2013-05-20T11:19:14-04:00 Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=hollie-moat Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Hollie Moat Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2256048 2012-12-07T19:00:00-05:00 2013-02-06T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
But, panic over, there's a new rumour in town and it's a big one. Namely that Anna Wintour, the iconic and terrifying in equal measures editor-in-chief of Vogue US will be stepping down from the title to take up a post as an ambassador for Obama's government.

It almost sounds too ridiculous to be true - a woman who essentially spends her life dictating to other women what colour shoe they should be wearing this season giving up her front row seat and being installed in a foreign country as a political diplomat. Particularly when you consider the two embassies she has been tipped for are London and Paris, both big Fashion cities. It's all a bit too convenient.

But Wintour of course was one of Obama's biggest fundraisers, adding some $40 million to his tally, and New York's Mayor Bloomberg has reportedly said the editor is high on the President's list of people to thank. And her reach is impressive - as arguably the most powerful woman fashion Wintour holds considerable influence over many celebrities (presumably winning over unruly politicians will be a doddle compared to taming Kanye) public figures and other ridiculously rich types. I must admit that I know precious little about the actual duties of an ambassador, but if the Ferrero Roche adverts are to be believed it largely consists of hosting parties and events - I doubt many other candidates could put the Met Ball on their resume.

So Wintour it appears is actually a totally valid choice for the post (if you don't mention that time PETA threw a dead raccoon onto her dinner plate to protest her love of wearing fur) the question is would she want to? As mentioned before, the suggested posts she'd occupy are in London and Paris, and Wintour is known not to be the greatest fan of her native Great Britain. In fact, before she landed the coveted US Vogue top job she was editor of its British edition, and insisted on continuing to live in New York throughout her tenure there, commuting back and forth.

And as an Editor, even if you don't believe the borderline cartoonish portrayal of her in The Devil Wears Prada, we've all heard the stories - the scorn for people not decked out in this season's Prada, the omission of influential designer Azzedine Alaïa's designs from her magazine because they had a fall out. Can you really go around behaving like that if you're an ambassador? Particularly if the press are on your case all the time specifically to pick up on things like this?

And whilst we doubt she will ever drop her Front Row status, surely a political career will mean less time for things like attending fashion shows on the arm of tennis player Roger Federer, a preferred activity of Wintour's.

But of course were Obama to make the offer and were Wintour to take it there is the delicious prospect of speculating who might get her old job at the reigns of the world's most famous fashion publication. Would Grace Coddington fancy a stab at it? (Very unlikely since she prefers the more creative duties but still) Would ex-Vogue Paris editor Carine Roitfeld step back into the Condè Nast fold? Would they go left-field and poach a rival, Harper Bazaar's Glenda Bailey or the New York Times' T magazine editor Deborah Needleman? Maybe they'll go for a totally new generation and elect Tavi Gevinson at the helm. Who knows. And for that reason, for the discussion it might bring, I very much hope to see Anna Wintour as an ambassador for the USA.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2269920 2012-12-07T19:00:00-05:00 2013-02-06T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
But, panic over, there's a new rumour in town and it's a big one. Namely that Anna Wintour, the iconic and terrifying in equal measures editor-in-chief of Vogue US will be stepping down from the title to take up a post as an ambassador for Obama's government.

It almost sounds too ridiculous to be true - a woman who essentially spends her life dictating to other women what colour shoe they should be wearing this season giving up her front row seat and being installed in a foreign country as a political diplomat. Particularly when you consider the two embassies she has been tipped for are London and Paris, both big Fashion cities. It's all a bit too convenient.

But Wintour of course was one of Obama's biggest fundraisers, adding some $40 million to his tally, and New York's Mayor Bloomberg has reportedly said the editor is high on the President's list of people to thank. And her reach is impressive - as arguably the most powerful woman fashion Wintour holds considerable influence over many celebrities (presumably winning over unruly politicians will be a doddle compared to taming Kanye) public figures and other ridiculously rich types. I must admit that I know precious little about the actual duties of an ambassador, but if the Ferrero Roche adverts are to be believed it largely consists of hosting parties and events - I doubt many other candidates could put the Met Ball on their resume.

