at our brilliant fashion icons MaryK and Una (or Amy, who also works in the profession) for evidence of that (and my apologies if I have forgotten someone else who is a lawyer).

Okay...where was I going with this novel, LOL?

I guess I just wanted to say that expressing oneself through one's way of dress is absolutely not necessary to BEING a great artist; Tara is completely correct about that. But in my own case, finding a way to express my artistic identity in my clothing would be itself a form of creative expression (as Rae suggested) and also a way of cementing that identity for myself and celebrating my values in the world.

I hope that won't come across as crazy, or narcissistic, or flaky, or foolish. (Krish, I could envision the scene so perfectly...and know exactly what you mean!)

But at the same time, I'm tired of being seen as somebody I am not.

I am always very curious about the perception others have of me. I am never really sure. I think part of it comes from the fact that my LIFE has sort of been all over the place (punk rocker, artist, general iconoclast on the one hand, Army NCO, strong critical thinker, dog trainer on the other).

I am not nearly so clear or critical about my dressing habits as others are and I am trying to become more aware, more deliberate about my choices so that I can have a focused wardrobe that works for my life and pleases my heart. I envy the clarity others have developed.

My heart sang to hear Angie's comment on my style. Though 'arty' has not been a style goal of mine I am beyond pleased that my creative side comes through. Maybe it is because if you are familiar with one element of my personality the others may be unexpected? Hmm...

Anywho, enough navel gazing from me, I guess.

Suz, I think if someone told me I looked like a lawyer I would gaffaw and wonder, "What does a lawyer look like?"

The only time someone has ever said, "Oh, you look like...," was when I was at AT with the Army and someone not in my unit acted surprised when he saw me in my "civies". I questioned him about it and he said, "Well, you looked sort of like a librarian."

In BDUs? Really? All I can say, is people are weird.

This is an interesting discussion!

I think of my style as arty, although I am by no means an artist. I used to write poetry in college, and I knit quite a lot, which is another form of artistic expression, but in my day to day life I am a scientist, a profession which probably does not seem very "artistic." It is creative in its own way, though, although in a different way than photography, or writing, etc. In any case, there is very little interest in fashion and style in my profession! I think this is a huge reason WHY I choose to be creative and artistic in my own personal style. It's a good outlet for all those artistic and creative impulses that I don't get to exercise in my profession!

I will say that, as a scientist in an academic setting, I have an extraordinary amount of sartorial freedom (although most of my colleagues do not choose to exercise it in the way I do!). Aside from some basic safety rules (which, honestly, I ignore most of the time), there is no dress code. I don't need to wear conservative business attire or a uniform, and can dress however I choose. This means that I can wear a fancy dress one day and jeans+leather jacket the next. Of course it does get me some funny looks from time to time, but then again I am clearly not dressing to blend in these days. The people I see everyday at work are used to it anyway!

I have loved this discussion ladies - thanks so much for all your input. Whether or not you want to dress creatively or in an arty way - we can all identify with the issues of self-expression in style.

As an engineer - I have suppressed my own style for a long time - even suppressing my femininity quite a bit - because it is such a conservative and male dominated industry. Now I wonder who I was trying to please. Maybe I've just got older and less tolerant or possibly more confident now I have plenty of track record and experience (or possibly now I've had a baby I figure they KNOW i'm a woman LOL) but I don't care anywhere near as much anymore about pleasing other people.

Of course I am a consultant so I DO have to think about it somewhat - first impressions are important - plus you need to "fit in" to a certain extent with your current work environment to do your job well. But I am realising that still leaves me with a remarkable amount of scope to dress for myself.

I am wondering if there is a kind of sweet spot though between adding a "style flavour" and missing the mark. I know some ladies above talked about sometimes hitting the mark with dramatic flair and other times feeling they have overdone it - too many competing areas of interest.

As an engineer I tend to think of things in terms of formulas or rules of thumb. Is there a rule of thumb like an 80:20 rule (i.e. 80% your main thing and 20% your flair) or maybe something like the golden mean (2/3 your main thing and 1/3 flair) that could apply in this situation? Or is it one of those "look in the mirror before you leave and if something catches your eye take it off" type of situations?

