The Tragically Unhip

a blog with three fingers on the pulse of uncoolness.

Never Mind The Fashion Week… October 4, 2009

Filed under: City Living,Culture & Society,Fashion,Shopping — Little Evie @ 8:13 pm

Manhattan Vintage Clothing Show
Vintage wasn’t cool when I was in high school. Well, no one wore it when we actually got free dress days, unless it was Hallowe’en and someone went all-out with their ‘1960s Hippie’ costume (the only thing more embarrassing than that has got to be marketing Punk Lite to tweens). But somewhere between my ‘80s hand-me-downs and ‘90s quasi-raver gear, I had myself a nice little collection of retro clothing, all care of my auntie Elsa aka Liz Kolanksy aka ‘The Cool Aunt.’

The stand-outs included a gold evening jacket and a bright green mod mini dress that blew everyone else’s standard school dance fare (Calvin Klein Mom-cut jeans and baby tees) out of the water. Or maybe it provoked giggles. I can’t remember caring, just thinking I looked like the hot distant Brady cousin.

Manhattan VintageSo I was thrilled when some time after high school I started heading down to New York and helping out Elsa with Studio 42 and Oly’s Vintage (named after my uncle Oly, whose salon then shared a space with her shop on E. 21st) – and with the Manhattan Vintage Clothing Show, a yearly showcase of vintage clothing and textiles for designers and fashion fiends.

It was then and there that I…

…learned how many designers’ ‘designs’ consist of re-issued vintage pieces (often after low-balling vintage clothing dealers – it’s odd, to say the least, seeing an exact replica of a piece you sold for a mere $75 for $1,000+ apiece in Saks).

…found out cool parties and media clippings don’t pay the rent, selling alongside a designer for Imitation of Christ who had moved back in with her parents.

…marveled at interns from major fashion houses sent over to buy up vintage items from their own labels.

…realized some people’s reaction to used clothing is still a decisive, ‘Eww.’

…ran into celebs and designers, managing to remain oblivious to their identities until afterward (except maybe Patricia Field and Betsey Johnson because, well, c’mon).

…found out even celebs and designers haggle.

Victorian cape from Studio 42

Victorian cape from Studio 42

…gave some bullshit interview to a Village Voice reporter about the popularity of Victorian whites post-9/11.

…fell in love with every old timey soul living in New York, from a couple stuck in the 1800s to a gang of rockabilly kids (when I mentioned the cuteness of one of the boys, a girl from the group warned me he was an alcoholic).

…wandered around in a gaudy one-armed Miss Universe pageant gown and had it bought off my back.

…bought my first pair of (and god help the Sex and the City-ness of it all) Manolos for about $100 and learned the single upside to my giant shoe size: Lots of models have it, too, meaning I get a great selection of runway cast-offs and stylist steals.

Looks like I’m heading down again this year for Oct. 8 and 9, hopefully after developing a strategy for keeping myself from spending the last of my life savings on a Victorian cape or Chanel twin set (though it’s hard not to kick yourself for passing up a gorgeous 1940s dress for $100 only to find a look-a-like for the same price at H&M).

I wonder what it’ll be like this year, if it’ll be full of Mad Men fans looking for hot Joan-style dresses. Or Rachel Zoe wannabes hunting for peasant pieces to put under ‘stylist’s own’ in the fashion spread credits. Hipster kids, burlesque performers, bargain hunters and incognito millionaires. I doubt I’ll even want to hit Century 21 when I’m done.

 

More Like “Rainbow Brite Does Dallas” February 14, 2009

Filed under: Advertising,Body,Books & Mags,Fashion,Hipster Culture,Shopping — Meagan Burbidge @ 3:12 pm

If I were to experience that incredibly irritating and deluded reverie in which a genie or sorcerer or Jesus tells me that whatever it is that I want, he’ll grant me it, I would immediately wish for the interior layout of the place of which I am employed to be switched around.  That is all.

 

I am not entirely assured in regards to the mental stability of whoever happened to establish the design of this particular space.  However, I do suspect an underlaying affinity for neo-Dadaism at the heart of it.

 

I spend forty waged hours a week in a medical professional’s office.  Most of you, I presume, are familiar with the ideologies of such a place: white walls, teal countertops (sometimes chocolate or Pepto-pink), framed art prints, and a visually communicated “front” or reception desk.  Traditionally, this desk is situated in a non-specific location within the waiting room area, sometimes in an enclosed space.  Its only unified position, in being that it faces the entryway and floor, procuring the respectful fear—through preemptive, paranoiac observation—of the occupants in hypertensive anticipation of an impending and scientific doom.

 

My situation is, of course, iconoclastic and individualistic of its own accord.  The front desk (albeit in name only) juts out of the middle of one wall, causing the door to be idiosyncratically stationed behind the desk.  This postulation for alternative or anti-order operates as the catalyst for patient befuddlement and my haphazard contortionism capabilities.

