Evolution versus Acceptance - going back to the beginnng - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Dressing

Evolution versus Acceptance - going back to the beginnng

ironkurtin

Veteran

MaryK posted in an off-topic thread:
I tend to agree that chasing That Look That Made One Feel So Awesome
Back In The Day may not be the very best strategy for looking one's best
going forward.

This hit a nerve with me because after a few years of *really trying* to wear brighter colors and generally Austinize my style, I have realized that what I love to wear is still what I loved (but could not afford) back in the 90s, epitomized by:
- Helmut Lang
- Jil Sander
- Donna Karan
This translates into black, white, gray, and navy, minimalism combined with intelligent drape, elegantly done with special attention to fabric and hand feel and how things work with the body. It means simple, uniformlike dressing distinguished by beautiful quality in materials and design - from simple white tshirt to black dresses and tunics worn with slim jeans and black boots.

I am now actively seeking to acquire "vintage" items from these designers because, even 20 years later, they make me happy. I'm pairing them with newer items, but to me, these things stand the test of time and they thrill me.

So is this reverse evolution, or wisdom? Am I repeating what Made Me Feel So Awesome in a stupid way, or embracing my bliss? I'm leaning toward bliss, but maybe I should change my username to TrappedInThe90s...

Dressing

53 replies

Latest reply was from mrseccentric

catgirl

Veteran

I was just pondering the same thing, Dana! Because it feels like trends go so fast, and I am at a point where I love what I love and feel caught between staying "modern" and staying true to myself. Is neon already passé? Must I wear pastels? Does my vest obsession seem foolishly dated?

Mo

(website)

Veteran

Possibly a bit of both? This is a style that is almost timeless, to me, though. The things you describe do not automatically put a picture of the 90's in my mind, although they may epitomize your 90's. Whereas the Ally McBeal long jacket/short skirt is very 90's to most I would say.

K. Period.

Veteran

Wisdom. I think the key is that you love avant garde pieces. (Nod to a certain super awesome stylist) and since those pieces don't date, your style doesn't date. It takes a sensitive eye to recognize what does and doesn't make the cut for avant garde, but I think all would agree you have it. So embrace your bliss!

fleur_avenue

I've wondered that same thing about myself. At a time when other girls were spending all their money on clothes and hair, I had no money to speak of and was super insecure about my body anyway, so I wore baggy hand-me downs and boys clothes. Then when I started getting fit and feeling great and having a little more money to spend, I noticed that I was buying all the things I wished I could have bought/worn in the 90s. So, some of it had to go, but some of it was and is just my style. So, my advice is to pair your vintage 90s finds with modern accents. Head to toe vintage doesn't work well. It makes people look older and out of touch. But, one large vintage piece or a couple of smaller vintage pieces with modern pieces works extremely well, and so do modern pieces with vintage flair, maybe even by those same designers that you loved.

MsMary

Veteran

I think it's pretty important to keep one's wardrobe reasonably updated. As we've discussed, there are black boots and then there are black boots. I think it's completely reasonable to have, say, a "uniform" of white shirts, jeans, and black boots for one's entire adult life. Or, say, navy skirts, black pumps, and white silk blouses for the office. However, if one is going to go that route I think it's important to make sure the cut of those outfits is current and modern so that one doesn't look like one has been wearing the same actual garments for 20-30-40 years.

Why do I think that's important? Hmmm... sitting here thinking about it, I think it's because wearing the same actual garments for 20 or more years ages one (are you really old enough to have owned that wide-collared white shirt for 35 years?) and also makes one seem like one is out of touch with one's surroundings (haven't you noticed that your shirt is, like, super dated in its style? And also starting to get kind of worn at the cuffs and elbows?).

So I'd say it's kind of perilous to stock up on vintage items from Back in the Day unless you are very good indeed at styling them in a way that makes them look fresh rather than just behind the times.

Or... .what fleur_avenue said!

Deborah

Veteran

IK for the record, from what I have seen on your outfits, I find your look current and very appealing. And I would suggest you have quite a strong style signature. The clothing that you are attracted to is IMHO quite timeless and classic and you seem to wear it with a modern edge (think of your footwear). I am going to say your approach is wise. You know what you like, it works for you and you feel good. As you know I have also done the 'trying colours' thing and I have too have reverted back to my neutrals. I think the most stylish people are those who work out and wear what works for and suits them.

ironkurtin

Veteran

Well, MaryK, I guess I will look behind the times and dated. I only wish I had owned a classic cashmere peacoat for 20 years. As far as that goes, my father still brings out his classic alpaca overcoat he purchased in grad school. It's in beautiful shape and so soft. Does it make him look old, or just smart?

MsMary

Veteran

Like I said, I cosign with fleur_avenue. The classica alpaca overcoat, worn with current clothing and shoes... fab fab fab. Ditto classic cashmere peacoat. Ditto an awesome Helmut Lang jacket worn with some current pieces.