For example, I'm trying to dress about 80% "professional" or "structured" and 20% bohemian (LOL). Sometimes that is all suit with a interesting blouse and/or necklace and shoes. Sometimes that is business casual with suit separates and interesting blouse and use the necklace and a cardi to take it all down a notch.

{edited for typos}

Lots of interesting thoughts since this morning; thanks for the read!

Nancylee, glad you are going to experiment with letting your inner drama-lover out a bit -- or a lot! I think your streamlined, classic items will pair up nicely with more exuberant pals.

Shipskitty, the "Style Statement" book (ok, journal) I mentioned upthread actually recommends one seek the 80:20 mix you're already doing, as long as both percentages resonate.

[So hey: at least you're aligned with one theory out there. If you're interested, there are several YLF threads on the book and also on style persona stuff.]

Since many people feel as if they have a work persona and a personal time one, I also think it could work to pick an 80:20 mix for one's personal time then flip that to 20:80 for work. I have no idea if that would be effective, but it might be a fun experiment....

Heaven above, what a FANTASTIC discussion! Made my Saturday night a party unto itself. So far, I've only managed to read about half of the responses so far, because I am reflecting on them and re-reading to really savour some intriguing and articulate ideas and experiences on this! Some were succinct, some elaborate.

Suz, WOW. Brilliant. I wish you'd collect your thoughts into a book of essays/reflections on style journeys. With an endorsement from Angie and YLF, it would be such a great addition to the style book universe! I'd be first in line for your book signing. About your first comment: So true - many artists are undervalued. Besides a lack of exposure in mad-flashy pop culture, being "behind-the-scenes", being appreciated in "niche" rather than widely seen venues, it might also be due to a combination of their own infamous lack of satisfaction with themselves and their work, their introversion, or any other non-self-promoting factors. Also, If they are not part of an artistic community daily, they can feel very isolated and removed from people in their environment, and perhaps the desire to distinguish themselves externally is to acknowledge that they are not necessarily the most conventional thinkers or workers, and express through style that as a sort of cultural marker. Subconsciously, beyond what we may be drawn to in style (classic, romantic, etc), we also want to communicate to others who we may have an affinity with - as you mentioned concerning Nancylee, for example. So, ensues the almost fervent desire to separate from a "traditional" (often seen as classic) style.

I think being authentic is crucial for an artist. True, there is a veneer, but in terms of pure self-expression, one will not rest until they feel "complete" internally and externally. Second guessing and self-doubting is often part of this process. I think an artist'st style evolves, can be formed through moods and phases, travels, and sentimental items, but usually a combination of all, hence the confusion! Perhaps the best start is to start trusting your first instinct when catching sight of an item or piece, and understanding what drew you to that. You will probably find less "conventional" pieces start to accumulate. Suz, remember that Finn dress you were considering donating? It was like a kimono, a really unique design? If I"m not mistaken, I think you decided to keep it at the last minute!

So much more to think about, and I'm sure I'll return after I've finished pondering all of these fascinating comments.

You know I never considered the trials and trevails of dressing as an artist before. I suppose I always assumed artists dressed "arty" because it came naturally to them and not that they felt pressured to present themselves as creative, but now that I think about it, your question makes a lot of sense. I would think that writers get more of a gimme on this one, though, than visual artists. I think the advice to focus on your personal style (inner voice) is excellent though.

Keruchina - your comment attracted my attention because you say that people dress to communicate their group membership, and as a scientist who does not like drab and boring clothes or genderless dressing, I thought at first it is not true for me. Thinking about it more though, the way I dress is a compromise between a) being practical for work b) pleasing myself and c) not shocking my colleagues too much/only attracting the level of attention for being different that I can currently deal with for personal or strategic (career-wise) reasons.

I can tell you why I think scientists dress the way they do--to communicate absolute, obsessive devotion to work. Appearance and clothing are just affectations that take time and distract from the important work at hand. They want to communicate a complete focus on the abstract. In summary, not regularly clipping your fingernails is a sign of a good work ethic. And also for those with big egos, that your work and achievements are so impressive that your colleagues will overlook and accept your strange personal habits and lack of toilette.