 

There exists an element of disquietude that far supercedes the spinal discomfort ensued.  As a result of limited activity (typical chiropractic patients are ‘sporty’ and in fair health, meriting little to no urgency in the acquisition of our services), I am often left to my own devices.  These devices typically involve hours of Facebook, Myspace, last.fm, and Vice magazine online.

 

Vice is fantastic because it renders various articles and literary tidbits that you wouldn’t often find in predictable publications such as Time, Newsweek, or O.  It also merits alternative versions of advertisement; the kind that could convince the creative minds behind the Coca-Cola campaign to buy clever Vitamin Water.  This is all fantastic, unless of course every person that passes by your computer screen is guaranteed to be privy to the contents of your desktop.  So, for example, when your boss comes up behind you, and you happen to be reading a review with album art in the left column, and that album art consists of a pink filtered photograph of tucked-back genitalia: nobody looks “good”.

 

I’ve always been a fan of the visual arts in the media.  Album art, tasteful and interesting upcoming film posters; I am the sort of person who still buys Vogue to simply peruse the advertisements. (Articles about which Prada bag to wear to which Libertarian luncheon or mid-afternoon movie, or, what sort of Bermuda shorts best describe me as a person on my next Mercedes Benz-drawn safari really don’t speak to me directly.) I have never really been able to pull off the dark and twisted alternativian/hip/un-jive/over-jive/under-jive/artist’s “Damn The Man and his attempted assuage of my preternatural lust for consumerism and the finer things in life” ideology.  (I am unsure if that is the exact dubbing of practice, but you should get the idea if you have ever met a person who enjoys Phish or only listens to record on vinyl.  Only.) The advertisement experience can be visceral as I pick through the pages while wearing Banana Republic or GAP or something from Target (very much in the spirit of when I would watch Julia Child prepare lobster something or other while eating McDonald’s).

 

I find it necessary to iterate this appreciation for advertisement because, despite the confusion that gold pants and unitards bring me, I often find myself considering various solid color additions to my wardrobe that could be easily obtained by American Apparel.  The problem is that every time that I have such a thought, American Apparel just has to go ahead and fucking ruin it.

 

Being in New York City, land of the eternal billboard, as well as on various hipster-driven websites, I am unquestionably exposed to the marketing campaigns of prior-stated apparel companies in droves.  Perhaps I’m just a tad more prudish than I give myself discredit for, but the photographic concepts provided by American Apparel just slay me.  There’s some aspect to each and every one of its campaigns that just makes me feel morally unclean.  There’s something remarkably trashy (but not in a fun way), and dirty (but not in a consensual way) about it that I have yet to unearth.  I’ll give it this much, it has the capacity to make me feel exactly the manner in which I imagine that I would feel if I were ever to be exposed to incest or kiddie porn directly.  Engaging in an American Apparel advertisement is like watching soft core porn scenes that take twenty minutes of dialogue in regards to “Cheryl” using the shower: get to the point already.  And then, it happens: that pivotal moment when you realize that you don’t have to wait anymore; that all of the secrets of the universe may not be answered, but they are well on their way, as a direct result of the event that you just witnessed.

 

Phlebotomizing along the right-hand side of a cannibal’s interview was everything I never knew I always needed: a breast.  Granted, this breast was attached to a woman.  This woman had only a pair of white pants on.  There was no notation, or labels, or emblems, or headers, footers; no text or icon-based branding whatsoever.  She was simply topless, in pants that occupied a mere 5% of the bottom right corner.  And yet, somehow we all knew exactly what we were supposed to buy based off of this simple image that, in varying degrees obviously, has been threading through Occidental art history for centuries.

 

One cannot measure the intensity of such mitigation.   Finally!  “Cheryl” (American Apparel) is “taking her clothes off and emulating the act of sweet love-making to the torso of someone” (no analogy required). And just then, in our greatest moment together, a new patient walks up from behind me in the office.  Naturally, this was at the precise moment that the Flash application starts to stick and the brief “American Apparel” that appears has given up hope, leaving the breast permanently frozen on my screen.  It is aware that God will always resent me, and accordingly abandons me, leaving me with this total stranger and a particularly gratuitous angle on screen.

 

I did what all other creepy, porn drenched computer nerds would do, which was react in an uncoordinated and overly flustered manner, ex-ing out of the page and pretending that I was doing something respectable, like donating money to the poor children of somewhere or ordering a sundeck umbrella.

 

I thought that the situation might have heightened as my boss entered the room.  However, I think that we have reached a point in our routine that no longer warrants incredulity, or even so much as a disrupted glance.  I think I need to improve upon my knitting abilities or learn to carve radishes into orchids and intricate fishes, something to occupy my time and my hands.

 

I remain perplexed by the nature and by the nurture of the million and one American Apparel colors. But now, having been bested by it, I do feel compelled to wear (in the Scarlet Letter sense of the word) a Golden Unitard: the bitch tag for the bright and splendid cotton adorners of this generation.

