tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post4429305096831942342..comments2023-10-20T08:27:40.314-04:00Comments on male pattern boldness: Is Glamour Dead?Peter Lappinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05109154527996679077noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-62886753062180310602014-07-06T18:39:20.538-04:002014-07-06T18:39:20.538-04:00Dita von Teese is glamorous!
I like to dress in 40...Dita von Teese is glamorous!<br />I like to dress in 40's and 50's fashions and I even (gasp!) set my hair.<br />My hubby loves it, but I can't do it every day, with working etc. <br />We are even pumping every penny into the mortgage so I can retire in the next 3 years, and keep house and be glamorous and make clothes and meals, and be old fashioned like I want to.<br />Hubby is happy either way, but he really loves the idea of coming home to a glamour puss and a hot meal on the table... and why shouldn't he? He works 14hr days (software engineer), and really drags the kill back to the cave. <br />My part time job pays nothing in comparison, so I'd rather devote all that time to us and our home... and my glamour!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-24395688008145649922010-05-02T01:15:53.494-04:002010-05-02T01:15:53.494-04:00I just came across this and thought it was an inte...I just came across this and thought it was an interesting addition to the conversation. The writer was watching WWII footage of England and was struck by how well put together the common folk looked during black outs and bomb raids and digging through rubble. http://www.retrochick.co.uk/2010/04/21/dressing-up-the-answer-to-all-lifes-ills/Cherri Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05109595206075746565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-19147526189877551952010-04-21T14:46:33.060-04:002010-04-21T14:46:33.060-04:00Glamour is definitely not dead! Just look at all o...Glamour is definitely not dead! Just look at all of us wonderful bloggers who show off our vintage style and glamourous looks for all to see. LOL, my husband just told me I look glamourous even while baking bread :)Peldynhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05467208667969292492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-13860671666840203702010-04-20T08:06:56.776-04:002010-04-20T08:06:56.776-04:00Oh yes, Catherine Zeta-Jones is gorgeous with her ...Oh yes, Catherine Zeta-Jones is gorgeous with her dark, sultry looks and a body to die for! Whenever you see her at award shows, etc. her look is spot on!<br /><br />Just wanted to comment on Kathy's look above...you have captured Joan Crawford's lips perfectly!mimi ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03308969238826902872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-70678174533424013532010-04-19T23:59:20.881-04:002010-04-19T23:59:20.881-04:00Hear, hear, Lizzie Q! I couldn't agree more, ...Hear, hear, Lizzie Q! I couldn't agree more, and I also highly recommend Simon Doonan's book. In fact, I just re-read it last night! I'm surprised no one mentioned Catherine Zeta-Jones as a modern day glamorous role model. She's so very Ava Gardner, isn't she?Denisehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06003546627143445920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-43266537882281751812010-04-18T11:18:29.572-04:002010-04-18T11:18:29.572-04:00May be half-dead. Otherwise, the "stars"...May be half-dead. Otherwise, the "stars" themselves would not go for vintage. They want to revive something that is not nowFifinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-9422488373405548592010-04-17T20:20:20.616-04:002010-04-17T20:20:20.616-04:00I tend to doubt even the screen sirens of the 30&#...I tend to doubt even the screen sirens of the 30's or 40's would seem nearly as glamorous to us if they were constantly photographed by paparazzi as they did thier shopping or grabbed a coffee. I think a large part of thier glamour came from the myth that they lived these "glamorous lives" that the movie studios put out. Thier images were meticulously created and maintained. <br /> I, for one, love the myth. Just because hard core glamour may be unattainable for most of us doesn't mean we can't allow it to inspire us on a daily basis. When my children were small something as simple as putting on a some silver bangles before I went to the playground <br />could make me feel like I was the glamor queen of the mommies. Glamour resides in all of us if we want it!<br /> I heartily suggest Simon Doonan's thoughtful, and hilarious "Eccentric Glamour: Creating an Insanely More Fabulous You "<br />It is amusing, inspirational and very thoughtfully examines what glamour was as well as what it has become in a modern context.Lizzie Qnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-89917688282312103432010-04-17T17:03:49.483-04:002010-04-17T17:03:49.483-04:00Another question: if glamour is dead (or dead in e...Another question: if glamour is dead (or dead in everyday life), is this a bad thing? I'm not convinced it is. <br /><br />By and large, as noted in lots of comments above, today's woman has a lot going on in her life and is perhaps more interested in dressing appropriately for her office / so that she can do what she needs to do (walk the dog, run around after her two year old), than in painting her nails and arranging her hair and doing her makeup and wearing heels. <br /><br />We've come to a place where it's totally okay to wear functional clothing actually designed for what you're going to be doing, rather than having to be dressed up all the time because what would the neighbours think? I think this is a good thing. Sure, you get some people dressing uber-casually, but I don't think that's too high a price to pay. For everyday, I'd much rather have clothing that's designed for what I'm doing in it than designed to put my body into particular proportions that were popular in the 40s.