I'll say like the others, this has turned into a fantastic discussion! It is so interesting to read you all. Suz, I agree with Helen about collecting your thoughts into a book. It is fascinating to read your style journey here on the Forum as it is.

I must say it is fascinating to read all the comments from this thread. Shipskitty, trying to please by SUPPRESSING your feminine side... what an interesting concept to realize this like you have. So for you, fashion and style has been a liberating, emancipating experience rather than the reverse.

Tarzy, good point about labels. Sylvie, thank you for reminding me about how wrong the presumption of our society. "One shouldn't think too highly of themselves" is... You are absolutely right.

Yet we do live in a backward society regarding style. It's true! A lot of people judge by the clothes and hairstyle, and they are stuck with stereotypes. This is what I have learned late in life, by frequenting people who are paid to judge others, analyse quickly if they are "reliable" or not, if they are who they say they are or not, what their weaknesses are...

I am not advocating dressing for those people (God forbid!!!) but am advocating knowing it. If you rebel, know what you rebel against. And know when. Crossing the border, testifying in court, meeting with high dignitaries may not be the best moment.

Nancylee, to answer your initial question, I am in the same position as you. And I am now exploring with proportions, colours and texture plays to express this side of myself. For this to work, I prefer to chose one of the three and concentrate on it to put it forth. For example if playing with textures I try to stay monochromatic, if playing with colours I try to keep the most classic lines, etc. I also like a small unexpected detail for spunk. The small unexpected detail is my laboratory for "out of myself" fashion, when I try new things even I would not have considered. I buy them every so and then at little clothes boutiques as a personal reward, never more than $20. Some are misses but most are hits, and have led me to change more important aspect of my outfits (especially regarding shape).

Hope this makes sense for you!

I re-read this whole post this morning, and was amazed all over again at everyone's many wonderful insights. This thread has made my head positively swim with possibilities re introducing some drama and creativity into my look. Thank you all for sharing your thoughts and personal stories. I don't have a lot of time to write more right now, but just know that all your comments are very much appreciated.

Suz, I do indeed feel like we're soul sisters. Your lovely story of how you came to writing is very similar to my own. I do hope we can meet sometime in the future. I think we would have a lot to talk about!

I hope we meet, too, Nancy!

As for writing my thoughts in a book, I'm very flattered, Helen & Krish. I can't really imagine I have all that much to say (not a book's worth, surely!) but who knows. Maybe an article or two?

Krish, I really liked your suggestion to focus on one element of an outfit and play with it, keeping the other elements of the outfit quite restrained. This also falls in line with the other formulas we've discussed here (and elsewhere): the 80/20 idea that Vix alluded to, or the (differently proportioned) 1/3 to 2/3 rule, or the idea, that Steph gave to me, that the "third layer" should be the more dramatic one; that layer might be a jacket in the spring/fall/winter months but it might simply be amazing jewellery in the hot summer months. (We were mentioning before how buying jewellery made by other artists is a great way to suggest one's affinities, and I think this is true; certainly I know a woman in my own town who does this to perfection.)

I think the element of restraint may be especially important for those of us who are on the petite side....and POSSIBLY also for those of us who are on the extremely tall or large side as well. Here's my reasoning: if we are petite, too much drama, asymmetry, flash, etc. will very likely overwhelm us. WE will be lost in the clothes and come across as flaky.

Whereas if we are tall or large, while we will probably wear dramatic looks more easily, it will be correspondingly easier to give the impression of narcissism. Looks like we are larger than life, or think we are. Something like that.

The thread that Sveta started about the Kibbe test was very interesting in that regard. I am not sure I understand or completely agree with his categories or his fashion suggestions (after all, the book dates from the 80s) BUT what fascinated me was the idea that we should dress to keep in mind our facial contours and bone structure, including but not limited to height, as well as our body type. http://youlookfab.com/welookfa.....you-denise

Denise, thank you again for linking us all to that test! It was so interesting.