 

Recessionista Fashion January 25, 2009

Filed under: Books & Mags,Culture & Society,Fashion,Language,Money,Musings,Shopping — MP*erron @ 6:31 pm

A true word I read in this month’s edition of Vogue, recessionista, captures everything the modern woman should be—or does it? The article in question was yet another piece about a modern day trend I don’t understand: the clothing swap. Maybe it’s because all my has-been threads get demoted to gym wear status or donated to charity, and, being an oniomaniac, I keep my closet stocked with pieces I love, but the swap party fails to appeal to me. Add to that the fact that, at size 12 (thank you Club Monaco), I rarely fit into the petite fashions being auctioned, so you can see why I’ve been known to choose dinner with grandma over the swap scene.

 

courtesy of NeimanMarcus.com

Photo courtesy of NeimanMarcus.com

That said, I did enjoy the article. It’s entertaining, if nothing else, to muse about what swap parties are like among the dolce vita set, the Kate Spade/Louboutin-sporting women it’s aimed at. Honey, if I owned a Dior handbag, I would not be trading it in, I’d be clinging to it for dear life among the debris that is our current economic flow.

 

After I’d put down the magazine and trudged home in the January snow, I got to thinking. Recessionista, a bug that had snagged my eye upon first read, came back and lodged itself in my mind. Normally, I’m crazy about linguistic acrobatics. Anyone who’s read my poetry knows I invent words and coin phrases like it’s nobody’s business. Recessionista. I even like the way it sounds. Sort of chic and regal, not at all financial crisis.

 

The more I thought about it though, the more the word made me feel sick. Don’t get me wrong—I love fashion. I love fashion and I have a shopping problem. Still, the idea of taking something very serious and turning it into a light amuse-gueule made me ponder the kind of thinking that got us into the mess to begin with. I think “recessionista” says it all: trying to plaster a fake face on a rotten corpse and keep the good times coming. While I do think today’s fashion vixen should be more economically minded, and it’s only smart to promote thrift in times of recession, the word seems to signify something beyond itself. It hints at the flawed state of American thinking—that although the ship is sinking, the pageant will go on. 

 

How to Look Cool When Air Canada Loses Your Luggage and You Have No Pants January 8, 2009

Filed under: Fashion,How-To,Transit — Elli S. @ 11:43 am

Yeah, I got nothing. My luggage has been in luggage-land limbo for three days now. My toiletries, my entire wardrobe, my entire life was in that suitcase. I have no hair straightener (‘sup jewfro), and I have no clean underwear; but more importantly, I have no pants.

 

This, as you can imagine, can pose quite a problem when you’re in Toronto and you’re up to your ass in snow and all that’s available are summer dresses. And some leftover reject clothes, but those belong in the Fashion Crimes Against Humanity section. 

 

Things I have done:

- Worn thigh-high American Apparel socks over my leopard print leggings. This looked good on day one—it had a little bit of an old-school, sexy-stocking look to it, with a leopard twist—but it’s day three now. My leopard print leggings have been stretched to crap-catcher status, and the socks smell of wet feet.

 

Things I will most likely have to do tomorrow and every day until Air Canada delivers my suitcase:

1. wear my hot pink tights for the first time ever, which leads us to number two:

2. not leave my apartment.

 

If there’s anyone in the downtown Toronto area who has an extra pair of pants, holler.

 

 

But here’s a peculiar airplane-related story that has nothing to do with me not having any pants:


On this particular flight back to Toronto, I was left to sit beside the strangest person I have ever had the (mis)fortune of sitting beside. She was probably about 42, with short black hair and an unfortunate lady-mustache. She didn’t say hello or bother with small talk, which is fine because I’m not the biggest fan of single-serving friends. 

 

I suppose she didn’t talk to me because she already had a friend with her. A small, hand-sized teddy bear that was somewhat disheveled and dirty: two things that screamed “crazy-grown-woman-who-carries-around-a-stuffed-animal!”. She put it in the pocket of the seat in front of her so that it appeared to be smiling up at her with its plastic eyes and its threaded smile. As she was reading her National Post, she would every so often acknowledge it by giving its nose a little poke. When she ate her Greek salad, she put the bear on the tray, and would pet it lovingly between bites. 

 

Towards the end of the flight I—no longer trying to subtly glance, but rather fully gaping at this point—noticed that the stuffed animal was sitting on her lap, and that she was looking down at it making it nod every few seconds by poking its little plastic nose. I wonder what they where talking about.

 

Also weird was how every time I coughed (which I courteously did into my elbow, taking my cue from McGill University’s coughing etiquette sign), she would begin fanning herself with the safety instructions card. This happened every single time I coughed; she would just tut and fan away, as though fanning herself would keep away the germs that I clearly had already safely stowed in my elbow. I spent the four-hour flight trying not to cough, which is hard to do when you’re sick.

 

She occasionally made comments under her breath, the first of which I acknowledged and tried to say something in agreement. She completely ignored me, probably because she was talking to her teddy bear. Silly me.

 

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go raid my roommate’s closet for some jeans, which is stupid because I’ve already done that and her jeans won’t magically fit me today, when they were two sizes too big yesterday.

