Yes, all true, face is important and a more human approach. But what if somebody don't want a focus neither-or especially not- on their face in those "unflattering" outfits....(?)

Kaliyana is a gorgeous line. There are boutiques in Toronto and Montreal. The colours are wonderful and the lines of the clothes are also very interesting. I like that line because it is beyond fashion. Not that I have ever bought anything there. I prefer Sarah Pacini.

A couple of observations:

1. I too didn't even notice the model's face in the COS pictures - and I assumed that was the point. She is deliberated made-up (or not) to fade into the background and let the clothes do the talking.

2. I don't think that clothes like this are for us to figure out how they would work into our lives. You either embrace and appreciate a look like this or you don't. It's not intended to be conventionally anything. To me, the bland bottoms (I still would change them to black or ink or charcoal, but whatever) and white plain shoes are to deliver the message that the tops are the defining pieces meant to be showcased against a submissive bottom.

3. disrupting flattery? sure, why not? I'm not sure this has anything to do with flattery in fact, and for those working in a professional environment where you want to dress with a nod to the understanding of angles, geometry, mathematics, pushing spacial boundaries, creating new ideas, etc - like an architect does - this is what I'd be wearing. Not exactly like that , but in this vein. These clothes blend into that kind of an environment - or "match" the ideas, the work, and entire philosophy. An art gallery owner, an interior designer, an artist, a fashion buyer ......these are the careers I imagine where dressing like this makes sense. You the artist or architect aren't interested in figure flattery - you are interested in reflecting the mood and creativity and understanding of the design process. Funny - I'm reminded of being really un-inspired and even wary of two interior designers I met in the last few years (female) who had no "look" of their own. They both wore the least interesting and most "normal" clothes I'd ever seen, which made me wonder what they would ever be able to do design-wise.

4. yes, this may sound like I'm stereotyping but all of fashion is a typing process of some sort.

I guess I'm in the minority in that I would wear this sort of thing if I worked in a field where this made sense. I would also personalize it by changing some colour, wearing different footwear, and using makeup and jewellery to identify myself in a way that worked with this kind of clothing.

Lisa, you are in my brain with that last response. I agree with all points, except for your last paragraph.

Even though I don't love everything about my body, I don't wish to hide the fact that I have a feminine shape under my clothes. This kind of dressing does not speak to me at this point in my life, even though I am embracing more JFE silhouettes than I have in the past. And I would, in theory, be a prime candidate for this kind of dressing: artist who works with designers and architects, etc. But I bet if I tried on these outfits and posted them for feedback, I would not get many thumbs up.

However, after taking another look, I think the color palette was the real deal-killer for me. If it were in colors that appeal to me more, I could see it with a bit more open mind. But I really have a visceral "no" reaction to those pants in soul-sucking beige, especially paired with the white sneakers. The tops are fine.

Interesting conversation. Thanks for initiating it!

Im another one who thinks that the face is less noticeable in these outfits, precisely because the outfits are different and remarkable. I tend to think if you don't want the focus to be on your clothing but rather your face, you need to wear UNremarkable clothing. Most often, this translates to something normcore, that would blend in with what everyone else is wearing. OR you wear something classic and simple, like a LBD or white shirt.

These looks are, no question about it, striking (although I too would prefer a different color palette). They might not be conventionally flattering but they make a big statement. Would I wear them as is? Probably not, even if they were black. In something this oversized, without overt structure, I feel like a short, squat refrigerator. I agree with Angie's original statement in the blog post that these looks are not JFE, at least not on these models and certainly not on me. That said, I've seen it done well but I suspect this is a look that requires a certain innate bone structure to pull off well - good "angles" if you will -strong shoulder line, etc. Me? I'm too "round", even if I was 30 pounds lighter, because my bone structure isn't angular. you gotta work with the body you have...

The anonymous poster has my vote here. I couldn't put it better myself.

Just chiming back in to say there are some great comments on this thread. I love COS and these outfits seem to me like a variation of Eileen Fisher - no cling, minimal exposure. The colors don't appeal but the shape and cut spark interest.