Head to toe clothing from 20-plus years ago, worn together and styled the same way it was styled back in the day? Nope... I'm thinking that would indeed look behind the times and dated. Not, I hasten to add, that I have ever seen you in anything that would approach such a look.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

High five, Dana. I was fashion-oblivious in the 90s. But I love, love, love vintage Jil Sander, Helmut Lang, and Donna Karan. That's what I meant by "strict" in my style descriptor post. Not that I have ever worn or owned a single one of these items, by the way. But I do love the overall aesthetic.

Still, on the whole I'm with Mary. There are updated versions of these items. And wearing the vintage head-to-toe would tend to make most people look less than fab.

Having said that, I also agree with Debs -- you have a very distinctive style signature and know what you enjoy. So if this is what works best for you, why not continue to enjoy it?

Angie

(website)

Fashion Stylist

I'm chiming in from my phone so excuse the typos.

I love the idea of rekindling the style of wardrobe items that made you feel amazing in the past, IK. I do that all the time myself. But they have to look current, in which case the modern incarnation might be better. I worry that the vintage items you are after will look dated. It happens fairly frequently with those who purchase at thrift stores regularly. It can all look so dated.

Anyway. Proceed with caution. Just like thrifters should proceed with caution.

mrseccentric

(website)

Veteran

oh i love these kids of topics

i think there's excellent arguments on both sides, and i also think that it's very individual as well. It depends on one's personal style as well as how interested you are in projecting a certain persona of being 'up to date'.

I'm very very particular about my clothes and my style is, indeed, eccentric. I've gone years on end not buying any new clothing because i could not find anything i could stand to wear. I've never followed trends, if i do buy something on trend it's because i'd wear it anyways and halleluljah! someone actually produced it!! Generally, it's a strong echo of a favorite piece from back in the day.

On the whole, i don't care what anyone else thinks of what i wear, and i'm in the fortunate position where i don't have to worry either. It seems to me, Dana, that you have just as strong a sense of your own style and, as Mo and K.Period point out, your avant garde style persona is tied much less loosely to the whole 'trends' cycle. And you're in a creative industry where uniqueness is more appreciated. So i'd say don't worry!!!! heehee, but consider the source

oh lord MaryK you brought back a weird memory!!! i was at a lecture in Berkeley a few years ago and saw this guy (around 65) wearing a velour track suit, merlot colored, you know like they had back in the late 1970's? Which was weird enough, but stranger still was the fact that the thing was in pristine shape. All nite i was wondering - did he buy a couple of dozen when they were knew, certain they'd be perfect always? Did he find a bunch of dead stock someplace?

Or does that track suit have a moth-eaten, mouldy doppelganger in his attic? Trippy indeed!!! have fun, steph

catgirl

Veteran

I am also someone who has a uniform or would if I could - jeans and boots and some kind of edgy topper. It's remarkable how consistent my taste (though not my style) has been and how much it ties in with my body type. My straying from the path has mostly been when I was new to YLF and determined to try everything I saw! Fluid fit has always been a love for me; puffy sleeves and pastels have always been a poison eye. I have been coveting leather jackets since I was a teenager. I'm not sure where that leaves me in the modern spectrum.

ironkurtin

Veteran

Ok, so, a question. When does "dated" become emblematic of an era and therefore vintage?

If I wore a classic Donna Karan cold shoulder dress today, would everyone say "dated"! Or would they understand it's a vintage piece with history and some significance?

Actually, I really don't care what they think. I think it's beautiful, and that's what matters... I guess I truly don't worry about looking dated so long as I don't look cheap. : )

MsMary

Veteran

LOL, Steph! And your post reminded me of my soon-to-be former husband, Mr. K. He had a thing for Beatle boots, whether or not they were in style. (He is a little on the short side and liked the heels.) He would buy multiple pairs in ever color whenever he found them so he had multiple pair of brand new Beatle boots, still in their boxes, stacked up in his closet.

Maybe Track Suit Guy was the same way!

Helena

Veteran

That is a great question. I tend to think as long as you are not wearing all the same actual pieces as 20 years ago, staying with the look is okay. For me, I am noticing for the most part I feel best today in the same things I felt best in when I was 25 ... neutrals, tailored pieces, darker-washed jeans, a black turtleneck.

I think Suz said on her blog something along the lines that her style evolution brought her back to many of her old 'uniforms' except that now she feels great in them. For me, I think usually I'm better off updating the pieces of my tried-and-true rather than trying something altogether new.

Deborah

Veteran

Simply, I think it's about what matters to you? Is it important to be up to date with trends and fashion forward? For some that isn't the goal. It doesn't mean you can't look fab.

