Urban Outfitters in Charge, of Our Hopes, and Our Dreams...

Hey, I'm back. Back with yet another Urban Outfitters post, brought to you today by those timeless style icons, the cast of Saved by the Bell and the slightly weaker Saved by the Bell rip-off I used to watch on Saturday mornings, California Dreams (the theme song promised "Surfer dudes with attitude" and they certainly delivered.) Also, some Charles in Charge thrown in.

You know, my last Urban Outfitters post was so popular that I got over thirty responses- thirty of which I had to delete because they were all Japanese porn-related--- from those lured in, I can only assume, by the loaded combination of words I had inadvertantly made part of the post, words that included pussy/naked/Japanese/model. Will it happen again? Also, why are people posting on my blog when there is plenty of real pornography on the internet? Anyway, more creative posts are coming, but for now, this is easy and stuff.
First of all....


Ohmygod!!!!!! An oversized purple or teal washed silk blouse!!!! Ohmygod! This is what my mother wore in 1991. It is everything that is bad about the early 90's- the boxy shapelessness, the bright yet somehow passive color, the washed silk. You know, whilst recently watching an episode of Golden Girls, I zeroed in on Bea Arthur's outfit, and realized I need only add leggings to make it completely indistinguishable from that of a sexy youngster of today. I could totally see that teal blouse on Dorothy. In a peacock blue (also on the website), on Blanche.


Yeah. The first and last are elastic waist skirts, "refashioned" (a pocket's been added!!!!) by those at Urban Outfitters. These skirts are not even Saved By the Bell, the first couple of seasons. They are 1996 Saved by the Bell. The New Class, people. As for the sleeveless chambray blouse tucked into the skirts, it just goes to show that we learn nothing from the mistakes we have made in history. Not that I was going to make a Holocaust reference and thought better of it or anything.

Actually, I have nothing against this skirt itself (the top is another story) except the fact that all these full, high-waisted skirts so popular these days (and I love full, high-waisted skirts) are all made so fucking short! They look beyond infantile! Suddenly, it's super frumpy to have anything longer than knee length! On ebay, vintage sellers are destroying vintage dresses by hemming them into awkward minis! Then everyone's going to end up hating all their clothes because they are so weirdly short when hemlines end up dropping again!

Okay, this skirt on the right I do have something against. It's very Jessie Spano, though, so worth being in this post.















And lastly, these pants. These high-waisted chambray pants. These pants you can probably buy in a Sunday coupon book for $9.99, right next to the oh-so-lifelike sleeping premature baby doll named Baby Chriseee that costs only six installments of $29.99. If I was the stylist for Urban Oufitters, the pants would be paired with a holiday sweater and the model would be cradling that doll, and everything would be snug in its natural environment.

PS: Edited to add for no reason! Horrifying photos of baby dolls from the internets! Aughhhh! If there is any more proof that we need feminism to be a part of people's lives, it is the fact that women actually purchase these dolls.

More Hope 4 the New Year: Accessories

Remember how I mentioned that Blossom hats were going to come back? And crushed velvet? And how I'm sick of face paint as a hipster accessory?

Well, here is hipter-cum-model Ikeline Stange or something like that wearing both those things. Probably her John Lennon glasses are stashed in her JNCOs, out of the frame of the photo.

Speaking of which, here are a few more trends I've railed against and I'm hoping we'll see the end of this new year, this time featuring Iekielene or however you spell it, who seems to know a thing or two about wearing seventeen trends at once:

Pocohontas bands! I can imagine the feeling of giddy pleasure one may have had after tying a leather shoelace around one's head back in 2006, but wouldn't you feel really foolish by 2009? Shouldn't some of the allure be lost by now? Now that Lindsay Lohan has done it?






Huge glasses! This blog was pratically started to make fun of people wearing these glasses, and it was started in February of 2006! 2006! How come neon is already practically dead but people are still wearing these damn glasses?

Lastly, the bowler hat.

We've seen enough of this hat, whether you are wearing it with an oversized 80's blouse and a vest, or a sloppy layered scarf, or a crushed velvet 90's dress and a vest, or an oversized v-neck and a vest, or have a sunflower glued to it. 

We don't need accessories. They don't hold up our pants or cover up our genitals. Rarely does a bowler hat keep the head warm. So wearing a douchey, overplayed accessory is that much worse because you don't need to place it on your head, guys. 

Okay, after this I promise I'm not going to talk about Blossom awhile. Maybe a couple days. I might switch to Clarissa Explains it All. Or Samantha Mathis in Pump of the Volume. We'll see.

PS:

Samantha Mathis in Pump up the Volume:

Also, I'm not, like, against accessories or something. I'm just saying that, since they're not exactly foundational when it comes to wardrobes, they should be the first to go when they get extremely overplayed/were never cute in the first place. (See the "Too Much" tag for more.)