So Wintour it appears is actually a totally valid choice for the post (if you don't mention that time PETA threw a dead raccoon onto her dinner plate to protest her love of wearing fur) the question is would she want to? As mentioned before, the suggested posts she'd occupy are in London and Paris, and Wintour is known not to be the greatest fan of her native Great Britain. In fact, before she landed the coveted US Vogue top job she was editor of its British edition, and insisted on continuing to live in New York throughout her tenure there, commuting back and forth.

And as an Editor, even if you don't believe the borderline cartoonish portrayal of her in The Devil Wears Prada, we've all heard the stories - the scorn for people not decked out in this season's Prada, the omission of influential designer Azzedine Alaïa's designs from her magazine because they had a fall out. Can you really go around behaving like that if you're an ambassador? Particularly if the press are on your case all the time specifically to pick up on things like this?

And whilst we doubt she will ever drop her Front Row status, surely a political career will mean less time for things like attending fashion shows on the arm of tennis player Roger Federer, a preferred activity of Wintour's.

But of course were Obama to make the offer and were Wintour to take it there is the delicious prospect of speculating who might get her old job at the reigns of the world's most famous fashion publication. Would Grace Coddington fancy a stab at it? (Very unlikely since she prefers the more creative duties but still) Would ex-Vogue Paris editor Carine Roitfeld step back into the Condè Nast fold? Would they go left-field and poach a rival, Harper Bazaar's Glenda Bailey or the New York Times' T magazine editor Deborah Needleman? Maybe they'll go for a totally new generation and elect Tavi Gevinson at the helm. Who knows. And for that reason, for the discussion it might bring, I very much hope to see Anna Wintour as an ambassador for the USA.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2050302 2012-10-31T13:32:53-04:00 2012-12-31T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Boys are different though, they love a bad guy. Given an option of Star Wars fancy dress I'd guess 8 out of 10 men would choose Boba Fett over Luke Skywalker (as a girl I'd be more attracted to a Han Solo but that's just personal taste).

Anyway I digress, what I mean to say is boys often prefer the bad guys because they look cooler but villainous attire is rarely a good sartorial choice. Until now, as current fashion darling Raf Simons proved with his last ever menswear show for Jil Sander, a perfect lesson in dressing with a dangerous edge without looking like you're dressed up for Halloween.

The music was the first clue -the theme to the movie Shame, which stars Michael Fassbender as emotionally bankrupt sex addict Brandon. Simons may now be dedicated to modernising classic femininity at Dior, but this show was a darker affair altogether, more likely to be worn by a leading man wielding a gun onscreen than by a beautiful starlet on the red carpet.
Which makes perfect sense - after all, whilst few men dream of attending premieres and sporting a tuxedo, the fantasy of living the reckless life of a charismatic cinematic villain remains as potent as ever.

And like all shady film characters, Simons' intent (by his own admission) was to get the audience wondering of his A/W 12 hero 'Who is he? What has he been doing?'

The evidence, i.e. the liberal use of slippery black fabrics, that serial killer favourite, would imply something sinister. After all, leather and rubber are materials often associated with homicide and S&M. But that's not to say it was in anything other than good taste, it is Raf Simons we're talking about here - a master of chic minimalism and exquisite detail. The tailoring of the suits was immaculate and the silhouettes beautifully suave, and this the attire of the likes of Dexter and Patrick Bateman, even Darth Vader (cold, murderous men with strength and a weird likability factor) rather than any two-bit baddie.

'A luxurious man who is daring with materials' is the way Simons describes his man for this season, but the resemblance to slick celluloid characters who are daring not only in the way they dress but the way they behave is where the real appeal lies. The suits, the glossy trench-coats, the use of leather on tops and sweaters as well as outerwear, the stark monochrome palette all ooze authority and a dangerous edge - just because we might not want to behave in the manner of Bateman, Dexter, Brandon et al, doesn't mean we can't borrow some of their sartorial panache. And if going the whole dark and perilous hog seems daunting, you could always just opt to go for the definitive accessory to this look, and one which Simons went wild for - black leather gloves.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1928518 2012-10-02T19:00:00-04:00 2012-12-02T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Is this outfit too dressy for the party you're going to? Is it not dressy enough? Can you reasonably wear something this revealing to work? Do I need to wear something warmer? (actually, this is never a problem in England, the answer is most certainly yes.)

Working in fashion actually makes these conundrums somewhat easier as basically anything goes so long as it's not drab but these past few weeks I have found myself blindsided by an image crisis I had not previously encountered - dressing after a break-up.