I've always believed, like Angie, that an "arty" style included some bohemian elements. I am sometimes somewhat attracted to boho pieces, too (and certainly appreciate them on others.) BUT...on me, they don't look right and I feel as if I am in a costume.

So I was left with a dilemma. Purely in my own mind, of course. But it went something like this: if I can't wear the garb of an artist, I must not BE an artist.

The Kibbe questionnaire suggests another reason. It's just not fitting for my type. I test out (I think) as a Dramatic Classic or, perhaps, a gamine (it is a bit difficult for me to answer some of the questions so I'm not sure.) In any case, boho looks just aren't for me. So in that sense, maybe I never will have what others would call an "arty" style.

On the other hand, I can still dress in a way that makes me FEEL fab, and expressive of who I am, and that subtly suggests my affiliations to the group. You are so right, Helen, that this is somehow important to us.

Alas, the Vuokko dress (good memory, Helen!!!) is gone. It was too full of moth holes. And really did overwhelm me. But I think it still had something to teach me. I kept it all those years for a reason.

Wow, what a thread! I'm coming to this late, and can't even begin to process all the great ideas in this, but a few things have jumped out at me. Krishnidoux, your story brings to mind an artist friend my husband and I have known, but not well, for about 10 years. She is fantastically talented, tall, statuesque, beautiful, and sometimes dresses flamboyantly "arty" -- we're talking layers and length and dramatic headscarves and tribal jewelry and everything. She also used to intimidate the hell out of me. In my mind, I was only playing at being an artist, and she was the real deal. Not too long ago, my husband and I were talking about her, and he commented on how her style and demeanor tipped him off that she's quite insecure herself. Now that I think of it, I understand what he's saying.

The key here, in "dressing like a ______ (fill in the blank)" is, to me, actually to remain true to oneself. I have never set out to dress like an artist, or a DJ, or an interior designer, or a graphic designer, even though these have all been creative professions I identify/ied strongly with. Helen mentions that authenticity is the most important thing, and i agree.

I also understand when Andrea says her life has been so all over the place that it is hard to pin down an identity, whether through style or otherwise. I have had some pretty interesting dichotomies in my life (conservative private school headmaster's assistant by day, rock'n'roll DJ by night!) and I always took a little bit of pride in never fully adopting the "uniform" of any of those identities. Heck, the first time I set foot in a legendary punk bar/John Waters hangout, I was 18 and wearing purple palm tree surf shorts and a white polo shirt. Yeah, I stood out a little among the mohawks and black leather. I have always enjoyed being hard to pigeonhole by my appearance.

I never get dressed thinking "does this look arty enough?" not even for a gallery show opening. But I can see some themes in my work that also come through in my style, which is natural because obviously these are aesthetics that appeal to my eye: certain color combinations, juxtapositions of soft/organic and hard/mechanical, etc. For a visual artist, this parallel is probably much easier to draw than for other creatives, but I can see it applying to others as well.

So, going back to the original question, I'd have to once again say that finding one's own "voice" is the key. Formulas of wearing black and chunky glasses or boho layers and headscarves are costumes, but the real deal is usually expressed in a more subtle way. When I think about this, I think some of the hallmarks of the creative edge to my style are preferences I've had ever since I was young: the use of color, bold prints and patterns, interesting structures and cuts, graphic touches, metallics, hats, bold jewelry, funky shoes/boots, and leather jackets.

Accessories are a great place to start, and I truly do think the answer lies in what makes your heart sing. Start there and own it!

Scarlett- as the wife of a scientist, I have to say that your comments really opened my eyes and made sense to me. Thank you!

This really has been amazing. I wrote Suz a PM, because I should disclose that one of the reasons I am so fascinated by this is that my 8 year old daughter is a total "artist". I am not. I try so hard to support her and guide her, without knowing what the heck I am doing. Many times I feel so bad for her because she has a mom who just doesn't really get her ( though I NEVER let her know that ). She started talking about "expressing" herself at 6. I encourage her and buy her sketch books to carry everywhere, I always have a notebook and pencil in my bag for her, I read everything that she writes, I download music for her and dance with her....it is like another life for me. In the end, I want her to be fulfilled....even if it has nothing to do with math and science.