 

Beauty and the Beast December 21, 2008

OK. I’ll admit it. Despite being way too intelligent for this shit, I am a bona fide shopaholic. My trusty Wikipedia tells me that this condition is called Oniomania (naw, that’s not just code for onion-chowing lunatics), and “can have devastating consequences”. Thanks, Wiki.

 

If shopping is an addiction, my drug is something like cocaine – I can’t afford the really fine stuff, but I’m not smoking crack down at Zellers either. I’m hovering somewhere in between, in a world where $300 dollar handbags and Modern American Poetry (that’s a 300-level class at Concordia) see eye to eye.

 

When I was in University I used to pay about $280 for rent and roughly $300 per 3 credits. That’s how my MPT (maximum purchase total) came to be raised to 3-0-0, give or take $45 for tax. You see, anything that I wanted badly enough to pout over got compared to those torturous 200-level requisite courses, like Intro to Lit. Theory with Dr. D. O’Leary.

 

Now that I’ve graduated, and bring in the (slightly) bigger bucks, I can afford the $500 rent I pay for my well-situated, much too small, paper-thin walls. As a result, my MPT has risen accordingly. Because, hell, if my landlady deserves my hard-earned cash, then I deserve that Mackage.

 

So, what’s the point of this piece? To confess that I’m in trouble. Since working with my therapist to curb my other obsessions, shopping has come to play an increasingly bigger role in my so-called life. The result? A bank account that’s constantly on empty, and a wardrobe that is too fabulous to keep behind doors. This would all be fine if I was your average Betty, but truth be told, I suffer from enough conscience to know my behavior is sick, given the condition of our wilting planet. This leaves me feeling a lot like a rotten tooth – pretty on the outside, but oh so deteriorated inside.

 

And hence, my New Year’s resolution! Yes. To quit shopping cold turkey. Because really, how many pounds of silver does one little doe need? With you as my witnesses, I move forward into the year of thrift! Luckily, this won’t require any drastic purification rituals like clothes burning, or jewelry hawking. And I’ve got enough Nars hydrating moisture cream to last me through the winter. 

 

Purrrfect November 19, 2008

Filed under: Fashion,Musings,Shopping — MP*erron @ 10:36 pm

My new earmuffs are not only warm and fuzzy, they do a fine job of blocking out the conversation I would otherwise be subject to while crossing through the McGill ghetto. In my happy mind those McGill girls are discussing poetry, not gushing about how (ohmygod!) drunk they got last Saturday night. Two days into their season, these pups (sorry, pun in poor taste) have already gotten many compliments. I’ve even had to give out directions to the Harricana headquarters on Atwater. All that, and I’ve only had to sheepishly explain that recycled fur is OK once.

 

UPS? UP yourS! November 13, 2008

Filed under: City Living,Etiquette,Fashion,Shopping — MP*erron @ 10:35 pm

I recently made a frivolous purchase. See, I just had to have this fabulous, leather, Mackage jacket in black. The problem is, it’s from last fall’s line and is sold out pretty much everywhere. Then I found it online. And on sale. Having little funds of my own, I did what any girl on my block would do: I begged my daddy to let me use his credit card. No easy task, but I succeeded. Then I sent it out to a buddy in NYC via UPS. 

 

Photo courtesy of Kaboodle

Photo courtesy of Kaboodle

Now, you’d think that UPS would take their clients into consideration when making deliveries, but no such luck. Being paranoid as heck, I obsessively tracked the package online for 48 hours. The first delivery attempt occurred while my buddy was at work. Maybe a roommate got the door, but the UPS man labeled this an “exception”. Online I read the description: no such person at this address. 

 

Freaking out I called UPS and tried to clarify things. I spoke to about four different agents and departments, found out you can’t pull a switcheroo and order your package to Canada in the middle of the game, that you need a signed note to make a pick-up for somebody else, and that the pick-up service is a) in the middle of no-man’s-land, NY, and b) only open from 9-5 Monday thru Friday. 

 

My friend being a working man, he could neither pull a Ferris Bueller nor stick around all hours waiting for UPS to come a-knockin’. So we decided to hold our breaths, and hope the UPS man would find one of his roommates home on day 2. 

 

Well, what actually happened was that somebody buzzed the UPS man into the lobby, where he decided to leave my parcel in a safe little place—the middle of everywhere. That’s right. He used his fine judgment to leave a large box unattended to in the lobby of an apartment building. In Brooklyn. I won’t even tell you what this jacket is worth. When my friend came home 6 hours later, he found the parcel and emailed me in awe. I just couldn’t believe it. UPS almost cost me a pretty penny. Which is why I decided to make a move for a new section of this blog: the Up Yours section.

 

Roman Holiday November 1, 2008

Filed under: Fashion,How-To,Video — Kimberly Senf @ 9:59 pm

I made the decision to be a toga-clad Roman for Hallowe’en, thinking that it would be the simplest costume to pull off. Little did I know that the weight of the material of your toga, as well as your ability to grow a third arm for tying purposes, are both very important factors to consider when choosing to drape yourself in this costume of the ancients.