<br /><br />I agree that there may be lots of people who 'don't put effort in', but I don't think that's glamour that's missing. If those people wore a neat jeans-and-sweater outfit, you wouldn't have the same criticism of them, but neither would you call them glamorous.<br /><br />I also think of glamour mostly as the 30s/40s movie siren who is completely done up to the nines and artificial, and I think that's a great look to have if you are one of the people who wants to and has the time to put in that effort all the time (e.g. Dita Von Teese), and a great look for special occasions, but I'm glad that it's not expected of me by society.<br /><br />Also agreeing that glamour = mystery = modesty doesn't hold. You can be very modest without being glamorous, and I think you can be mysterious without being glamorous and/or particularly modest.<br /><br />One last point - I think this is probably a class issue, as well, and I don't think that should be ignored. I'm not quite sure how it plays into it but I'm sure it's significant.<br /><br />(Apologies for enormously long comment!)Jingle Bellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18140666771612038714noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-14337444178449490852010-04-17T01:45:04.607-04:002010-04-17T01:45:04.607-04:00Not a fan of Lady Gaga myself, but I for sure shar...Not a fan of Lady Gaga myself, but I for sure share Garrison's unease with everyone's equating glamour with mystery and then mystery with modesty. Women's bodies are not packages meant to be unwrapped - ew.<br /><br />I think of "glamour" simply as the 30s and 40s movie siren look. I think you can be glamorous one day and not the next, just like you can dress punk one day and conservative the next.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08461837367339345747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-85080228161338027762010-04-16T20:02:46.571-04:002010-04-16T20:02:46.571-04:00This is an issue I think about at least five days ...This is an issue I think about at least five days a week while I'm walking around my highschool and witnessing the tight jeans with G-strings sticking out and the sweatpants and the ugg boots and yuck. Glamour is actually important to me, in spite of how outdated it may seem for others. For me it means /clean/ clothing, heels most of the time, if not then classic flats, a dress-domited wardrobe with some highwaisted skirts and smart trousers thrown in, and liquid eyeliner. Liquid eyeliner definitely never hurts. Unless you're bad at it, which most highschool girls are. Excellent post!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-9958729545102925232010-04-16T18:06:35.469-04:002010-04-16T18:06:35.469-04:00I'm writing my comment before reading the othe...I'm writing my comment before reading the others because I don't want to be influenced - I'll read theirs after I hit "Post"!<br /><br />I would define "glamour" as having obviously put a lot of effort into your appearance (and succeeded in looking polished - we all know that a lot of thought/effort doesn't necessarily always look glamorous as we can see in Lady Gaga's picture). Glamour is red lips, stunning dresses, well-set hair, full face makeup, etc. It's sophistication and, to a certain extent, an air of un-accessability. And it's unnatural. I think that's why Beyonce would qualify as "glamorous" and not merely "pretty." She is absolutely pretty (and perhaps she does wake up stunning) but it's no secret that it's a lot of work to get to the point where she is in the photograph above. She's had her hair done, put on makeup, picked out a drop-dead frock, and put on some expensive jewelry. That's glamorous. If she woke up, brushed her hair, swiped on some lipgloss and put on a sun dress, she would likely still be pretty but that element of mystery and done-upness would be gone. She would be more approachable and more natural. And less glamorous.<br /><br />So I guess what I'm getting at is: glamour has an element of not being natural. It's obvious you worked at it. So I would say that glamour is perhaps not dead but certainly not in good health. Society in general is getting more casual so as soon as you take the time to put on red lips, or set your hair, it's seen as a bit "uppity" (at least in my experience). And I guess that's why I don't hanker for glamour. The attention I would get, in my region and social circle, would be *bad* attention. Like, either you're uppity OR you aren't naturally pretty. Neither of which are good!Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17840377765937929376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-77551965429615927982010-04-16T11:26:02.957-04:002010-04-16T11:26:02.957-04:00Michelle Obama=glamour, effortless, classy, gracio...Michelle Obama=glamour, effortless, classy, graciousness, coiffed, not too much over the top, making bare arms sexy!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-54075923094199892562010-04-15T14:41:58.971-04:002010-04-15T14:41:58.971-04:00Glamour is not dead, it is just in hiding.