So I am getting some parenting tid bits here too !

Isabel, that's so beautiful. You are a wonderful mother to your daughter and she is so lucky to have you.

And I agree, Scarlet, it's very interesting to hear a scientist's take on this, as well, and it would be really great if the science types on this list would write about their particular style challenges and joys.

Janet, thank you SO much for your post. It resonated with me on so many levels. I, too, have sometimes felt that someone else was "the real deal" and I was not. At the same time, until YLF, I've never consciously dressed to look more "arty;" I just WISHED that somehow I COULD look that way, magically. And sometimes I would try this or that piece that was supposed to give the look...but it did not. Since YLF I think I have been much more conscious that this is an element of the look I want. But in my own unique way, not in any stereotypical way.

That's why I LOVED what you said here: " I can see some themes in my work that also come through in my style."

You're right that it might be tougher for non-visual artists to recognize those themes but at least one leapt immediately to my attention. In almost all my writing (and all the pieces I'm proudest of) juxtaposition is crucial. I like to braid different stories, or bring contrasting images together, or place texts of different kinds next to each other to see what kind of energy that generates.

In terms of my style, it then makes perfect sense that I would feel most at home in looks that mix high and low; casual/ soft with more structured; quiet with more dramatic.

Thank you SO much for that insight. It is precious!

And thank you again, Nancy, for raising this discussion!

I have to agree that there are distinctions in expectations between visual and writerly artists. I think writers tend to be more analytical, hence their often more "proper"/classic/conservative way of dressing...?

I thought it might be fun and helpful to look at photos of established Professional Artists that we may be familiar with - and check out their style. You'll notice none of them are particularly outlandish or wacky at all - just tasteful and classically elegant! Interesting.

Photo #1: Novelist Alice Sebold
Photo #2 & 3: Novelist for young people, Judy Blume
Photo #4: Poet Maya Angelou
Photo #5: Painter Georgia O'Keefe

It's a great thread and I am enjoying your discussions---I hope it carries on for a while.

Isobel--I want to jump up and down with joy for you dancing with your daughter!!! You go girls!! You are doing a great thing for her and she will only benefit and so will you!
I have artistic kids too--have had to deal with many a school principle/teacher about it too so the more you know them and what makes them tick the better it is all around!

I have worked with many artists in the animation field---it's amazing how you can see their drawing styles in their personal style and I don't believe they do it intentionally initially--it just is--the obvious arty stuff is just punctuation.
Me--I like to think I'm a comic strip artist --I dress pretty main stream I guess but like goofy stuff like mismatched socks. I am pretty reserved and that shows in my drawing style. My hubby is a fine animator and technical artist--he likes graphic ts and cut off shorts/track pants but is surprisingly classic in his formal wear, personality--I see this in his drawings too.

Suz--it's blog writing time!

This is such an interesting thread. I really relate to a lot of the comments here. I don't even know where to start :). I am a social scientist with a creative bent; writing (creating, reading, editing others' writing) is a big part of my job and an important part of how I identify myself. I also really enjoy artistic expression, in the fine arts, through writing, in home design, fashion and style, etc. So I find that to feel the most like myself, I like to dress in ways that reflect all of these aspects of me. Suz, when you wrote about juxtaposition, I found myself nodding along, because my most thrilling writing comes when I am connecting dots others haven't connected before, and juxtaposing different elements to come up with something new. This gives me great pleasure and satisfaction. I can see now that how I dress is related to this.

I agree with Scarlet that if you are an academic and a scholar, there is definitely the perception that you should be consumed by your work (love the long fingernails bit!). To show other interests, especially ones associated with women to be blunt, is to risk being taken much less seriously. I do think that many of my colleagues think I am somewhat suspect because I obviously put some thought into how I present myself. I hope that my work speaks for itself, and that I can be a model for graduate students--it *is* possible to be a serious thinker and writer, and have a family life, and enjoy pursuits like fashion! Also, I take heart in thinking that this is sort of changing. I remember hearing somewhat recently about a female scientist who was tenured at an Ivy institution, and has also worked for years as an aerobics instructor. I love these kinds of stories!!