My boyfriend and I split three weeks ago and unlike previous break-ups, this time I was neither so nonchalant I barely noticed, or so devastated I didn't want to get out of my pyjamas. But all of a sudden standing in front of the wardrobe in the morning started giving me a massive headache.

It's like a fine tight-rope act I find, getting the balance between looking like you're neither trying too hard or have let yourself go. Falling into the trap of either of those two means people are going to start asking questions, I remember one tragic occasion when I was seventeen being inundated with cries of 'have you broke up with Jonathan' because I happened to be wearing my best skirt (he had of course dumped me the night before).

As a teenage girl, your painful break-up is the only thing you want to talk about, but as an adult you'd hope it's not, so the problem is that you need to basically look exactly the same as you did before. Only now you're trying extremely hard to do that, which inevitably puts the whole thing off balance.

Going to the pub on a Saturday night was a personal minefield because I'd never considered before what my clothes were saying about me- I've always been fond of wearing buttoned-up shirts and tiny skirts but now I was worried they made me look desperate.

The worst occasion was when I met up with the former boyfriend, I fretted over that outfit for a while. I was worried that if I wore anything mildly glamorous he would think I was trying to get back together with him and if I dressed down he would think I was too upset to make an effort. I did not want to be either of those people.

And annoyingly, for a while I had been working myself up to getting a fringe, something which has now had to be put on the back burner thanks to the cringe-worthy association of break-ups with terrible new hair-cuts. I read recently that Olivier Theyskens, whose own locks have just gone from long to short, had wanted to do it for a long time, but had put it off after being first fired by Nina Ricci, and then hired by Theory.

He didn't want people to see it as some dramatic gesture to do with change. He just felt like cutting his hair. Similarly, when I finally take the plunge and get the fringe which will no doubt look god awful on me, I want people to know that I did it because I wanted to see if a fringe suited me and not because I miss doing the Guardian crossword with my ex.

I'm aware that this may come across as a little shallow - and this is as much a plea to find that I'm not the only one as anything else. But isn't finding yourself suddenly single and alone a time when you're going to become hyper-aware of how you look to other people? Other people you previously had not considered you might need to meet?

In any case, for better or for worse, it has proved a marvellous distraction...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1913072 2012-09-25T12:14:37-04:00 2012-11-25T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
This was the first Milan Fashion Week since the passing of Anna Piaggi, the flamboyant and brilliant Vogue Italia editor who had been a significant presence at the shows (and hitting up the party scene with then-partner-in-crime Karl Lagerfeld) long before the writers, bloggers, models and celebrities in attendance this time around were even born.

But the woman famed for her garish yet curiously fabulous outfits and intimate relationships with all the best designers still managed to capture her fair share of the attention at the event, with a memorial service held on Friday at Milan's Palazzo Reale, the 200 guests in attendance counting Franca Sozanni, Carla Fendi, Manolo Blahnik, and Rosita Missoni.

Among the speakers was milliner Stephen Jones, who recalled a time when Piaggi called him up requesting some waterproof hats and when he enquired why, she responded 'Well, I can't be naked in the sauna.'

It was these pieces of whimsy that led the New York Times to lament the Piaggi was 'perhaps the last example of a fashion eccentric'. And whilst it's true the Piaggi, in all her multi-coloured fur and airport-scaring amount of jewellery glory, will never be replaced, it was fitting that on the very same day the fashion industry said goodbye to Piaggi, a sort of successor in terms of sentiment, approach to style and way with words emerged.

For at her ready-to-wear show on Friday, a triumph of lace-trimmed booty shorts, nude knee-high sandals, and cut-out kaftans slashed to the waist with a live performance from the ever-electric Beth Ditto, Donatella Versace without irony described her collection as 'subtle' to Women's Wear Daily. 'Subtle. Can you underline this' she explained to the industry bible.

If that is what she considers subtle, God knows what we can expect from the Italian diva in the future. I can't wait for any tips she might have on natural beauty.
Anna Piaggi would be proud I'm sure.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1863886 2012-09-07T07:21:19-04:00 2012-11-07T05:12:01-05:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
The term was coined by film critic Nathan Rabin after seeing Kirsten Dunst's performance in 2005 flop Elizabethtown, and is now the blanket term for those women in movies who are kooky and whimsical and teach the hero how to embrace life and adventure. It's been foisted on everyone from Scarlett Johansson to Natalie Portman (not poor old Lindsay Lohan though, who probably wishes it would be).

