![]() |
I'm beginning to think that Nikki Minaj and Lady
Gaga have cornered the market on "new" when it
comes to clothing. And that is not good.
|
I don't read fashion magazines month to month. I just buy them twice a year when they really matter - spring and fall. Same monthly price, but I get twice the magazine, and learn all I need to know about what's new for the coming season.
Usually among each seasons' latest thing, there is one decade that influences the requisite retro look. In this month's Elle, you will see significant tribute to no less than four decades - maybe five - amongst the copious trends. There is the flapper/art deco look (1920s), the "lady like look," no doubt inspired by Mad Men mania (1950s), the Edie (think Little, Sedgwick) look (1960s), and the interminable influence of the 1970s on shoes (although the return of a sensibly soled high heel draws a sigh of relief de moi). If I really wanted to push it, I could add the tribute to 1990s minimalism. But I'm gonna give it the benefit of the doubt and call it a stretch.
Were designers drunk all winter and just at the last minute threw a bunch of tried and true vintage smatterings out there to see what sticks? Is the return of color before the true end of the recession forcing fashion houses to play it safe with familiar looks? Or have I seen it all rehashed so many times because I'm so old that nothing seems new anymore?










