Quote:
Originally posted by shinerbock
I guess if I was truly elite, I'd have 2-3 different sets of clothing exclusively for different activities, but I'm not there yet. Maybe one day...
|
That's the spirit, sweetie! Reach for the stars and just maybe you'll get there one day
Meanwhile, just content yourself that you're displaying the famous Yankee frugality that would make a Brahmin Bostonian proud!
**********
I have to share the following from Michelle Lee's book, "Fashion Victims" (some of you boys might enjoy reading it if you haven't already)
But if a garment can create the illusion that it's functional as well, it's all the better. A part of us knows that fashion is frivolous, so we attempt to justify our participation in it by making our clothes seem useful. We're grasping at straws to rationalize making some of our unnecessary purchases. Shirts come with hoods whose sole purpose is to hang behind one's neck. The polar fleece vest was pitched as functional in a climbing-the-Alps way but if you really wanted something to keep you warm, wouldn't you give it sleeves? Cargo pants, with their multitude of pockets, seemed infinitely useful...imagine all the odds and ends you could carry. Countless designers, invluding Calvin Klein, Gucci and Versace, interpreted the military style for the runway, and mall retailers followed suit with their versions, like Abercrombie's Paratroopos and AE's Cargo Trek Pant. Ralph Lauren even produced an army-green cargo bikini with pockets at the hip (for toting beach grenades?). The fashion world's idealized image of the utilitarian future appears to involve lots of zippers, buckles, Velcro, pull closures, straps and strings - no matter if they actually serve a purpose or not.