Fortunately for those of us in real-life who fail to live up to this Hollywood-spun criteria, some writers and actresses appear to be fighting back. In protest of this over-used cinematic trope, the heroines in a large number of recent hits have gone in the complete opposite direction. They're not cute, they're not misunderstood, they're not fiercely loyal or sweet or funny, they're just mean and quite horrible people.

It was the instigator of this whole mess who made me realise this - Kirsten Dunst, who has been photographed countless times this week in a series of killer outfits promoting her new film Bachelorette, in which she plays a grown-up mean girl who goes about carelessly ruining her friend's wedding. Her sidekicks are played by the ever sardonic Lizzie Caplan (Janice!!) and Isla Fisher who is as perky as usual, but in this instance it's because she's totally wired on cocaine. I've not seen the film, much to my frustration it hasn't actually been given a UK release date yet, but by all accounts this isn't so much a story of redemption so much as a look at how awful girls can really be.

And one of the summer's big success stories was Snow White and the Huntsman, where granted, drippy Kristen Stewart was cast as the heroine, but the real star of the show was Charlize Theron's sadistic Queen, who no doubt studio bosses knew perfectly well was going to be far more popular with anyone not a fourteen year old girl. Stewart's character has reportedly been dropped from the sequel (yes we all know there are other reason's but she obviously not worth hanging onto). Theron took on another bitchy anti-heroine role in this year's Young Adult, playing a main character's whose story revolves around going to her hometown to steal her first love away from his wife and kids.

And in the film that kicked off the girl star renaissance, Bridesmaids, the jokes were funny and the main character a total pain in the arse. I'm not entirely sure if Kirsten Wiig intended to be that irritating but she certainly was and the film is all the better for it.

Actresses like the surly but amazing Aubrey Plaza and Christina Hendricks, aka Queen of the sweetly delivered put-down are starting to be cast as leading ladies. The most talked about television show in America this year was Girls, and I'm sure even creator and star Lena Dunham would admit protagonist Hannah is totally someone you might end up slapping if you were friends with her in real life.

In film, like in fashion, trends come and go. There's no knowing when the Mean Girl might be knocked off her cinematic perch. But let's enjoy it for now, it's bad enough watching beautiful actresses onscreen - and when they're lovely characters you're only going to feel worse about yourself by the time the credits roll. But when they're bad? You can walk out of that cinema feeling a little superior. And bad girls rarely get the fairytale ending, even if their fate isn't necessarily doomed. And as anyone who's ever had their relationship compromised by too many viewings of The Notebook knows, that can only be a good thing...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1775389 2012-08-14T10:18:03-04:00 2012-10-14T05:12:02-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
It's rare that big is considered beautiful in fashion, but the runways of Autumn/Winter 12 were awash with oversized blazers, huge cocoon coats and wide trousers. Claire Waight Keller's second season at Chloé was one of the collections to embrace this new silhouette most enthusiastically with billowing, jewel-toned slouch pants and midi-skirts. Acne, the former jeans brand which now leads Scandinavia's impressive fashion renaissance also sent out roomy coats which could have concealed entire suitcases in their depths had they so wished, and at Balenciaga models appeared to have snatched their structured, almost futuristic jackets right off the back of a Stormtrooper.

But on the runway everything looks good. It's the translation of this trend into real life that makes it worthwhile. Here are three big reasons why if you're going to stick a toe in the world of trends this Winter, this is the one to pick...

1. You can double your wardrobe without buying anything new
Girls have been stealing their boyfriend's clothes for slouchy Sundays forever, now you can extend that to going out in public. And if you're single fear not, since this look works better with tweeds and heavy fabrics, dads and granddads are an even better target.

2. It makes you look thin
There are very few trends that will ever allow you to do this without the aid of a crash diet. And whilst wearing over-sized clothes is not about to give the impression you've shed three stone in a week, it's very difficult to tell apart the body of a model and the body of a normal person when it's clad in a coat the size of Texas.