MsMary

Veteran

IK, I think part of it relates to the "no backsies" rule. And it is also making me have a greater understanding and appreciation of the "no backsies rule." If you are old enough to have worn that fab Donna Karan dress the first time around, then proceed with extreme caution because it's hard to tell whether you are wearing "a vintage piece with history and some significance," or whether you have been stuck in a fashion time warp for lo, these 30-plus years. If you're 25 years old, at least it's a given that you are wearing it as a vintage piece, you know?

catgirl

Veteran

Just to add my loves are not that specific; I will always love the next new leather jacket or distressed jeans. So in that sense I am just updating a formula, rather than preserving a past look intact.

cciele

Veteran

I think MaryK has a point -- unfortunately, it does have to do with age, in part. However, the "head-to-toe" rule of thumb applies too. A few vintage pieces mixed with modern pieces does not look dated to my eye. A vintage dress, worn with shoes, bag, topper and in particular, makeup and hairstyle, of the same era will look dated -- but on a young person, it would look retro.

Of course, again, this is just my opinion. Since we're here to have fun with fashion, go for what's in your heart!

catgirl

Veteran

IK, the dated vs vintage was one of the first questions I posted on YLF!

Sorry to be so chatty - I have a lovely day off and you all are my lunch date!

ironkurtin

Veteran

What if I wore it back then and looked great, and I've taken really good care of myself, so I am wearing it now?

I just don't see how certain iconic/classic items can date in a bad way. If I had purchased a black Chanel cashmere jacket back then in my 20s, I would like to think I could still wear it from that moment until the grave. Sure, the lapel would be more or less hip depending on current trends, but the provenance would still be... well... Chanel!

So, since I could not *afford* a black Chanel cashmere jacket then, and I can now, and I find The One in good condition, and I wear it and love it... well... that to me is not being dated, it's fashion karma.

Vildy

Veteran

I strongly feel that your taste in clothing will not look dated - left behind.
It will look like a choice. I'm curious what percentage of people you will encounter would be likely to identify the year your clothing was produced?
If they could, I'm betting at least as many would be envious and admiring as might be puzzled.

leopardluxe

Veteran

IK, I think you nailed it on the head with this statement:

"Actually, I really don't care what they think. I think it's beautiful,
and that's what matters... I guess I truly don't worry about looking
dated so long as I don't look cheap. : )"

That is a good philosophy to subscribe to, imho, when considering buying and wearing vintage. The fact that you're an active part of this community and stylish overall leads me to believe acquiring coveted pieces from a past era won't make it so you run the risk of looking like you never advanced past the 90's.

As someone who regularly wears vintage (and still has pieces I've owned since the 70's/80s AND still wear them) all I can say is pulling it off is really all in the attitude.

MsMary

Veteran

I guess the question is whether you believe there is such a thing as a "classic, iconic item." I don't really believe in that concept. We've discussed this before, and shapes and lengths and lapel widths and so on all change over time. Chanel hasn't been making the exact same jacket all these years. So certainly it's awesome to have a vintage Chanel jacket but to most people it's only going to look like a slightly-out-of-date Chanel-style jacket. You know what I mean?

ironkurtin

Veteran

MaryK, I guess I don't. But then I hang out with so few people who know or care about Chanel it's kinda moot. Like that episode of the Simpsons where Mrge finds a Chanel suit at the off-brand wholesaler. If someone look at me in my Helmut Lang coat from the 90s, what I mostly get is, "That coat is beautiful!" In their heads they may be thinking, "how frightfully dated!" But I doubt it.

deb

Veteran

OK, so what do I do with the bootcuts hanging in my closet? They look great on me, I get many compliments when I wear them, but according to a previous thread, the new bootcuts are updated and are not 'quite' the same. If I wear them will I look dated?

Vildy

Veteran

Deb, I think you are likely to wear the bootcuts with your other "regular" contemporary clothes and people who see them are just going to be envious and curious how you found a "better" pair than they have.

rabbit

Veteran

Hmm... but if you were in Paris, would you still be wearing an iconic well made designer jacket from an earlier year? Is chasing the current at the expense of the long lasting a fairly North American obsession?

I mean my first thought is who really cares if you look dated, as long as it still looks good on you. But obviously people care, and people influence others to care, and retailers care very very much.

Is it the fear that you won't know fashion has moved in new directions? What if you've done your homework, considered your options, and still choose predominantly era specific dressing?

I mean I have friends into the Rockabilly scene who dress from 1950's Oklahoma down to their tweezed eyebrows and red lips. Yes they are younger than when the original look was being sported, but they are now in their late 40's, not spring chickens. They also work in online design and are very very aware of the newest developments in tech and social media. They might listen to Bob Wills but also that so-obscure-it's-only-played-on-their-friends--web-radio-station brand new band.

I do really understand how you can't go backward. In contemporary art you can only participate in the conversation going on during your time, not an earlier one, but that doesn't mean you can't heavily reference and reinterpret the past from the lens of the present.

This all might be my bias speaking. In a line up of women in street wear, I might pick out Mrs. E as the coolest one, solely based on dress. I look at images of your outfits, Mrs. E, and I think 'freedom'. I might see the most stylishly dressed person standing next to you, and think 'stylish, chic, fashionable, current' but not necessarily 'free.'

rabbit

Veteran

IK - I'd definitely be in the 'that coat is beautiful!' crowd. Partly because I think I have some of the same design preferences you do, and partly because I wouldn't know better

12