This topic got me to thinking about one of my favorite modern female artists. Georgia O'Keefe. When I look at any photographs of her she is usually wearing black and white and strong jewelry. The clothing is comfortable, practical and organic looking and her jewelry is sculptural and simple but striking. Even her hats are fun. And of course her face is very striking.

The visuals are very interesting; we see a range of styles represented even in just a few photos. Judy Blume looks casual and approachable, which fits her identity as a writer for young people. Alice Sebold looks restrained yet dramatic; she is a writer of literary books for adults. Maya Angelou looks dramatic and dignified, as befits her status. Georgia O'Keefe looks striking and dramatic, like her work.

Very interesting, Helen. Makes me think again that each of us could look to our work (or our work's intentions) for clues about how to identify the artistic elements that will suit us best.

I had to add these pics and this quote from Louise Nevelson, an influential sculptor who also had tons of style.

Here's the quote, from an interview with her that was later published in a book Dawns and Dusks:

"I don’t think of myself as a strong woman. I never even heard that word about me until recently. I always thought bluntly that I was a glamorous goddamn exciting woman. I didn’t want to be strong at anything. I wanted to have a ball on earth.[…] I could have played the role of the down-and-out artist, but I wanted to have fun, and not only fun, I think I fed on it. It was exciting. I always used to dress with a flair. And I liked to swear and I liked to drink and have romances. Well, little did they think that I’d be the one to arrive. I knew it, though. I was very sure of what I was doing. I believed in myself and I was utterly satisfied with what I believed in."

Good grief, this is quite interesting and raises so many other issues besides the one that Nancy asked about directly. It's especially interesting for me to hear the academics and scientists weigh in here (Scarlet, I didn't know that you are also a scientist). In contrast to what Jonesy said (a bit), I feel as though in much of my writing I am working hard to remove myself from the writing, since the norm in my discipline is to focus on the results and the work, and not the writer. I love to write, and I love to edit. But, the norm is to write about the research in an objective way, and therefore the scientist is not the focus on the writing. I wonder if that's in part why I feel so self conscious sometimes in expressing my style. And of course that reinforces the whole issue of not wanting to dress too outside of my environmental norm. Honestly, even getting my hair cut has been a bit traumatic, as I feel as though I'm intentionally drawing attention to myself. Artists, on the other hand, are rewarded for their individuality and originality of expression. Not that scientists aren't rewarded for creativity and individuality, but it's more about the originality of their work, and not about themselves per se. Hmmm...

I already talked a bit in my earlier post (up above) about how being a scientist in academia has influenced my sartorial choices but I wanted to add a couple more points.

Scarlet makes a really good point about a perceived dichotomy between being interested in fashion/style and being considered a serious scientist. I do think this is true since science is one of the few fields in which you can look like an utter and total slob and still be taken seriously. This perception mostly just really annoys me and so I feel that, in some small way, I am making a statement by dressing the way I do.

I don't feel the need to tone down my style in my daily life where i go to lab and interact with basically the same people day in and day out. They are all pretty used to it and don't really bat an eyelash and don't judge me negatively because they know me better than that. I even get compliments on occasion, usually from the younger women, which gives me hope that as more people like me rise in the ranks (hopefully!) the perception of stylish as being flaky or not serious will change.

I do admit to toning it down when I have to give an interview or a big talk or something where a lot of people who do not know me may be present, but I will only go so far. Put me in a button down shirt or conservative suit (or for that matter,something like non-PPL pants), and I feel uncomfortable, so I will not be confident when giving my talk, which completely defeats the purpose of trying to appear competent and serious.

Anyway, here are a couple of blogs by fashionable ladies in science:

http://geekthreads.blogspot.com/ - I want to be Audi when I grow up. She is both the epitome of artsy dressing AND a scientist (albeit at a biotech company rather than in academia).

http://www.befabulousdaily.us/ - Cynthia is a science professor at a research university, and also dresses in a rather arty (although more mainstream than Audi) manner and is interested in belly dancing and other such artistic endeavors.