 

In order to figure out exactly how much white cloth I’d be needing, I did what I always do when faced with such a pickle: I Googled it. I found what I thought to be a very informative (if not dated and mildly annoying) video of a British woman telling me how exactly I should be affixing the toga to my person. Little did I know that she was instructing me to buy 3 yards of fabric too many, thus doubling the price of my costume. I don’t know who she thinks needs 6 yards of fabric, but it ain’t me. Oh yes, and she topped off her how-to with the instructions for all of us toga-clad ladies to go party like it’s 1999. But please don’t take my word for it; watch for yourself.

 

 

After watching a few more instructional videos on YouTube and trying to make sense of all the extra fabric I’d purchased, I finally decided to do things the old-fashioned way. Out came the safety pins and scissors. A couple of snips and my supply of fabric was down to half of its original size and much more manageable. Then my roommate—whom I’d already flashed while running around the house half-naked and who had seen (and heard) me struggling for a half hour—poked her head in. Between the two of us, my toga was on and tied in minutes.

 

A couple of points to remember are to make sure that you save the eye-catching underwear for every other day of the year and that you wrap the material around your body at least once before you start in with the toga tying, securing the material with a safety pin in order to hold everything in place. Don’t let anyone tell you that this a one person job, because unless you have superhuman toga-tying abilities, it takes two to tie the toga.

 

Wear With Pride? October 18, 2008

Filed under: Culture & Society,Fashion,Musings — MP*erron @ 8:58 pm

Photo courtesy of Palms & Company

 

Fur. Once a coveted luxury item, it was the staple of our grandmother’s winter closets: thick, full-length furs, elaborate stoles made from whole animals, leather gloves accented with tufts of tail, and of course, the fashion shapka.

 

In today’s animal rights-conscious world, fur has moved from being enviable to being one of the forward-minded’s cardinal sins. But in the fashion world, fur continues to poke its little head. Check out the catwalks and magazines, and you’ll see a salute to the fashions of our ancestors in the form of fur-everything. Yes, we’ve come a long way, but baby, it ain’t over yet.

 

Google “fur protests” and you’ll be overcome with images and words attempting to dissuade the market. Visit the PETA website and you can read about a campaign to protest Donna Karan’s use of real fur in her designs. The brief description the site provides of the treatment suffered by fur-giving animals was enough to turn my stomach. I instantly regretted the many leather purses and shoes lining my closet. At no time does the question of fur seem more relevant than in the face of another Canadian winter.

 

Which brings me to my topic: recycled fur. This is a movement I’ve been pondering since falling in love with a pair of (real) lynx earmuffs at Ogilvy’s the other day. This is not simply a question of luxury and economy (the muffs cost a pretty penny), but it has become, for me, an ethical issue. The muffs and neighbouring accessories all bore the tag Harricana.

 

Harricana is Quebec designer Mariouche Gagné’s cruelty-free label. As the website explains, the idea for the label was born while Gagné was still a student. Lacking funds, as many students do, she used her mother’s old fur coat to complete an award-winning design. Today Harricana creates coats, hats, and accessories from recycled fur. The furs are salvaged from thrift stores, Salvation Army depots, and other fashion cemeteries, and transformed through special treatments into loveable, animal-friendly styles. But how animal-friendly is it really? That’s the question I’ve been asking myself.

 

Which is the greater evil? To flaunt and revel in the natural softness of our animals’ skins, a behaviour that encourages the fur industry regardless of the creativity of the designer’s resources, or to condemn vintage furs to Garbage Island, something that feels a lot like throwing meat away? Is recycled fur simply a way to distance ourselves from the evil by a couple of degrees, or can it really be a step forward for the fashion industry?

 

On the one hand, there is the idea that the slaughtering of animals can be acceptable, an idea that is propagated when an individual dons fur, no matter what the source. Nobody knows if what you’re wearing is recycled or not. They just see the fur, and the message it sends out is “Fur is in,” which translates quickly into “faster pussycat, kill, kill.” This side of the argument recognizes that killing animals is cruel, and refuses to forgive that cruelty simply because it was committed pre-enlightenment.

 

On the other hand, there is the idea that clothing—not just clothing, but fashion—can be evolved to match the growing eco-friendly trend in other industries. This take on couture promotes the recycling of fabrics and materials, the abolition of slave labour, and the minimization of environmental abuse. This is a big step up for an industry based on excess. (It’s undeniable; artistic medium, form of self-expression or not, fashion is excess. The desire to decorate the body is, as modernists would say, ornamentation, and ornamentation is the desire for excess.) This camp is for the reuse of materials that are available to us, as a replacement for new fur, and hopes to transform the industry by modeling a different code of ethics. 