3. When it gets cold you don't have to choose between warmth and style
I have spent several Winters trying to stuff a quilted Barbour jacket under every kind of coat imaginable in a bid not to catch frostbite whilst waiting for London's permanently delayed buses. This year I could probably comfortably fit a couple under there and still walk around shamelessly at Fashion Week.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1761619 2012-08-09T15:58:04-04:00 2012-10-11T11:18:32-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Unfortunately every year they publish a best dressed list and every year it makes me want to bash my head against the wall. Not because of fashion snobbery or anything but just because it literally doesn't make any sense. The one they released last week is a perfect case in point. Usually when a magazine compiles such a list they do so based on who has looked the best that year at various glamorous events, and whilst the winners have rarely chosen their own outfits it doesn't really matter. Emma Stone in a succession of brave and beautiful Lanvin gowns is an undeniable sartorial hit, whether it's the work of a stylist or not. She deserves to top a best-dressed list.

What is strange about the Vanity Fair list, is that they don't appear to have used that, or any method whatsoever into compiling their line-up. With one very obvious (and notable) exception, they appear to be have been picked completely at random. New York Magazine's fashion section The Cut likened it to throwing spaghetti at a wall.

Let's have a look. H.R. H Crown Princess Mary of Denmark is unrecognisable to most people and whilst appearing very well groomed, dresses in the Quality Street-hued evening dresses of a British Soap Awards attendee. Plus a tiara of course. Presumably that counts for a lot. Léa Seydoux is a very pretty elfin French actress (last seen walking off into the sunset with Owen Wilson in Midnight In Paris) but her minimal time in the spotlight makes her a strange choice ahead of equally well-dressed contemporaries Clemence Posey and Josephine de la Baume.

Charlotte Casiraghi is one of those Monaco royals who claims to not really care about clothes. Chinese actress Fan Bing Bing wears the couture pieces no one else will because they're impossible for real life. Alicia Keys should be a welcome addition because Vanity Fair is often put under criticism for not including enough black or Asian people, but hasn't made a ripple on the right side of the style pages in years (when the likes of Zoe Saldana and Solange Knowles constantly look spectacular), and Diane Kruger always looks fashion-forward yet somehow accessible, but then the law of averages meant they had to get one legitimate player in there somewhere.

The obvious exception I mentioned earlier is of course H.R.H The Duchess of Cambridge. Her inclusion was inevitable, and whilst I'm not about to start arguing that the former Kate Middleton isn't well-dressed (she always looks lovely and that McQueen wedding dress was iconic), the point is, that's not why we love her. Women don't run out and buy whatever she happens to be photographed in because they like what she is wearing. They do it because (and I say this without irony) she is so pretty and she seems so lovely and we were all dazzled by her and William's love story. If the Duchess was pictured poring over a copy of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto, sales of that would rocket. She does choose her wardrobe wisely, but take away the potency of her persona, and it's all pretty average. Similarly, Prince Harry makes the best dressed men list. Yes, the man is a national treasure, but he lives in crumpled chinos and was recently pictured proudly sporting an angry birds hat.

Let's be Fair (oh dear), there is good stuff to be found in the list - L'Uomo Vogue's colourfully rakish editor Robert Rabensteiner makes an appearance, as does the beautifully theatrical front-row fixture Michelle Harper, but you have to dig right down to find them. What I'm saying really, is the term 'Best Dressed List' actually accurate in any way for this compilation, would it not be more apt to title it 'People we would most like to be' or 'Future feature subjects we're hoping to score'.

I know in the grander scheme of world affairs these things are embarrassingly insignificant, but even within the fashion industry, are Best Dressed Lists themselves, in these days of super stylists and still warm from the runway red-carpet dressing even relevant? That, I think, is a bigger argument all together...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1753090 2012-08-07T15:58:04-04:00 2012-10-07T05:12:03-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Unfortunately every year they publish a best dressed list and every year it makes me want to bash my head against the wall. Not because of fashion snobbery or anything but just because it literally doesn't make any sense. The one they released last week is a perfect case in point. Usually when a magazine compiles such a list they do so based on who has looked the best that year at various glamorous events, and whilst the winners have rarely chosen their own outfits it doesn't really matter. Emma Stone in a succession of brave and beautiful Lanvin gowns is an undeniable sartorial hit, whether it's the work of a stylist or not. She deserves to top a best-dressed list.

