Thursday, February 26, 2009

Fashion: Spring 2009



That's Michelle on the cover of Vogue. The caption:
THE FIRST LADY THE WORLD'S BEEN WAITING FOR. Can't wait to read the story.

Well, the country may be a mess, the world staggering in recession, but let me tell you. The spring clothes in Vogue! OMG! We haven't seen a more beautiful collection in a decade, maybe several decades.

The fabrics, the lines, simply indescribable. It's the March 2009 issue, so if you're not skin-phobic*, take a peak. Leaf through it. Lovely.

I informed FD about the spring fashions, told him that this is really exciting, it really is, and although it's unlikely anyone can really afford to buy anything, and many of the models (meaning the clothes) this year show a ton of skin, our lives will be immeasurably better, very soon, just knowing that there are beautiful duds in the world in which people who are privileged still spend money.

#4 Son walks into the kitchen during my soliloquy.

"What shows a ton of skin?"

therapydoc

*Many cultures really frown upon semi-nudity and exposure of the skin outside of the bedroom. I'm not making a comment here one way or another, just warning that if you have these more modest sensitivities, Vogue is not for you. I blush, seriously, what can I say.

10 comments:

Jack said...

Skin phobic- now there is a new term, or have I just not read the DSMIV as closely as I should have. ;)

varun said...

nice range!!Shawls and Scarves

Lisa Marie said...

Yikes. Skin is in? I'm in trouble ;)

Funny that your son honed in on that part of the conversation!

Syd said...

I think that showing a ton of skin is a nice thing too. Well...maybe not a ton but a few pounds will do.

Margo said...

Saw the cover and the Obamarms, and decided to pump a little iron before I crack the new Vogue cover. I love visiting you... never know what I'm going to get!

Retriever said...

The comments of the people waiting to be laid off in my office about our First Lady's vanity are not printable. She should set a more frugal example. She reminds me of those ministers driving Cadillacs when their impoverished congregations are scraping by. They may be willing to tolerate the hypocrisy, but my friends are not. The fashion industry's loathsome excesses are salt in the wound to people who are out of work.

therapydoc said...

True, true, but we could look at the media that presents the value as entertainment, eye candy. We can't afford to buy, but looking is free.

But if we HAVE to have these things, then that defines us (see the post above) and not in a good way, not for these times, for sure.

I know someone who works for an online store, a clothing store, and in December, the chain's other stores all lost money. The online store did very well.

Conclusion? People are ashamed to be seen buying. But they'll still buy.

blognut said...

A little skin is okay with me, arms, legs, and the like are okay too. I'm not so much inclined to like the outfits that leave 3-5 inches of stomach bare between the end of the shirt and the top of the pants or skirt. That's tolerable at the pool, but not so much at the mall. Just sayin' - that's my point of view on it.

Adrian DeVore said...

Michelle Obama looks great on the Vogue cover because she takes excellent care of herself. More power to her!

cb said...

Don't they say that hemlines rise and fall in inverse proportion to how the economy is faring? So more skin, less cloth..