Pink Rock Candy – Top fashion trends, news and shopping of 2010

Today, I wore one of my new Twinkle by Wenlan Spring 2010 pieces. I tweeted about it, but the picture was , in my very self-critical opinion, horrendous.

I’ve loved the ‘Oil and Water’ print since I saw it being made— a lot of Wenlan’s prints are created by the design team and then sent to a fabric manufacturer. There’s something about the busy nature of the print that easily gets me through a gray day like today.

You can’t see the back, but it’s made of black and white striped fine gauge knit, adding an extra bit of pizazz without needing sequins, studs, chains, grommets, or any other glimmering details. It is the lack of necessity for such pieces of flare that make me love Twinkle as much as I do.

On a completely different but strangely connected note, there was an article on Fashionista about telling the world you’re wearing a sample.

“I’ve spotted at least three people proudly sporting their ‘Sample’ label. At ThreeAsFour’s show at Milk, a man took off his jacket to reveal a sample label pinned inside; a model threw a tantrum in sample-stamped shoes, and while waiting in line for Hakaan I noticed ‘Sample’ written across the back of of a woman’s army jacket in Sharpie,” writes Britt Aboutaleb.

It’s a known fact in the fashion industry many people wear loaned samples. It is also known that just  as many people, including models and interns, get “paid” in samples instead of cold hard cash. I’m not exempt from this process. While working at Twinkle, I had a clothing allowance and was able to convert my hundreds of labored hours into something similar to Twinkle Bucks to purchase samples or order pieces from the new season. This tunic is one of the many pieces I ordered using my allowance from Twinkle.

The question on Fashionista was whether it is “cool” to publicize that you’re wearing a sample?

In my opinion, there is no need to do so. It isn’t as if you’re sharing a great sale tip with a friend. I don’t think it’s a gold star on my shopping record to say I’m wearing a sample. I’d also like to note, I only used my allowance on items I would have actually purchased, not simply because I was jonesing for a Twinkle sample.

Samples are everywhere, and you aren’t in an exclusive club or making a unique sartorial statement simply because you’re wearing one. Think about it, a sample sale is called a SAMPLE sale for a reason, and there are hundreds of them each season. Not to mention, those hundreds of sample sales are attended by hundreds of people. I see no novelty in said situation.

That being said, I, obviously, have nothing against samples and will continue to wear them and trade labor for them as I see fit, but I won’t be leaving the sample tag in, sorry!

What’s your take on showing the world you’re wearing a sample?

p.s. Follow me on Twitter

Left to right: Gina Garrubbo, Mary Scherpe, Carl Hoyt, Jessica Schroeder, Imram Amed, and Diane Pernet

Ethics…

I had a philosophy class about ethics, once, and my professor was promptly fired for calling another professor a douchebag and telling him to do Oedipal things to his mother. Needless, to say that class was more interesting than helpful. The next couple of years, ethics in terms of Journalism and Public Relations had been beaten into my brain, however the “Navigating Ethics Pane” at the Independent Fashion Bloggers Evolving Influence conference I attended on February 15, left me struggling internally.

“To be a good PR professional, you have to, first, be a good journalist,” is the mantra of my many public relations professors.

“Never, NEVER accept gifts from people or brands you are writing about. A journalist is supposed to remain unbiased,” tout my journalism professors all having either worked at Newsday, The New York Times or both.

“Getting free stuff for writing a blog post is like the barter system,” exclaims a semi-scandalous blogger at the IFB conference. What can only be described as a rant by said blogger, went downhill fast after making slightly anti-Semitic generalizations about the Jewish people (read about it here).

None of this information is helpful in the blogging ethics situation.

Even the discussion had between the panelist of the “Navigating Ethics Panel” at the blogging conference— The New York Times‘ Carl Hoyt (also, a Pultizer Prize winning journalist), What I Wore’s Jessica Schroeder, BlogHer’s Gina Garrubbo, The Business of Fashion’s Imram Amed, A Shaded View of Fashion’s Diane Pernet, Still in Berlin’s Mary Scherpe, and jewelery designer/blogger Wendy Brandes as moderator— left things quite unresolved. Continue Reading ‘What Are Blogging Ethics?’

Blake Lively and Elettra Wiedemann front row at DVF’s S/S 2010 show.

Celebrities are like evil step-children to the fashion industry. You deal with them for the sake of your spouse— the public, in fashion’s case—but you generally wish they would simply go away. I’ve met and been around my fair share of “listed” people, from A-list to D-list, but seeing and meeting them is very underwhelming to me, and compared to meeting designers or editors, the excitement is negligible. So, when I read “How Much Fashion Brands Pay For Celebrities to Sit in Their Front Rows” on Fashionista.com, the outrage at the rates paid to celebs for sitting front row almost outweighed the bemusement of the post.

Here, on Pink Rock Candy, my celeb name dropping is few and far between. There are a few starlets whom I believe actually love and appreciate fashion the way industry insiders and even us bloggers do, and I respect them for that. The males of the celeb-world are a different story complete, but suffice it to say, they are generally chalked up to eye candy.