What is strange about the Vanity Fair list, is that they don't appear to have used that, or any method whatsoever into compiling their line-up. With one very obvious (and notable) exception, they appear to be have been picked completely at random. New York Magazine's fashion section The Cut likened it to throwing spaghetti at a wall.

Let's have a look. H.R. H Crown Princess Mary of Denmark is unrecognisable to most people and whilst appearing very well groomed, dresses in the Quality Street-hued evening dresses of a British Soap Awards attendee. Plus a tiara of course. Presumably that counts for a lot. Léa Seydoux is a very pretty elfin French actress (last seen walking off into the sunset with Owen Wilson in Midnight In Paris) but her minimal time in the spotlight makes her a strange choice ahead of equally well-dressed contemporaries Clemence Posey and Josephine de la Baume.

Charlotte Casiraghi is one of those Monaco royals who claims to not really care about clothes. Chinese actress Fan Bing Bing wears the couture pieces no one else will because they're impossible for real life. Alicia Keys should be a welcome addition because Vanity Fair is often put under criticism for not including enough black or Asian people, but hasn't made a ripple on the right side of the style pages in years (when the likes of Zoe Saldana and Solange Knowles constantly look spectacular), and Diane Kruger always looks fashion-forward yet somehow accessible, but then the law of averages meant they had to get one legitimate player in there somewhere.

The obvious exception I mentioned earlier is of course H.R.H The Duchess of Cambridge. Her inclusion was inevitable, and whilst I'm not about to start arguing that the former Kate Middleton isn't well-dressed (she always looks lovely and that McQueen wedding dress was iconic), the point is, that's not why we love her. Women don't run out and buy whatever she happens to be photographed in because they like what she is wearing. They do it because (and I say this without irony) she is so pretty and she seems so lovely and we were all dazzled by her and William's love story. If the Duchess was pictured poring over a copy of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto, sales of that would rocket. She does choose her wardrobe wisely, but take away the potency of her persona, and it's all pretty average. Similarly, Prince Harry makes the best dressed men list. Yes, the man is a national treasure, but he lives in crumpled chinos and was recently pictured proudly sporting an angry birds hat.

Let's be Fair (oh dear), there is good stuff to be found in the list - L'Uomo Vogue's colourfully rakish editor Robert Rabensteiner makes an appearance, as does the beautifully theatrical front-row fixture Michelle Harper, but you have to dig right down to find them. What I'm saying really, is the term 'Best Dressed List' actually accurate in any way for this compilation, would it not be more apt to title it 'People we would most like to be' or 'Future feature subjects we're hoping to score'.

I know in the grander scheme of world affairs these things are embarrassingly insignificant, but even within the fashion industry, are Best Dressed Lists themselves, in these days of super stylists and still warm from the runway red-carpet dressing even relevant? That, I think, is a bigger argument all together...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1761368 2012-08-07T15:58:04-04:00 2012-10-11T11:18:38-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Unfortunately every year they publish a best dressed list and every year it makes me want to bash my head against the wall. Not because of fashion snobbery or anything but just because it literally doesn't make any sense. The one they released last week is a perfect case in point. Usually when a magazine compiles such a list they do so based on who has looked the best that year at various glamorous events, and whilst the winners have rarely chosen their own outfits it doesn't really matter. Emma Stone in a succession of brave and beautiful Lanvin gowns is an undeniable sartorial hit, whether it's the work of a stylist or not. She deserves to top a best-dressed list.

What is strange about the Vanity Fair list, is that they don't appear to have used that, or any method whatsoever into compiling their line-up. With one very obvious (and notable) exception, they appear to be have been picked completely at random. New York Magazine's fashion section The Cut likened it to throwing spaghetti at a wall.

Let's have a look. H.R. H Crown Princess Mary of Denmark is unrecognisable to most people and whilst appearing very well groomed, dresses in the Quality Street-hued evening dresses of a British Soap Awards attendee. Plus a tiara of course. Presumably that counts for a lot. Léa Seydoux is a very pretty elfin French actress (last seen walking off into the sunset with Owen Wilson in Midnight In Paris) but her minimal time in the spotlight makes her a strange choice ahead of equally well-dressed contemporaries Clemence Posey and Josephine de la Baume.