For me personally, the body-hiding issue would not be the main problem with these outfits. I simply don't have the height to make these look good. Now, I think it's true that the whole point of these outfits is not to make the wearer to look good. It's to make a style statement. But if I wanted to do that, I wouldn't do it with something that makes me look even shorter than I already am. When you spend your life with that kind of disadvantage (and believe me, being short is a disadvantage in so many ways), you don't accentuate it. Ironically (given Gaylene's original questions), the only area in which being short is not a disadvantage is the "feminine charms" department -- that is, shortness doesn't necessarily make you less attractive to men.

I agree with Lisa that these outfits could work on a designer/art director/artist etc. -- although what looks cool and statement-y on a woman with a body like a coat rack often looks gaspingly hilarious on just about everybody else.

Az, I think these looks could be scaled down to fit us shorties. A little less length and volume would do the trick. The issue is finding the items!

Una, I agree that you could scale it down to make it not as overwhelming, and you could wear all the same colour to chop up the body less. However, there is absolutely no way a big, boxy top over wide, cropped pants is NOT going to make a woman -- any woman -- look shorter than she is!

Yes! I love COS clothes because of how they fight against convention. Your post captures a lot of my feelings about it.

Though, last night I got dressed to go to the ballet. I put on an artfully shapeless outfit, then looked in the mirror and just felt unattractive and boring, an almost-middle-aged woman in ill-fitting clothes. I added bright red lipstick and let my hair down and felt ok again, but it was a glimpse of how my feelings might change with time.

COS styles did come out of a specific recent fashion trend. I haven't followed the brand long enough to know how much they change with trends, but I'm curious how they'll shift when fashion moves back towards fitted clothes.

I do wish there were a COS store in San Francisco. I love the looks but they don't always work on me (Aziraphale is right - being short is a disadvantage - and I'm not stick-shaped so things don't always hang right). Mail order hasn't been very successful so I want to try them on in person.

I like Anon's thought about not having to have a philosophical crisis every time you go into your closet. And I respect the idea of being reasonably attractive and presentable. That's really enough.

I think the hard part is coming to agreement on 'reasonably.' So you get into these tug of wars. And whose standard prevails is a big deal and has all to do with an arena way beyond individual daily lives, getting to the grocery and even getting a date.

My dad was from the West Indies. One image that always comes to mind there is that of the Brit suffering in a wool suit, maintaining standards. That sounds like a lot of silliness, easy to dismiss as a craziness of yester-year, except the clothes were the tip of the iceberg. Underlying them was, in fact, sociopolitical war...

I have to add, in the old days, I was always prevented from going out in the street. I only went from house to house. Shopping was by appointment, etc. A sort of purdah. Why? Because I was a mark. People who dress for dinner, where the men wear white dinner jackets and that's considered casual, maybe wouldn't make it back home alive.

Thank you, Gaylene, for moving the conversation forward.

These looks excite my eye even though they're on some level off-putting. I think COS is onto something.

Astrid, since I don't live near a COS store your comment about the look of the women who shop there interested me. Can you describe?

Jaileen, your comment about dressing for your clients struck me as a wonderfully sensitive.

Thanks, everyone, for participating. Great comments. To the letter.

I just have to say how much I love this post. Gaylene, I've missed your keen insights! The first thing I thought of when I saw Angie's post was something along the lines of: "Hey great! Someone is showing outfits for people who prefer to keep themselves covered!" Lots of folks, for lots of reasons, feel safer, or better, or truer to their own personal values, or just more comfortable, in clothing that keeps them covered and drapes around them. Their clothing preferences aren't usually represented in fashion photography.

Laura, it's actually difficult to describe, it's more of a vibe than a certain look... I went and did a search and came across this blog which shows some pretty good representations of the things you can see on Berlin's streets. I pulled some pictures which I think more or less match the vibe I'm thinking of. The clothes might not be COS, but it's the same or at least a similar look. Most people I see there look like they shop the styles in moderation. You don't often see them wearing something where you'd think they're wearing head to toe COS.