 

This leads to many questions. Like, can this do-as-I-do technique be good for something? Can companies like Harricana become the fashion houses of the future? Can we, as a society, be instigated to move from the realm of reckless consumption and into that of conscious consumption? Can recycled fur be seen as a way of saying, “Hey, we’ve done the shit we’ve done, we’ve fucked the whole thing up, now let’s put our heads back on and roll with it.”? Or is it just another excuse? This little fashionista simply does not know. And so, I encourage you readers to give me your feedback: to fur, or not to fur? 

 

Hot Chip Will Break Your Legs (With Dancing, We Mean) October 3, 2008

Filed under: Dance,Fashion,Music,Nightlife — Kimberly Senf @ 2:11 am

Hot Chip at Metropolis. (Photo by Genevieve D. Markle)

I had certain expectations about the experience of a Hot Chip concert: I knew that I wouldn’t be the only one wearing a scarf for fashion rather than warmth, and I knew that I would dance—or at least bop—the night away. Turns out I was right on both accounts. I didn’t expect, however, to be assaulted both physically and sensorily by a group of raver kids who danced with complete disregard for the people around them—not only by constantly knocking into my companion and me, but also by allowing one member of their party to repeatedly pass gas on the dancefloor. But moving on, the positive highlights of the night!

 

The evening started off on a good note as my trusty sidekick Gen and I happened upon our favourite Pop Montreal ticket connoisseur. Not only has our friend Tony recently climbed Kilimanjaro, but he also had in his possession two free tickets which he bestowed upon us for nothing more than generosity’s sake. Fate was smiling upon us.

 

Blue Man Group. (Photo by Kimberlily)

Blue Man Group. (Photo by Kimberlily)

The opening act was an experience to be endured rather than enjoyed, and I think many more than myself breathed a sigh of relief when Growing made their exit. The Metropolis wasn’t as packed to the brim as I’ve seen it in the past, so in exchange there was room to meander between those interested with the periphery and those who came to get their dance on. The less-than-packed house also meant that it was easier to spot all the people who came dressed to impress in their geek chic. It was candy for the eyes that made it very apparent who took an eclectic bent with their look and who bought it ready-made.

 

We were able to wrangle a wee little dance spot for ourselves and as soon as Hot Chip hit the stage it was practically impossible not to tap along to the beat. They deserve hearty kudos for their enthusiasm throughout the night, which is something that can make or break a live show. I want to know that the musicians on stage are responding to the music they’re performing before a live audience, and Hot Chip left nothing about this up in the air; it was pretty clear that they are all about doing what they do so well.

 

Maracas! (Photo by Genevieve D. Markle)

After the show, we caught guitarist and frontman Al Doyle attempting to make a getaway for the band’s bus. But we couldn’t just let him pass us by without a few comments for the Tragically Unhip, so we stood our ground (quite literally, actually, as we had to wait for him to come back out of the bus—which, thankfully, he did). Upon being asked for a comment for our unhip website, he let us know that it’s no secret that Hot Chip has been labeled as nerds and geeks, even though people “aren’t quite yelling it [at them] on the street.” He seems to think that Hot Chip is still “on the periphery of pop culture in the U.K.,” but that it might just be because they have to compete with Amy Winehouse’s latest debauchery or whether or not Prince William is getting married. And no sooner were the words out of his mouth than a small crowd of semi-drunk fans stumbled out of the darkness, which was the perfect opportunity for these Unhipsters to perform their vanishing act.

 

- Kimberlily, Genevieve D. Markle

 

Members Only (of a club that I hoped had burned down) September 12, 2008

Filed under: Fashion,Hipster Culture,Musings — Laurin McNiff @ 1:37 am

When I was younger, I remember asking my father about a jacket he practically wore to the bone. It was a hideous hue of maroon, bordering on magenta, and what surprises me most about the memory is that even at such a young age I had enough fashion sense to ask him, “Why is this your favorite jacket, Daddy? It’s ugly.” (Keep in mind that I was probably 5 – 7 years old, so the bluntness of my curiosity can be forgiven; and—it should also be noted—I am a total Daddy’s Girl.) “Well honey, it’s the perfect weight for spring,” he replied. “But it’s terrible!” Shortly after that incident, he all but stopped wearing it completely. I believe the jacket was first retired to “corner store”-status, wherein my father could only be seen donning it when going to pick up small items on grocery excursions. He eventually phased it out altogether, leaving it to sit forlorn in a closet until my mother threw it out in 2000.

 

My father’s jacket was a Members Only jacket. Anyone who grew up in the 80′s should remember the rise and fall of this particular brand: the rise being its incredible popularity from approximately 1981 until about 1988, when wearing Members Only was no longer regarded as a respectable fashion statement.

 

Photo by Laurin McNiff

Fast forward to my second year in New York, where I’m currently making waves in the lesbian bar scene and writing for the Tragically Unhip. We here at the site have noticed such fashion crimes as the resurgence of leg warmers, neckerchiefs, leopard slippers, and too-tight, overly stone-washed denim (as well as other faux pas I taste bile at the thought of mentioning), but only recently did I spot something that almost made me accost a total stranger for what I consider to be the most shameful of all fashion revivals: the Members Only jacket. The one I saw was periwinkle blue and dancing in front of me at Rockstar Bar during the Pantyho’s lesbian party. In fact, I was in such shock that I even deleted several photos from my cellphone just to make room for photographic evidence of the sighting.