Being informed that some celebs are getting paid almost six figures to sit their meticulously toned tushes in a front row seat many people, fashion lovers and socialites alike, would give anything to fill, kills me.

I know public relations enough to know celebrities are a necessary evil, but charging a fashion brand to enjoy it’s latest work in one of the best seats in the house is a bit excessive. To me, that process is almost as ignorant as it would have been to charge Michelangelo to create a sculpture for you, as if it was an honor for him.

This may come as a surprise to many celebrities, but their presence at fashion events though often, and unfortunately, is a necessity to gain public notoriety, is anything but an honor.

As my little brother once said of homework, “It’s a have to do, not a want to do.”

What do you think of celebrities charging fashion brands to grace the front rows with their presence?

Photo Credit: Style.com

On Friday, there was a article published on The Guardian entitled, “Why I hate fashion,” in which the writer, Tanya Gold, speaks about her journey from being fashionably absorbed to leading a fashion-free existence.

As I read the article I could hear Meryl Streep as Miranda Priestly spit, “This… stuff?” before she launches into her rant about Andy Sachs’ “lumpy blue sweater.”

It wasn’t the linking of a sixteen-year-old girl’s unfortunate death to her high heels or Gold’s insinuation that the industry I love is oppressive that infuriated me. It was her reasoning for escaping what she remarks is “one of the ultimate evils in the universe.”

“The oddest thing rescued me from fashion. It was that I got fat,” says Gold.

Not only, is there an entire article bashing an industry that is inescapable to those who choose to live in modern society— Mark Twain once said, “Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society”— but she insinuated that those who aren’t skinny and are in turn, “fat,” cannot participate in “fashion,” or more precisely, be fashionable.

Are there as many high fashion designers who cater to the size-10-and-up crowd as there are who cater to their smaller counter parts? Most definitely, not. That, however, doesn’t mean larger women, and men, for that matter, are completely excluded from the cycle and can’t be fashionable. Quite frankly, I think the argument that her weight played a part in her escape from this strange meta-world called Fashion is idiotic, even knowing how high fashion designers cater to the lithe. If you truly think about it, there are more people in the world who can’t afford to purchase from high fashion designers than there are people who are “fat,” and when it comes to mass retailers and fast fashion, the scales are infinitely more balanced (no pun intended).

So, Miss Gold, I must channel Miranda Priestly again when I say, though you may view yourself as “fat,” you, I’m assuming, have yet to joined a nudist community and still wear and buy, from time to time, clothes/beauty products/home goods— all things that are influenced by fashion trends— making it “sort of comical how you think that you’ve made a choice that exempts you from the fashion industry.”

People— editors, bloggers, and I— have talking a lot about quality over quantity when it comes to purchasing new clothes. Miss Elle from Broke & Beautiful even wrote a wonderful list of quality necessities every girl needs in their wardrobe. This, however, has made me think a lot about the word quality.

Quality (noun) – qual·i·ty: a) degree of excellence [grade];  b) superiority in kind [merchandise of quality] Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Of course there is a technical definition of quality, but quality truly means a plethora of different things to different people, especially when it comes to clothing and accessories.

Is a quality pair of shoes only a pair of shoes handmade using Italian leather, or is it just a pair of leather shoes? Do quality shoes actually have to be leather or made of natural fabrics? Can they be made of synthetic fabrics? How much should a pair of quality shoes cost? What brands are quality? What if the shoes are technically “trendy” and won’t be worn within the next year but are handmade Italian leather shoes from a luxury brand?

There are so many questions only answerable by the individual.

Many people think the more expensive the item, the better the quality, but is it smarter to pay $90 for a T by Alexander Wang shirt than $25 for a similar shirt from American Apparel?

After having worked in the fashion industry, I’ve learned not to base the grade of an item on cost. I’ve seen people throw away almost $600 in less than 30 minutes at sample sales because the low prices lead them to overindulge. Depending on the sample sale, $600 can equate two or 20+ garments — the sample sale I’m speaking of was similar to the latter. Though, yes, the clothes were extremely marked down, and, yes, they were well-made, silk, designer garments, I highly doubt most of the clothes purchased would be worn often, if at all.

Does quality also include wearability? Does an item’s novelty decrease it’s qualitative worth?

What about quality between different designers, or well-known designers vs. unknown designers? New vs. vintage?

There are so many variables hindering me from figuring out my definition, as of yet. I want to say that not only do quality garments have to be well-made and preferably made of natural fiber fabrics, but also they should be timeless silhouetted items I would be able to wear for years to come, barring any weight fluctuations. I don’t particularly subscribe to one or a group of supreme designer(s), but if I had the choice between to similar garments equally priced but one was a brand I had heard of and another an unknown brand, I would choose the former— better the devil you know than the devil you don’t. All that being said, I know my definition of quality probably changes on a case-to-case basis, especially when price comes into play.

So, what is quality to you?