To me g...Glamour is not dead, it is just in hiding.<br />To me glamour is a combination of unnatainable beauty, a perfectly groomed look and not putting all your merchandise on display at once.<br /><br />Lady Gaga certainly makes a statement and puts considerable effort into having a complete 'look' but to my mind she presents a mock glamour.Val from Oznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-32794686524904661292010-04-15T09:27:16.056-04:002010-04-15T09:27:16.056-04:00I've just started reading my one "summer&...I've just started reading my one "summer" novel: Judith Krantz's "Scruples" (picked up at my local library's 1-dollar-a-bag booksale). On page 12, as we meet the main character, there is a fabulous quote, and one I think sums up the problem of glamour/elegance quite spectacularly. Here it is:<br />"Billy knew that any emphasis on ass and tits played bloody hell with elegance."<br /><br />Great topic! I'm sad that glamour is dead.Rebecca MacLaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07689995277925279930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-55757356846303680622010-04-15T09:19:13.790-04:002010-04-15T09:19:13.790-04:00I was interested to read Erica B's comment. To...I was interested to read Erica B's comment. To me, she is the perfect example of modern glamour.Maehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01471643987029247042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-23272140832994480032010-04-15T02:27:53.980-04:002010-04-15T02:27:53.980-04:00Peter, I totally agree with you that 'contempo...Peter, I totally agree with you that 'contemporary life has just become too informal, too come-as-you-are', people just don't seem to care anymore. Dressing these days is very much anything goes. Personally I like to look tidy when I leave the house, be it for a work day, weekend, or even a quick trip to the supermarket. I keep my underwear under my clothes (as the name suggests) and and always, always, always brush my hair. As far as I'm concerned, tracksuit pants are for exercising or slothing around the house. <br /><br />I'm in my mid-30s but I feel like an old woman when I look at how younger people dress. No class; no polish; no pizazz what so ever! Glamour appears to have gone by the wayside. No one appears to make an effort anymore, or perhaps that's the 'look' they're going for. Who knows?<br /><br />I started sewing from 30s - 50s vintage patterns because I hated the current fashions and they really didn't suit the type of person I am. 30s/40s/50s era clothing seem to have an effortless elegance about them you just don't see anymore. That is unless it's on the red carpet for an awards night.Tamarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03703863890101335979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-4769734583632071192010-04-14T23:50:23.851-04:002010-04-14T23:50:23.851-04:00Glamour isn't really something I understand bu...Glamour isn't really something I understand but I think your definition is pretty spot on. I think it's one of those things where you have to actively try to be it, rather than it being a trait that comes naturally. Maybe it's just not a word I use. Confidence and beauty doesn't say "glamour" to me.reillyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12776283905130149324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-55963987883152655342010-04-14T21:29:43.454-04:002010-04-14T21:29:43.454-04:00This was such an on-point comment (especially comi...This was such an on-point comment (especially coming from a dude!): "Most women I know want to be, first healthy, then probably thin, and then some variation of pretty (as THEY define it) -- and ideally a combination of all three." <br /><br />The pic in the yellow dress almost caused me to snort my wine onto the screen - OMG. I especially loved the Olson Mills-style shading.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-4306494611058598132010-04-14T20:20:47.734-04:002010-04-14T20:20:47.734-04:00Glamorous. The word is almost as misunderstood as ...Glamorous. The word is almost as misunderstood as sex, yogurt or politics. Can I define it, hell no. But, true glamour comes from within. We have all met women (and some men) in our lives who give us a tingle being with them because they are so effortlessy glamorous. Maybe it's just because they always have on the right shade of red lipstick whether they are taking out the trash or going out to dinner. Or they have the same hairdo since 1972, but it is the RIGHT hairdo for them. Fashion fades, style remains. <br /><br />I find sassy, outspoken and confident women who are comfortable admitting that they dress to please themselves glamorous. Ms. M likes pantsuits and false eyelashes. Hell Yea. Ms. Q likes feather boas