Gaylene..., I must share my excitement for having just now found this thread! I posted earlier on Angie's blog post about having this silhouette come to me lately and quoted Laura's same passage that you did...love the questions you've brought to light. Okay, now I can go back and actually read and contemplate this more. Just wanted to say thanks in advance.

Love it, Astrid! Clean, casual, comfortable, confident, youthful-but-ageless, luxe. . . I love these looks.

Astrid, I like those looks and I think I'm responding to the "moderation". There is still some of that balance of a more fitted part plus the voluminous part. So the long full cardi is over, not leggings perhaps but restrained volume. The cropped wide trouser outfit is paired with a jacket that is slightly fitted at the waist.
It's hard to know where my eye is using "conventional" beauty as its bar, or whether the outfits seem to have better movement or wearability
so that they register as more, human, meaning, the body does have a shape, and flexion points and all that.

This may be way out there and a product of jet lag (sitting in Vienna airport waiting for flight home) but: Free-associating, some of the conversation around figure flattery and why other people should expect to see the outline of my body reminds me of the conversation around RBF or "Resting Bitch Face". As someone who possessed that before it was A Thing, I was often faced with commentary of which the friendlier version was "You should smile more". Why?

Laura, I like them too! For inspiration at least, even if I wouldn't personally wear them. Alright, I would probably feel right at home in #5 and #7.

And L'Abeille, very good point! I didn't think of that but I guess you can draw parallels. I don't have RBF as such, but I've been told a few times over the years that I often seem to be aloof or dissaproving. Which isn't my intention at all, it's just me not actively smiling.

It’s been a fascinating reading your responses. One of the things I love about this forum is how it makes me think about my instinctive responses to something I see here, especially when my response is “Oh, I don’t like that.” or “ There is no way I’d ever wear something like that!”

I started this thread because those COS outfits bothered me. As someone who had always worn “normal" tailored clothes and was firmly in the “wear what is flattering” camp. I wanted help figuring out the weird attraction those boxy, voluminous outfits held for me. Maybe it’s just, after years of dressing with the rules of figure flattery firmly planted in my head, the idea of wearing clothes which made it impossible to distinguish between a pear or an apple or an hourglass seemed rather liberating. But, as so many of you point out, making a decision to forgo conventional flattery comes with some serious baggage. Strange, isn’t it, how covering one’s body can be as controversial as showing it off.

Anyway, thank you Kaelyn, Peri, Unfrumped, Torontogirl, Echo, Aziraphale, Smittie, Crazyone, Lisa, Shevia, Janet, Denise, Suz, Lyn, Style Fan, Diana, Summer, Una, Greyscale, Rachylou, Laura, Robin, Astrid, Judy, L’Abeille —you are all such good sports about helping me figure out my crazy musings about fashions. Your responses have sparked all kinds of thoughts in my head that I’m going to take some time to mull through.

And thank you, Angie, for giving us a place to talk about clothes—not just as garments we put on our bodies, but as ways that we identify ourselves to others.

Maybe I’ll leave those COS pants alone, but those Kaliyama skirts have always interested me... And I'm totally smitten by those pictures Astrid posted.

I say go for the COS pants, Gaylene...:)....or some version of them, if you choose. When I did my recent baggy cropped jeans purchase, even though I had been attracted to them for some time, my first thought when I put them on was "Wow, can I really wear these??" Something in me had longed for them yet they were so different than what I was used to. AND at the same time, the freedom of movement and as you say, not being able to distinguish the body lines, felt liberating. But because at that moment so many of my jeans were uncomfortably tight due to a slight weight gain, practicality forced my hand to embrace my new purchase and just "go with it" and out of the house I went. I had a few days of doubt, but I haven't looked back since. You know the first rule of fashion here is to have fun, after all. It's been a fun disruption of convention for me. I support you in whatever is fun!