What at timely thread - I've been pondering these very ideas. Suz - your posts resonated so much for me, partly because my experience writing has followed a similar path as yours and partly because, like you, I've always wanted to incorporate a more creative element in my clothes but haven't been sure what that would actually look like.

I think that one of the reasons I've tended not to do so is because I've been afraid to take the risk of sticking out or having people actively dislike what I'm wearing. (Not coincidentally, these are also the same reasons that I didn't write for years). People are too often surprised when they get to know me, saying that I look a lot different. I don't think that I look bad, but I would like my exterior to represent my self more, however fluid and shifting that self may be.

One way that I'm trying to move toward integrating my more creative side is by wearing more items that are handmade and have meaning to me. My grandmother recently knitted me some infinity scarves. I don't know that they look arty or creative to anyone else, but I know that sewing and knitting is one way that my grandmother expresses her creative impulses, so what she made for me feels creative to me.

I'm going to be going through archives of WIW of all of you who have said that you aspire for this in your own wardrobe for inspiration.

Wonderful question, Nancylee! I'm so glad you *did* ask

I'm blown away by everyone's profound thoughts and insights, and touched by the life experiences shared by our artistic and scientific members!

I don't want to interrupt the flow of such beautiful thoughts, but I just wanted to comment on how surprised I am at the number of members here whose profession involves writing, whose hobby involves writing, or whose passion includes writing.

It actually explains a lot for me -- how the thoughtful, eloquent replies just flow out of so many members. It always puts my basic "I really like it" comments to shame. . .

Anyway, now back to our regularly scheduled commentary (and I'm taking notes!)

This thread is fascinating and I am so impressed with the thoughtful responses and journeys shared.

I think about many of the same things when I dress that I do when I paint. When principles of art are the driving force, usually the style becomes "arty".
I have many more thoughts on this but wanted too keep it simple since so much wisdom has already been shared.

Amazing discussion, still going strong!

MNSara - you are funny. No shame in a direct and honest response! "I really like it!" sums it up well and lets the recipient know her efforts are appreciated!

Many helpful revelations here. Among them, one that really caught me was that the defining elements of an artist's work can inform their personal style, consciously and subconsciously. Juxtaposition, rebellion, subtlety, boldness, etc were some artistic approaches mentioned. This is highly personal, unqiue, artistic. Much food for thought.

And I have to add that I'm LOVING hearing the insights of the scientific minds here. I am of the belief that most people - regardless of how they earn money and are predominantly viewed - have an artistic side, and one way to unleash it is through style. For some who are in very conservative environments, it's almost a compulsion so that a bit of fun is added to the day to day! We can name many ladies on the forum who don't have a typically "creative" job, but who are very creative dressers! (This side can be also reflected in activities like cooking, home decorating, playing an instrument/writing music, makeup, woodworking, dancing, teaching style, etc.) Diana, I enjoyed checking out the two "science nerd" blogs. (Lol.) They certainly have a wonderful appreciation of aesthetics!

About the pictures, perhaps "classically elegant" wasn't the most accurate way to describe the artists' styles that I posted (it was my first impression, though.) I noticed a certain tasteful restraint and modesty there, and as Suz said, each look seems to represent each lady's output! These are not "poseurs" in any sense of the word (we'd heard concerns about "costume") - but real lauded artists. We saw flashes of uniqueness - Judy Blume's jewellry amidst the denim and blue button down, Maya Angelous's unmistakable tribal print on a very classic jacket, Georgia O'Keefe's beautifully tailored black dress punctuated with an eye-catching belt.

ETA: Jonesy, what a striking sculptor. With her very flamboyant style and personality, I think her extreme presentation is what other artists here might characterize as alienating or intimidating. Hers is the sort of style that somehow triggers an identity crisis among other working artists, and I feel it shouldn't. A fun read and viewing, though|!

I have to say, too, sometimes an individual's personality and culture can be an even bigger influence on personal style than career (though it's a chicken-and-the-egg debate about whether career is chosen by personality...) Hmmm. Onwards!

