I could go on a pretentious rant about what constitutes fashion and what doesn’t…but its too hot to sit here writing forever so I won’t.
Just know this:
There is fashion. And then there is suburban fashion. Which is…not really fashionable.
That being said, most suburban fashion comes from a pretty legitimate place. For the most part suburban fashion is high fashion, just 3 or 4 years after the fact.
To give you an example, here is a picture of Kate Moss wearing black tights, horizontal nautical stripes, and skinny jeans in April of 2006
Now if you reside around these parts you probably starting seeing a lot of skinny jeans in 2008. Black tights in 2009, and nautical stripes were huge around here last Summer.
That is the essence of suburban fashion. And there is nothing wrong with that.
To clarify, fashion, to me, is decided upon, created and cultivated by those actually employed in the high fashion industry. The best of the best of each season is then critiqued, discussed and covered by trained fashion journalists, modeled and worn by celebrities and other persons of influence and no matter what anyone says, Anna Wintour has the ultimate say.
There, now that we got that out of the way, I’m basically here today to skewer those brands and products that don’t have any basis in real fashion and yet somehow clueless suburbanites snatch them up like free monogrammed L.L. Bean totes at a little league baseball game.
For instance:
Well…monogrammed L.L. Bean totes, for starters. Or anything by The North Face.
The only fashion statement you are making by wearing The North Face is that you:
A. Have enough money to shell out $150 for a fleece.
B. Spend your free time camping and hiking.
If you’re trying to make any more of a statement than that by wearing The North Face you’re doing it wrong.
But The North Face is quality gear, for outdoorsy types and is not untasteful in the slightest…same with L.L. Bean so I can’t get too caught up on that.
What really grinds my gears are the brands and products (and eyesores) marketed illegitimately as fashionable, and then coveted blindly by misguided naive surburbanites as such.
PUBLIC OFFENDER #1
VERA BRADLEY
When have you ever seen a Vera Bradley anything covered by any reputable fashion source? You haven’t. Does Victoria Beckham sit front row at Chanel with her Vera Bradley key ring? Fuck no.
And that is because if Posh and her contemporaries wanted a bag that looked like it was stitched by Betsey Ross and her colonial quilting ilk they’d just invent a damn time machine.
And yet suburb-dwelling women everywhere would wipe their ass with Vera Bradley toilet paper if it matched their favorite print.
That being said, If pastel colors and epileptic-seizure-inducing prints are your thing…fine. But if you’re buying it to be fashionable… it’s not fine.
PUBLIC OFFENDER #2
LILY PULITZER
Everything I said about the pastel colors and seizure inducing prints.
Also.. pink & green.. fucking pink & green… fucking pink & green has thrown up on every single one of your collections since 1986 when pink & green was actually a relevant color combination.
Furthermore, there are only 2 acceptable occasions to wear Lily Pulitzer.
1. To a luau in fiji
2. To church on Easter with your big offensive pastel hat.
PUBLIC OFFENDER #3
JUDITH LEIBER
This owl purse (which by the way is only slightly larger than my fist) is over $2,000. It will not carry much but by golly you’ll be carrying a bedazzled owl around and what could be better than that feeling?
They infamously made fun of this in a great Sex & The City episode. Carrie Bradshaw didn’t want one either.
Now if someone were to give me one of these as a gift I probably wouldn’t turn it down, but that is because I’ve never owned an accessory that cost over a grand, or an accessory this completely useless!
Now that’s killing two birds with 1 rhinestone.
—-
But hey, what do I know? You keep on keepin’ on suburbanites. If you like ticky tacky accouterment, by all means have at it…
Just know that Anna will be judging you when you meet her at the gates of heaven.