Formulaic is better than uniform, Caro. You're right.

And Mary's right - she doesn't appear to be saving up for a couple of scarves. She has so many of them!! Wow. I guess that is where she chooses to put her wardrobe dollars as she mentioned she got her sweater for for 10 Euros.

Love this discussion (Gaylene thank you for starting it). MaiTai's style does not appeal to me, and, apropos the topic, I do not find it particularly restrained. I do think that some of these concepts turn into goals in themselves, whereas I think they are more useful as tools, with the goal being a style that suits the person getting dressed.

In my link to the semi-controversial Passage des Perles post about "strict/plus strict" dressing, the blogger did mention that it's a look many N American women would find "boring."

And since so many YLF members come here to learn how to incorporate trends and/or get ideas for how to mix things up, it makes sense restrained dressing is unappealing.

However, I *do* wear a lot of looks with a monochromatic, tonal, or very low contrast base -- it's probably 5/7 days that happens. I've noticed a lot of YLF members enjoy wearing outfits heavy on the horizontal lines/cuts across the body, while I don't go there too often.

I don't care if I'm labeled boring, but I do care if I'm unable to find inspiration. [Photo 1 is from this year, Photos 2-3 from a few winters back but I'm still wearing it though the underlayer T is dead.]

Even though restrained dressing is only part of my clothing style, I agree with Gaylene's point here:

>>But it's interesting that we all have such a different idea about what would qualify as "restrained" dressing. To me, restraint does not mean invisible or unexciting or monotone; after all, who would embrace a style with those synonyms.

Given how many "maximalist" bloggers have oodles of money to drop on clothes and/or tons of free luxury goods handed over to them in exchange for the publicity, I can't judge MaiTai for showcasing her goods without judging them as well.

What I *can* say is that I think her style is actually *more* accessible than that of many fantasy-life bloggers.

I and some of the women I know who tend to wear lots of plain-jane neutrals, "classic" hair, and oft-boring footwear (by choice, really!) have either copied or used her looks as jumping-off points. Our scarves are in the $10-50 dollar range and our basics around that point too. If we don't carry it off as well as she does at least we can console ourselves with the fact it's only the money, honey that stops us.

My one SAHM friend lives in a hot climate most of the year and loved the "scarf as tank top/dress neckline embellishment":
http://www.maitaispicturebook......arres.html

I've used my bargain pleated Macy's scarf to go for this "flower" look (also the very loose starting point for my vintage blue scarf + espresso cords and sweater look in Photos 2-3):
http://www.maitaispicturebook......-knot.html

ETA to add a few more examples of what I consider restrained (the dress is a custom wool jersey worn with only an inexpensive vintage shell ring...the waistband is a removable tube)

Now this is interesting -- Vix, I would call your scarf outfits restrained or at least more restrained than Mai Tai's. Is it simply because of the dark background? I don't think so, though that has something to do with it. Hmmm.

I'm interested also in your comment about horizontal lines. So do you typically aim for a column of colour?

I don't think a monochromatic look is boring by definition. It can be sophisticated and beautiful and restful to the eye.

I agree with Suz. I don't think monochromatic is boring - it can be rich & interesting as well as sophisticated & restful.

For this look to appeal to me it has to include something a little unexpected otherwise it's like a showroom look - nice furniture but who lives here?

Vix, you can give all of us a master class in how to make restraint interesting and sophisticated. I'm also thinking that restrained dressing doesn't seem to have as many fans on this forum as do other styles, at least judging from many of the comments that I'm reading. It's also interesting that some see it as an "older" style or a "formulaic" approach.

Caro and Suz, I'm with you in thinking monotone dressing can be highly interesting, but am I the only one who finds it feels like I am in a costume when I do it?

Shevia, your comment on using the concepts in particular style as tools instead of seeing the style itself as a goal is a interesting idea; I'd love to hear you elaborate on that point.

Suz and Gaylene --

I'm not sure which of your comments has me more surprised, ha. A statement that you'd consider my examples *more* restrained than MaiTai? A reaction that I can pull off my sometime-goal of making restrained dressing seem natural to my unrestrained personality?