 

What’s even better is, after doing some mild research, I’ve learned that Members Only seems to have gotten some serious media attention lately and is on the upward climb to becoming the next Lacoste: the perfect example of an 80′s brand that fell out of fashion only to discover a great resurgence in popularity in the new millenium. I remember years ago when my mother threw out all of our old Lacoste shirts because, simply put, no one wore them anymore. They were stale and out of style, and became the rags she used to spot clean our carpets. And now look—Lacoste is practically a fashion staple again! Will the same thing happen with Members Only?

 

In closing, what I’d really like to see come around as bad fashion statements are baby-doll dresses, scrunchies, and overalls. And somehow, now that I’ve written it down, I feel as though I may have jinxed it from fruition.

 

Taking a Stand for Secondhand September 5, 2008

Filed under: Fashion,Manifesto,Shopping — Meghan Best @ 5:09 pm

Here in the U.K. we have high streets. These are mostly made up of chain stores like Topshop and such, various £1 emporiums, and a decent sprinkling of charity shops. Now, while you over there in America have your Goodwills, Value Villages and Salvation Army’s, we, on the other hand, have an endless spate of sad-looking, dusty-windowed shops supporting every uncomfortable situation known to man and the animal world.

 

These shops used to be littered with bargains made up of pretty, pleated old lady dresses, jewel-coloured wool winter coats and fantastic leather bags (often with a free clean handkerchief!). I used to feel bad that these beautiful garments had survived for decades when I could ruin them in two weekends with fag burns and lip gloss stains.

 

But this guilty feeling hasn’t arisen in the past few years, as U.K charity shops are not quite cutting the mustard anymore. I recently went to a village in Derbyshire to try and find some thrifty gems. Going out of town is often more fruitful because London shop owners tend to be more eBay-savvy/giddy than their village counterparts. However, I was severely disappointed on my weekend trip to Derbyshire; the chazzies were saturated with last season’s Primark clothing.

 

Primark has shops on nearly every major high street, selling similar stuff to H&M, but at half the price and across 10 colourways. Primark used to be good. In 2000, whilst it was undergoing its tranformation, you could have a mooch around and find gems costing one-sixth of a Topshop equivalent. Then, gradually, Vogue started featuring Primark’s items here and there, and by 2004 it was the pièce de résistance of the British high street, peaking in 2007 with its Oxford Street store opening.

 

Nowadays on a Saturday, young girls stride the high streets laden with brown paper Primark bags brimming with £20 worth of cheap dross. They proceed to wear these items once—maybe never at all—and then fill their heart with that warm, gooey feeling by donating their cast-offs to their charity shop of choice.

 

This is insane! I do not want to buy a shrunken secondhand top with half its sequins missing for £4, especially when Primark was selling it three months ago for £5. Alas, I am worried about the future of our charity shops. Good quality vintage goods are much harder to find these days, and charity shops have difficulty selling these garments, which will ultimately end up in landfill. The U.K population needs to go back to investing in well-made garments, using quality fabrics, rather than spending the same amount on cheap, fickle trends.

 

The Burlesque Dancer’s Guide to Peacocks and High Heels August 12, 2008

Filed under: Fashion,How-To — MP*erron @ 11:32 pm

 

Daydream nation

Daydream nation.

Once upon a time, a friend and I went for dinner at a restaurant. I enjoyed the fried calamari, and she found the waiter to her liking. While she worked on reeling him in, I was banished to the badly-tiled bathroom in the joint’s basement. That’s where I met Sherri. She was a curvaceous burlesque dancer who was dressed the part. She had just finished a show two floors up, and was cleaning up before her next act. I was sweating and wearing brand new heels that I could barely walk in when she sashayed into the john like she owned it. Having hobbled shamefully to the restaurant, and now facing the humiliation of being the girl the waiter didn’t think was hot, I was driven by a bout of hysteria to holler my appreciation. Then the desperation kicked in.  “How,” I pleaded, “does a lady own her shoes, and make her strut sexy?” Honey, I asked the right girl.

 

 

1) Posture

Pilates, ladies! Powerhouse tucked in and strong. Back straight. Chin up.

 

2) Step with your foot, but thrust with your hip

Yeah, you gotta get the heel on the ground, but it’s the hip and thigh that do all the legwork. Sherri taught me to roll my hip forward and not be afraid to swing my butt (but not too much, or baby looks like a hooker).

 

3) Left foot forward

Actually, it doesn’t matter who leads, as long as it’s the heel that precedes, and not the toe, as some would have you believe. Plant it firmly on the ground, but don’t slam all your weight down. Instead, tread lightly and roll forward onto the balls of your feet before lifting for another step.

 

4) Legs!