Charlotte Casiraghi is one of those Monaco royals who claims to not really care about clothes. Chinese actress Fan Bing Bing wears the couture pieces no one else will because they're impossible for real life. Alicia Keys should be a welcome addition because Vanity Fair is often put under criticism for not including enough black or Asian people, but hasn't made a ripple on the right side of the style pages in years (when the likes of Zoe Saldana and Solange Knowles constantly look spectacular), and Diane Kruger always looks fashion-forward yet somehow accessible, but then the law of averages meant they had to get one legitimate player in there somewhere.

The obvious exception I mentioned earlier is of course H.R.H The Duchess of Cambridge. Her inclusion was inevitable, and whilst I'm not about to start arguing that the former Kate Middleton isn't well-dressed (she always looks lovely and that McQueen wedding dress was iconic), the point is, that's not why we love her. Women don't run out and buy whatever she happens to be photographed in because they like what she is wearing. They do it because (and I say this without irony) she is so pretty and she seems so lovely and we were all dazzled by her and William's love story. If the Duchess was pictured poring over a copy of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto, sales of that would rocket. She does choose her wardrobe wisely, but take away the potency of her persona, and it's all pretty average. Similarly, Prince Harry makes the best dressed men list. Yes, the man is a national treasure, but he lives in crumpled chinos and was recently pictured proudly sporting an angry birds hat.

Let's be Fair (oh dear), there is good stuff to be found in the list - L'Uomo Vogue's colourfully rakish editor Robert Rabensteiner makes an appearance, as does the beautifully theatrical front-row fixture Michelle Harper, but you have to dig right down to find them. What I'm saying really, is the term 'Best Dressed List' actually accurate in any way for this compilation, would it not be more apt to title it 'People we would most like to be' or 'Future feature subjects we're hoping to score'.

I know in the grander scheme of world affairs these things are embarrassingly insignificant, but even within the fashion industry, are Best Dressed Lists themselves, in these days of super stylists and still warm from the runway red-carpet dressing even relevant? That, I think, is a bigger argument all together...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1761395 2012-08-07T15:58:04-04:00 2012-10-11T11:18:38-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/
Unfortunately every year they publish a best dressed list and every year it makes me want to bash my head against the wall. Not because of fashion snobbery or anything but just because it literally doesn't make any sense. The one they released last week is a perfect case in point. Usually when a magazine compiles such a list they do so based on who has looked the best that year at various glamorous events, and whilst the winners have rarely chosen their own outfits it doesn't really matter. Emma Stone in a succession of brave and beautiful Lanvin gowns is an undeniable sartorial hit, whether it's the work of a stylist or not. She deserves to top a best-dressed list.

What is strange about the Vanity Fair list, is that they don't appear to have used that, or any method whatsoever into compiling their line-up. With one very obvious (and notable) exception, they appear to be have been picked completely at random. New York Magazine's fashion section The Cut likened it to throwing spaghetti at a wall.

Let's have a look. H.R. H Crown Princess Mary of Denmark is unrecognisable to most people and whilst appearing very well groomed, dresses in the Quality Street-hued evening dresses of a British Soap Awards attendee. Plus a tiara of course. Presumably that counts for a lot. Léa Seydoux is a very pretty elfin French actress (last seen walking off into the sunset with Owen Wilson in Midnight In Paris) but her minimal time in the spotlight makes her a strange choice ahead of equally well-dressed contemporaries Clemence Posey and Josephine de la Baume.

Charlotte Casiraghi is one of those Monaco royals who claims to not really care about clothes. Chinese actress Fan Bing Bing wears the couture pieces no one else will because they're impossible for real life. Alicia Keys should be a welcome addition because Vanity Fair is often put under criticism for not including enough black or Asian people, but hasn't made a ripple on the right side of the style pages in years (when the likes of Zoe Saldana and Solange Knowles constantly look spectacular), and Diane Kruger always looks fashion-forward yet somehow accessible, but then the law of averages meant they had to get one legitimate player in there somewhere.

The obvious exception I mentioned earlier is of course H.R.H The Duchess of Cambridge. Her inclusion was inevitable, and whilst I'm not about to start arguing that the former Kate Middleton isn't well-dressed (she always looks lovely and that McQueen wedding dress was iconic), the point is, that's not why we love her. Women don't run out and buy whatever she happens to be photographed in because they like what she is wearing. They do it because (and I say this without irony) she is so pretty and she seems so lovely and we were all dazzled by her and William's love story. If the Duchess was pictured poring over a copy of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto, sales of that would rocket. She does choose her wardrobe wisely, but take away the potency of her persona, and it's all pretty average. Similarly, Prince Harry makes the best dressed men list. Yes, the man is a national treasure, but he lives in crumpled chinos and was recently pictured proudly sporting an angry birds hat.