My head is exploding, but I thank you both for offering new things to mull over re the topic. I added another photo in my prior post of a grey wool jersey dress worn without color accents etc...curious as whether people see it as restrained (I do).

Gaylene --

I agree the fans of restrained looks may be a small contingent. The "older" or "old money" comments struck me too, as did Caro's about wanting to see something interesting lest it be a "showroom" look.

If I compare restrained dressing to others on the classic continuum -- like Southern Prep, which I find a very "young" albeit expensive look no matter how aged the wearer -- I like that the look conveys some sense of luxury, control ("showroom!") , or maturity.

Generally the days I feel drawn to that look are days I want to convey that...though I'm not polished re hair, nails, makeup so I don't get beyond a certain level.

Suz --

Yes, I often wear a column of color (or one of very low-contrast colors). The whole "vertical lines lengthen" thing aside, it feels more right to me more of the time. Also I agree with you about monochromatic looks.

I force myself to wear horizontal breaks and higher contrast looks because they are more visually dynamic and sometimes I want that energy. These also tend to be looks I photograph/share because of the aforementioned quality!

Vix, I don't see any reason why restrained dressing has to be associated with a quiet, introverted personality. I've got several European friends and relatives that favor the restrained approach to dressing, but I'd never, in my wildest dreams, call some of them "restrained" personalities. Their exuberance and wit is evident in their choice of accessories--a bangle, a scarf, a bold lip color--but, most often, the twinkle in their eyes and the lift in their step.

This is such an intelligent and interesting discussion. I identify with a restrained style and after spending much time exploring my preferences I am ok with that. I think personality and in my case, body type, plays a part in preferring a style that doesn't draw too much attention. I am tall and broad and fight the feeling and insecurities of feeling "large" even though I have never been overweight. Add too many colors, accessories or statements and I feel like I'm a "hot mess" as Suz so eloquently puts it. Simple classic pieces in harmonious colors make me feel more elegant and I like that feeling!

Carole, I'm so glad you wandered over to this thread. However, naughty/too humble you for not adding photos of your own looks.

As I said on your thread:

"I know that Gaylene and I share a belief that restrained doesn't mean lack of color-color or prints/patterns or detail -- other forum members interpret it differently. To me #6 is stunning on you as well as "restrained" due to the silhouettes and harmony with your personal coloring."

Photos of Carole doing what I would call restrained dressing, and doing it amazingly well here:

http://youlookfab.com/welookfa.....out-myself

I agree that Carole looks (beautifully) restrained.

I think, then, it has something to do with harmony. Harmony in the choice of clothing and accessories, obviously, but also some harmony with the person who is wearing it.

I think the way the question is posed biases the answers, as it makes it sound like restraint or minimalism is always desirable or something to aspire to. I don't think it is.

As others have mentioned, just as bold colours or lots of details on an outfit would look OTT and costumey on some people, a restrained style would also look costumey on some people because it would not match their personalities at all.

And fit, IMO, isn't something that can or should be compromised, regardless of one's personal style. A highly busy style or outfit never excuses poor fit in my eyes, so the idea that those who dess in a more restrained manner must have better tailored clothing is a myth to me. NOTHING looks good if it is ill-fitting.

I guess what I am getting at is that differences between people are a great thing. An OTT sense of style does not automatically mean many of the things implied in this thread ("tarty" or tacky or gaudy or overly young or ill-fitting or too tight/short/exposed). Dressing well is always "hard", regardless of one's natural style because being good at anything takes practice. Restraint may be safer for many people, but to me it actually seems easier. Most importantly, there is no right or wrong answer, nor is one style automatically better than another.

Such a great, almost week-old post. How did I miss this?!! Nothing brilliant to add as it's the wee hours of the morning, but lots to mull over. Thank you Gaylene. Restraint is something I'm going for, and it was interesting to see how people defined it differently.

I agree with Claire, this has been a very interesting read! I aim for a simple, paired down look, but I think it is very difficult to achieve. Reading this thread gave more insight indeed.