Keep your ankles stiff and your legs relaxed. Sounds tough, I know. Basically you want to avoid that thing hootchies do with their ankles when they’re teetering in really, really high ones. Also, if you let your knees bend too much to compensate, you’ll look like a jack-in-the-box. Extend those legs, keeping the muscles firm but not tense.

 

5) No ducks

Many of us turn our feet out slightly when we walk. In flats this slight waddle is barely noticeable, but with heels it will seem exaggerated and masculine. Keep your feet straight and closer together than you usually would. There’s no need to criss-cross (unless, of course, you’re on a catwalk). Just turn your leg slightly so that your foot and leg follow the same line.

 

6) Arms

Remember that episode of Seinfeld? Raquel Welch? Catfight. Keep your arms at your sides, relaxed and swinging naturally. Do not clench your fists. Or your ass, for that matter.

 

7) Shoes

Dream about the day you can afford Manolo’s. Then take your fine ass down to the store and make sure you score a sexy, sturdy heel that will support your weight. The more money you can drop, the better. Same goes for the softness of leather. Sale season is gold. And if you must, sneak down to Holt Renfrew and slide your un-pedicured feet into a $700 pair of MBs for a treat.

 

The Clone Syndrome August 10, 2008

Filed under: Etiquette,Fashion,Shopping — MP*erron @ 11:47 pm

Fashion is about edge, originality, and theft. The true fashionista has to be able to assimilate and re-invent. Fashion on a budget is all about having an eye for the best pieces available to you. Often that can mean scouring magazines and thrift shops for ideas, diving into discount bins, and tailing key pieces for entire seasons until they hit the reduction rack. At other times it means scoping out what the competition is wearing, even accosting strangers with the question some consider a faux-pas: “Where did you find that?” 

 

Once you dare to become a fashion-scout you’ll quickly realize that there are many different personalities you may encounter. There’s the free-spirit: ready to distribute any knowledge and divulge all secrets, she’ll even give you directions to the shop. The elitist: she’ll smirk as she rolls the designer’s name off her tongue; the more obscure the label, the smugger the girl. The petty princess: she’ll actually refuse to tell you where she made the purchase, and will sometimes even claim it’s a personal policy. And of course, the Carmen Sandiego sister, who will vaguely drop an international hint: shaped like a boot.

 

But what if the owner of the perfect shoes/purse/jean jacket is a friend? What’s the policy on cramping your girlfriend’s style in the name of your own? If you grew up as part of a school-yard gaggle, chances are you went in fear of the other CC label: that of copy-cat. Somehow, coolness came to be defined paradoxically: Be the same, yet different. In the grown-up world it seems the same rules apply. Especially when it comes to fashion accessories. The rarer and quirkier the find, or the more into it your pal is, the less acceptable it is to copy.

 

Personality type also comes into play. Some girlfriends couldn’t care less. They’re happy knowing you can both look good rocking a particular item. Others are more possessive and don’t mind sharing basic pieces, but will get uptight about you moving in on more original items. And then there are those who just won’t budge. Stubborn and snobby, you know they’ll kill you for cloning. But what about when you just hafta, hafta, hafta have it? Is it OK to be a closet-cloner?

 

Maybe. When you can get away with it. Sure it’s devious and sneaky, and risky business when you’re wearing your outfit out on the town, but that can add to the fun. You must, however, follow the golden rule: Avoid places the original is likely to be. Actually, this rule applies to knock-offs of all stripes; follow it, and the (fashion) world is your oyster! 

 

This Can’t Be Love August 3, 2008

Filed under: Body,Fashion,Musings — MP*erron @ 9:18 pm

I own 19 pairs of shoes. At the moment. In the past I have loved and discarded dozens upon dozens of destined couples, sending them out to live and die on the pavement where they (theoretically) belonged. The sad truth is that for every pair of shoes that can pound you through hundreds of city blocks, there are at least two that send you to the hell of fashion lovers everywhere: shredded, blistered, bruised and abused feet.

 

As a result of my love for cute footwear, my feet have become my sorest body part – hidden and maltreated in a vicious cycle that may take me to my grave. These puppies have every ailment magazines warn against: blisters, hammertoes, corns, calluses, ingrown and crooked nails, and even one disgracefully blue nail. Needles to say, I do not wear sandals.

 

My closet on the other hand, is thriving. Beautifully displayed and pampered are rows upon rows of bitty ballet flats, cushy wedges, multi-colored heels, and cute boots in various colors and textures. Among my favorites are a copy-cat pair I have to keep hidden from a friend, the most expensive rubber boots ever, and walk-friendly heels.  

 

The survivors are those that are kind to me. Abandoned on street corners around Montreal: combat boots that rubbed my skin raw; fake-leather flats that threatened to give me bunions; enormous Sorels that gave my feet so much room they started to curl into a death-grip in an attempt to secure the footwear on slippery winter walks; expired sneakers; blister-happy Mary Janes; and the sweetest little heels that offered less support than a strapless bra without underwire.