Formal Wear

As the holidays approach, we often find an event or two on our calendars that require us to step it up a notch or two (or three) satorially-speaking. I have spoken at length in the past about Fighting Frump over the holidays, and I encourage you to review this post called “Ho, Ho, Ho, I Swear!”

Gals, don’t get all screamy at me because I must say it: dressing up requires some make-up and attention to your hair and nails! Consider this part of the PeaceBang Orthodox Doctrine. Unless you are so naturally glowing and beautiful and super-famous for being an Earth Mother, like Jane Goodall, you just won’t look right. You’ll look undone. Trust me, my doves.

Let’s look at some photos together, shall we? They’re all from the Glamour Women of the Year Awards of November 10th, and I’m pretty sure no clergyperson was in attendance. I could be wrong. However, Jezebel.com was kind enough to post these photos of celebrities that I’m going to use to make various points (& you can click on each image to make it bigger):

First of all, here’s Jane. I mean, she’s carrying a stuffed monkey as an accessory, so she’s clearly a maverick. This whole “I -just-left-the-dojo” look totally works on her, because she spends the majority of her time in the jungle hanging with primates. She’s a saint.

If you or I show up looking like this, though, we’re probably just going to look messy. I’m just guessing. Well, I’m not just guessing, actually, ’cause I seen it with my own eyes too many times.

Yes, I know that actress Natalie Portman is stunning and thirty years younger than most of us, but this is a beautiful example of minimalist make-up that looks smashing with a formal gown. You simply cannot wear formal black and go bare-faced. And just ’cause I know you want to know, here’s a link to my post on the Perfect Neutral Lip. (So what do you think of her gown?)

Here is the magnificent Hillary Clinton in chocolate brown. Her hair and make-up are fabulous. Look and learn:

Bright lips, glowing skin, soft, full hair (harder to get that than it looks, right? Spritz some volumizer on your roots, use a thickening gel if you have fine hair, and blow dry with a round brush ), a gorgeous, rich-toned necklace framing her face — love it.

What I don’t love so much is the cut and fit of this gown:

Shiny material highlights sloppy fit at bosom, and frankly, she needs a better bra. It’s not about sex, it’s about fit. Clumped up material at waist makes her look thick around the middle and the gathering at the seams there also adds volume, so why is that sash even there? And why are we seeing exposed elbow? PeaceBang has serious disapproval on this particular detail. Elbows are rarely attractive. Why in the world would one design a dress that not only revealed them, but highlighted them? Oh, for a proper 3/4 length sleeve, at least!

But do you see how those minor flaws don’t matter because she’s so luminous? If Hill had walked in bare-faced with flat hair, it would have been Frumparama. Her posture helps, too. And look to thine own, pigeons, because PeaceBang has been noticing some slouchy clergy out there lately. Shoulders back.

Here’s the former vampire slayer, Sarah Michelle Gellar, showing us that one simple accessory can bring dazzle to a very simple outfit. Do you LOVE that bracelet? Yum!!!

So her nails are all wrong and she’s wearing too heavy a stocking and shoe for that gown, but she’s Buffy the Vampire Slayer, she can do goth details and get away with it.

Granted, Ms. Gellar’s gown is probably couture and costs a bajillion dollars, but my point is that IF your face, hair and nails are done, you can wear something tailored, add one eye-catching, major piece of dazzle, and be done with it. I get invited to so few really dressy events that I wear a black suit, high heels, a silk camisole of some kind (you only see a peek of it) and a huge pair of really nice, blingy earrings. I (very occasionally) pay $20 to get my hair done, do dramatic make-up, and I’m set. I do own a couple of nice clutch purses and those add to the illusion that I’m dressed in formal wear, when all I’ve done is add height and drama to a classic suit.

I’m telling you, all you need is heels, great posture, bigger hair than usual and some bling and you’re 80% of the way there.

3 Replies to “Formal Wear”

  1. Yay! Formalwear post!

    Jane Goodall rocked the monkey, though her clothes made her look like everybody’s wacky old aunt.

    Not a fan of Natalie Portman’s dress.

    I think Hillary was trying to do an earth-mother thing and more or less pulled it off.

    I hadn’t even noticed Buffy’s bracelet, but you’re right, it’s awesome.

    CC

  2. Natalie Portman is young and very beautiful. And because of this, instead of the (distinctly odd) dress making her look a fright, we think, ‘Goodness, what an odd dress she’s wearing’. It looks like there’s a cool sparkly dress and she’s got a weird sort of coat on over the top.

    Hillary looks…absolutely stunning. Even with the crazy shiny dress. It wasn’t so much the shine that got me, that could have been ok. It was (like you said) the appalling cut. We all make wardrobe gaffes. And in the main she is, no matter your views on her politics or whatever-you-fancy, a woman who knows that image counts for something. Often a big something. See her official headshot in the campaign, for example. Very tasteful, very…conservative, almost: pearls (I thought the earrings were a touch too big, myself), dark suit, flag pin, black and white photo.
    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/officialheadshot/

    (Barack Obama, so far as I can tell, is similarly clever. And his image fitted best with having very few posed pictures. There are plenty of photos, but very few official ones, and fewer that have the ‘posed’ feel about them. More ‘President of the People’ than aloof leader, which was exactly what he needed to project.

    Peacebang, are you ever going to do a post on how image can lie to us? Possibly that one’s not within your remit. Oh well. If not, maybe I’ll have a go.

  3. PS: The lying was not in reference to Obama or Clinton, incidentally, but they did spark me off with the idea of how image can manipulate us into thinking certain things, which may or may not be true. I’m not dissing the Democrats. Honest. 🙂

Comments are closed.