Let's be Fair (oh dear), there is good stuff to be found in the list - L'Uomo Vogue's colourfully rakish editor Robert Rabensteiner makes an appearance, as does the beautifully theatrical front-row fixture Michelle Harper, but you have to dig right down to find them. What I'm saying really, is the term 'Best Dressed List' actually accurate in any way for this compilation, would it not be more apt to title it 'People we would most like to be' or 'Future feature subjects we're hoping to score'.

I know in the grander scheme of world affairs these things are embarrassingly insignificant, but even within the fashion industry, are Best Dressed Lists themselves, in these days of super stylists and still warm from the runway red-carpet dressing even relevant? That, I think, is a bigger argument all together...]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1682125 2012-07-18T07:22:26-04:00 2012-09-17T05:12:07-04:00

Hollie Moat http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hollie-moat/ I thought that I'd need to watch Clueless again to research this piece. I didn't. That's not say that I didn't dig out that glorious 1995 relic, just that when I did I practically talked along word for word. Because such is its lasting influence on girls of a certain age that its lines remain fiercely embedded in our brains in a way we fear wrinkles will one day be on our faces.

Cher Horowitz you see, is a goddess in the manner of Diane Kruger and Grace Jones - someone who we will always hold up in awe and would love to be but secretly fear we could never quite pull off. Cher may have been dizzy, and naïve and prone to making mistakes when it came to love and life and friendship, but she was also self-assured, devious, unapologetically materialistic yet curiously well-meaning, and with hair to die for. And we could learn a lot from her, when it comes to fashion at least. Honestly it's true. Here are just three stylish lessons we've picked up from the film...

1. Alaïa is like, a totally important designer
Dior, Prada, Yves Saint Laurent - oh well all recognise those big fashion names, but thanks to Clueless the lesser known but hugely influential Azzedine Alaïa gained appreciation from a whole new generation. Because after having absolutely mastered tight, curve-embracing dresses in the Eighties, by the mid-Nineties he was more of an insider's favourite. How many young fashion fans would have missed out on knowing about 'the King of cling' had Cher not been held up at gunpoint and tearfully begged her assailant not to make her lie on the floor because she was wearing an Alaïa and to ruin than dress would be sacrilege?

2. Always choose the guy with the classic wardrobe
In Clueless Cher chases after fashion-forward Christian, with his jaunty hats, tight tees and patterned jackets before having an epiphany (complete with a light-up fountain display) and realising that plaid shirt and jeans wearing Josh is the man she loves. He is of course, the right choice and looks suitably sharp in a tux at the end. But more importantly, today, decades later - Josh aka Paul Rudd is a major movie star who has retained his good looks, and no one even knows what happened to the actor who played Christian. Is he still working?

3. You can wear anything so long as someone credible designed it
Want to wear something outrageous but worried of being judged? Make sure it's by a big fashion name. Edina and Patsy in Absolutely Fabulous may be have been parodies with their protests of 'but it's Lacroix' but you'd be surprised how much the simple words 'it's by Balenciaga' changes most people's opinion. It even works on non-fashion fans. In Clueless, Cher comes downstairs in a tiny white slip and her clearly sartorially indifferent father barks 'What the hell is that?', 'A dress' replies our heroine, 'Says who' he retorts. 'Calvin Klein' shoots back Cher. She leaves the house in the dress (and a sheer jacket that in no way covers it).

4. Shopping is good for the brain
Upset from a row with her friend Tai (RIP Brittany Murphy), and all kinds of confused about her love life, Cher goes for a walk to clear her head. She's not making much progress until she spots a cute dress in a shop window and nips in to investigate. It's only once she resumes her stroll, new purchase in hand, she is able to make a breakthrough - she loves Josh and needs to be a better person. Of course.

5. You can't drive in platforms
You just can't. Cher tries, she ends up first driving on the wrong side of the road a la James Bond, and then failing her test. Fortunately. Because the film is perfect just the way it is, all failed motor skills and Tai's ultimate burn to Cher 'You're just a virgin. Who can't drive.' That one still stings.]]>