It's That Talentless Girl from The Hills! And She Looks Like Blossom!*

Here is a great example of a trend overload, on immensely talented performer/nose job recipient Ashley Tisdale. A bad trend overload. Now that all those trends that used to be reserved for the hipster set, from the "Indian inspired" Minnetonkas and Pocohantas bands to an overuse of scarves to oversized glasses to old lady purses, to huge men's v-neck t-shirts, have been taken up by all the preppy girls, the only way you can even tell a hipster from a standard mall JAP these days is the Mystic tan, am I right?

Anyway, Ashley has on a myriad of hipster-to-normal trends, starting with an ugly oversized t-shirt that is supposed to look like vintage but was probably $60 at Diesel. Also, a horribly fugly Chanel "vintage" style bag. Again, this mom-purse trend with the long straps is real hot. One of my fashion pet peeves, as I have mentioned many times before, is a carrying a bag that is not appropriate for the look. Usually, ladies tote around elaborate leather purses with lots of hardware and pair them with their sundresses or Juicy suits or whatever. This is no exception. I know in her case, it's supposed to look funky, but really it looks tired, besides being totally inappropriate. Then the colored jean, which we are all sick off. And finally, fringed Uggs! Uggs are out (sort of) and Minnatonkas are in so we'll just combine them!

At first thought, I didn't see Ashley, I saw her feet, and I thought she was someone with that "tree" disease as seen on TLC that perhaps some of us have been horrified by. Speaking of which, TLC should rename itself "The Sideshow Network" because every single thing on it is like, "Two Ton Dad!" "Two Ton Mom!" "The Littlest People in the World!" "The Man Who's Arms Exploded!" I mean, I'm not saying I don't watch these specials on occasion, but it's interesting to note that the freak show is still alive and well, albeit with a thin veneer of "education" over it.

Alright, I'm done talking about that. now, moving on to someone from The Hills! A lesser person from The Hills! Whitney Port! Who's that? Some ho!


Auggghhhh!!! It's so 90's! Remember how often things were selectively plaid all the time in the 90's? Maybe you had a jean jacket with plaid flannel sleeves and a hood? Or a pair of overalls with a plaid pocket? Well, we all know that this has been the year that plaid and flannel have surged out of control because we're all so ready for the grunge era #2, so plaid patchwork is probably coming soon.


Just look at it! It's so shapelessly short and boxy. Is this a new garment or is it from 1992? Is she wearing friendship bracelets, too??? Seriously, are those John Lennon glasses with the purple lenses going to come back soon? I had a pair of those I thought were really cool and this one extremely cold winter when I visited my family on the east coast my mother and I got our picture in the paper and I was wearing them because I thought it would keep the cold out of my face and my grandfather framed the photo even though I looked strangely deformed in it. Probably due largely in part to the glasses.

Here are some predictions for Fall '09:

*I tried to think of a different title because I feel I mention Blossom too much on this blog, and haven't I used this reference before? Probably.

The Validity of the Skort

I'm sorry I have to do another post about the early 90's, but, like a train wreck, I cannot help but watch from the sidelines with fascinated horror. I recently tried looking for shorts on eBay (not recommended) because my fav pair of red sailor shorts from H&M perished in the fire, and I really need a solid pair of shorts for the summer, even though shorts are something I pretty much decided I could never wear for the years 1999-2005, having too many bad memories of bulky, riding-up denim, and horrible flashbacks of my grave enemy, the skort. But then I got back on the shorts train- not to be confused with the shorts train wreck I'm writing about here.

Anyway, what's important is that ten million pairs of early to mid 90's rompers, onesies, and general Blossom-wear popped up, all going for ridic prices from those special hipster eBay sellers who advertise their shit in trendy ways and somehow get people to pay exhorbitant prices for things that they OBVIOUSLY got at a thrift store for 1.99. This type of thing bugs me to no end because, basically, people cannot manage to go down to their local thrift store and find something themselves for that price (or find it on eBay for the same price, but in a less glam-looking auction) but are willing to pay $75 (literally some of this stuff went for that much, like the cotton-poly floral dress at top left) for something because someone else styled it for them. Once they see it advertised on some lank girl with oxford shoes they realize how trendy and COOL it is to wear something floral denim, and bid up a storm.

It is reflective of some horrible lack of creativity and eye for clothing and how to wear it in general, but I guess that's why there are boutique stores and stylists and fancy displays- because people need to be told what to wear, and how to wear it. And, that, my friends, is what trends are- they gently let people know that it's cute and new all over again to wear a flowy skort, and then everyone mindlessly pays $60 for a flowy skort because they've seen other people do it, and nobody ever questions the validity of the skort! Do you think anybody would have been caught dead in a rayon floral romper from 1994 two years ago? Or even high waisted anything?

It's just so weird to me how things get popular only when saturation has reached a certain level, and it becomes acceptable (but not too acceptable, because then it's, like, boring!!!! (Speaking of which, who else has noticed that the neon trend has already reached saturation point and no one on the Face Hunter would be caught dead in it anymore? (Here's a tip: beige is the word.)))

Ugly UO Items of the Whatever: Where is My Snap-Crotch Bodysuit?