Such a cool conversation. I too have struggled with feeling like my outsides didn't reflect my insides especially as my career has shifted. I have a science background and ended up in tech, and then slowly moved toward more creative writing. But I still think of myself as more of a left brained person and not your 'typical' writer (as if there is such a thing).

You all at YLF have seen me struggle trying to find some outfits that have some flair and edge to them for writing events, as that kind of dressing doesn't come naturally to me, especially given my current size. I've had several incidents where people have said once they got to know me that I was very different (less uptight, more flexible, more interesting) than what they thought I was like when they first met me. I don't know if that's my way of interacting with people or my dress style or some of both, but apparently I come across as the most square boring Republican ever, which I am not. It does distress me whenever it happens because I think it must turn people off that I'd get along with but never get the chance to really meet.

Diana, I thought of Audi too as you mentioned the tension of dressing as a scientist. The gals at Academchic talked a lot about sartorial norms and identity construction in academic while they were blogging - I believe the site is still up for browsing.

Here (the San Francisco area) there are a lot of ladies who never really got past their hippie years (or like to pretend they had hippie years), and dress in that flowing tunics, lots of black and jewel tones sort of way. It suits some of them and not so much others. It's not something that appeals to me, personally, aesthetically, and I think for most people's figures it's not the best look. But it is a nice shorthand for saying "I'm this kind of person," and I wish I could find an analogue that worked for me. I think there's a younger coterie that's doing it with very mid-century vintage looks, but whenever I wear something like that I feel costumey and ridiculous.

Diane, I didn't realize you were a scientist too!

To address Sarah's point about not wanting to stick out. Part of it may be that women are still vastly underrepresented in tenure track positions in science. At faculty meetings and other faculty gatherings, I defy the environmental norm just by my gender, and I don't necessarily want to add to my conspicuousness.

Wow. I am overwhelmed by the conversation this little post has generated. I so appreciate everyone's contributions, and I particularly love how it's branched out to include those of you in the scientific community and your own particular style concerns and challenges. Please forgive me for not commenting individually on everyone's comments at this point. This thread has taken on a life of its own--which is fantastic--but I just can't keep up! (Angie, kudos once again for your magnificent and constant handling of all our concerns. I'm exhausted just keeping up with one thread!)

So many great observations added today. Helen, I love your photos of writers and corresponding analysis of their looks. I think you're right to conclude that most writers chose a low-key classic style. This type of look is what I've settled into (after my all-black phase). I didn't want to look flakey, so I just fell into a conservative mode. There was no need, I rationalized, to scream "I'm an artist!" Just do the work and be modest in your dress. *sigh* The problem is an all-classic look doesn't quite satisfy me.

Angie's recent post on the modern classic look really made me stop and think. My closet is full of modern classic basics...the "glue" of a functional wardrobe....but there is very little "fun" or creativity to spunk up those basics. Like Suz, I've tried to spark up the drama in my own little ways: wearing scarves and necklaces and boots, mostly. But I still don't really feel like I'm projecting "me" fully. I've never experimented much with color or texture, and always err on the side of understated for fear of looking OTT. I moved tentatively into some trends last fall: booties, skinnies (daring for me!), and a fur vest. But I don't want to fall into using trends to define me just as I don't want classic pieces to limit me. I think what I'm looking for (and this thread has helped me SO much) is a way to move forward adding the right type of creative touches for me and what I want to project. I don't want to become a slave to trends any more than I want to lazily rely on a strictly modern classic look. Like many of us, I want to project a more focused and intentional image.

Suz, your idea of translating your own writing style into your look is intriguing. You love the juxtaposition of different ideas, whereas my writing favors thematic development, repeated patterns/echoes of events, and symbols. Interesting. I can actually see this reflected in my newfound love of bookending, which offers me a chance to repeat/echo themes within my outfits. This is something I'll have to think about more...and play around with!

Artists are as different as snowflakes. You have the Louise Nevelsons of the world: bold, bigger than life, and outspoken. And you have the quiet ones. Certainly a big part of expressing who you are as an artist...or as an individual...starts with knowing yourself.

Many thanks again for this enlightening and therapeutic discussion!