I recently looked at my passport photo circa 1994, and I'm wearing a maroon thermal babydoll dress and this vest I got at the famed, now defunct Esprit outlet in South City (was it in South City? I don't know) that was made up of a sort of patchworky, men's tie style fabric in navy, grayish blue and maroon. It wasn't that ugly, actually, for 1994. I also accessorized it with a tiny fake cameo necklace. It was so Clarissa Explains It All!

Anyway, nobody is going to buy this fugly denim vest for $48. Not just because it's shapeless, and kind of acid washed, but because I SAW THIS DAMN VEST AT GOODWILL FOR $2 AND NOBODY WANTED IT.

This "Bird Printed Bianca Tunic" is a real gem. Now that everything is this weird length where it's too short to be a dress but too long to be a top, no one know what to do any more. Urban has solved this by just making it a skanky dress, but it's not like she looks alluring. She looks overmedicated (my god, the fast paced life of an Urban Outfitters model!) , and so do those sad little birds. Even though I've spoke in the past of how I'm sick of birds being stuck on everything, at least birds in general are pleasing to the eye. But they're not pleasing if they're lavender and stuck haphazardly on something teal. This whole look is just so depressing.

First of all, why does everything have to created in the murkiest of all colors? Why is everyone so afraid to wear, I don't know, red? Personally, I have trouble going out in public if I am wearing a gray sweater and jeans, and feel depressed and drab and "What would Dolly Parton think?" and all that, but finding cute things in a bright color that's not mustard nowadays is nearly impossible.

But let's get down to the business at hand, the Lux Andover Onepiece, a "menswear-inspired romper." Kind of like my menswear inspired Esprit vest. In fact, I think they may have actually copied this from a "vintage" 1994 design. I can just imagine the Urban designers staying up late at night, pausing stills from Clarissa Explains It All and Blossom to see just how the sunflower is placed on Mayim Bialik's (Side note: she once bought a 1940's suit at my mother's clothing store- so glamorous!) hat or studying the boxy shape of Melissa Joan Hart's crop top, velvet choker, and shorts combo. Anyway, the point is, this is hideous and has NO SHAPE whatsoever. It's like, the waist is kind of a drop waist, but not really, and it's kind of loose, but not really. It is, however, 100% stupid looking.

What is with the hair on these models? It looks like they combed through it with Vaseline. I guess they are trying to be edgy. Well, there is nothing edgier than this butter yellow, Oversized Hoodie Vest, a real steal for something acrylic at $72. You know how I said I felt depressed when I had to wear boring clothes and neutral colors? Well, I would rather rock that onesie in the previous picture than be forced to wear this. Aside from the obvious fact that short-sleeved hoodies are stupid, the sloppy, floppy fit and gaping armholes are just so fug.

Looking at this makes me want to, much like Mayim Bialik, don a fitted 40's suit like this and do up my hair and try to avoid this "pajamas as daywear" look as much as possible.

Lastly, this Bias Stripe Sweater, which they claim is "retro", which I guess means "late 80's." But really this reminds me more of those filthy poncho pullover things that hippies wear all the time. God do I hate those. They always look like really itchy, and like they have never been washed, and always come in colors like "dishwater and gray." Anyway, this sweater, like the one above, is of the slouchy and gaping acrylic-blend variety. I think the picture speaks for itself, and it's saying, "I am so depressed and I have Vaseline in my hair and am wearing a sweater that's color is described as 'purple combo.'"

It's times like this I think the war against sacks is really unwinnable. I can just imagine the photographer on these shoots, screaming, "Okay, look lank. Lanker! Do you hear me, I said LANK!"

All That's Missing is the Blossom Hat

The denim vest trend- or, the attempted denim vest trend, as no one in real life actually wears denim vests, is bad enough. But when you pair your denim vest with another item- the floral rayon dress that comes from the same time period (1995) and evokes the middle school teacher, that takes the look into new territory. You might think this picture was from 1996, even, if you didn't spot that little hangy heart necklace from Urban Outfitters or whatever, 2007ing up the outfit. Why stop at the vest, anyway? How about a pair of wraparound Oakleys and some Airwalks? A faux-Victorian choker? Something crushed velvet or washable silk? What about a nice floppy denim hat with a big sunflower on the brim? When are those going to come back?

Ugly UO Item of the Day: A Touch of Blossom

Shockingly, this Kimchi & Blue Jacquard Animal Vest has been reduced from $42 to 11.99. For a long time, designers, and whatever you call the people who invent the clothes for Urban Outfitters, have been trying to make vests happen. And, by "a while", I mean literally like four or five years. And they haven't caught on, because they're pretty stupid, and serve no purpose. They look great in a dandy-ish, three piece suit-ish kind of way, or maybe if you're Patti Smith, but the vest is not an easy item to pull off.

This vest, however, screams "BLOSSOM!" to me. It's "poly-nylon jacquard" and I'm not sure what exactly that is, but it sounds very unpleasant. All in all, this belongs on the floor of Ross. Doesn't it look like one of those poly suits they have at Ross for 24.99? Have I mentioned that the print is snakeskin? Oh man, that makes it even worse!