and Chucks. Double hell Yea. You get my drift.Chip and Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10042276130926461420noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-49084463639409773072010-04-14T20:10:45.529-04:002010-04-14T20:10:45.529-04:00Are you trying to say Lady Gaga isn't glamorou...Are you trying to say Lady Gaga isn't glamorous? I'm downright shocked. I suppose it's easy to find one less-than-flattering picture of her and substitute that for actually making a point, but I can't think of another (post)modern celebrity that makes glamour part and parcel of her identity. And I think there might be a tendency to conflate "mystery" with "covering". This seems to reduce the "gift" of the woman to her body. I think Gaga is much more adept at making her identity, her purpose, and her project the mystery. Her body isn't a secret, and it shouldn't have to be.<br /><br />I'm worried that appeals to an idealized past are covering up a more insidious desire to a past in which women's sexualities were for men or only on men's terms. Or, even if that territory gets too complicated, an appeal to a gendered past can't escape the material conditions of stark gender inequality that defined that past.<br /><br />And I think Gaga's great.Garrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09346206426212505238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-12654890776481383562010-04-14T18:36:41.811-04:002010-04-14T18:36:41.811-04:00I think glamor is superb confidence in yourself. ...I think glamor is superb confidence in yourself. How you look, how you act. The closest I ever got is on a plane flying business class overseas or the sleeping car of a train. And, even then, it was the props that did it. The dining, champagne, service. But, it felt good! For a few hours I felt like Garbo in a 1947 movie!Rosie1925https://www.blogger.com/profile/14232906422200267881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-48417167687618718802010-04-14T17:54:09.113-04:002010-04-14T17:54:09.113-04:00There are many young women celebrities who attempt...There are many young women celebrities who attempt, and often attain what I would call glamour. On Oscar night that is what they are striving for, and mostly they achieve it. <br /><br />For me personally, I can't imagine worrying about it. I'm not now nor have ever been glamorous. I have no reason to be glamorous, or to want to be. <br /><br />It seems to me that while going about one's simple life, doing the normal mundane things, glamor would just get in the way. Now, beauty, poise, self-confidence--those things help you. Glamour, not so much, unless you live an unusual life.sulymohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07887228971839188556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-41722451560099900332010-04-14T16:49:07.077-04:002010-04-14T16:49:07.077-04:00In response to an earlier comment, I do believe th...In response to an earlier comment, I do believe the womens lib movement contributed to the demise of dressing up with a feminine look, it wasn't cool to be June Cleaver anymore. Now I think many current younger women aspire to have the best qualities of that older generation, the retro looks, craftiness, ingenuity, return to sewing, etc., in a modern world.Myrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16163175961766563965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-57264491129816607612010-04-14T16:32:39.962-04:002010-04-14T16:32:39.962-04:00Fashion in the glamourous days of the 30's/40&...Fashion in the glamourous days of the 30's/40's was filtered down from the wealthier classes/movie stars, and the less wealthy adopted these fashions, as has happened throughout history.<br /><br />More recently fashion has filtered up from the street - take punk as the classic example - arising from the lower classes it soon was adopted (in diluted form!) by the mainstream. Remember denim was a fabric for work clothes - now who doesn't have a pair of jeans in their wardrobe?<br /><br />So today we have an abundance of down-market dressing, instead of up-market dressing.<br /><br />Let's hope the pendulum swings back soon!Sheryllhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17460472835794108787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1991166428290808171.post-34320515707437186412010-04-14T15:58:48.575-04:002010-04-14T15:58:48.575-04:00Glamour still exists only if we want it to. I'...Glamour still exists only if we want it to. I'm sure there were frumpy housewives in the 40's but obviously those photos are only in family albums and not movie posters or magazine covers widely accessible by today's people. For example, I know what my grandma looked like in the 50's. She did dress a little better than she does today, and wore a wig but her lifestyle was much different then. <br /><br />Because we are removed from the decades that are being considered glamourous, of course the images that remain are the good ones. When we look at historical renderings of Elizabethan costumes, we usually see the cream of the crop. There often are no sketches for beggars or peasants. <br /><br />I think something that we need to remember is that in the earlier ages of film and TV, REAL designers worked on the projects. REAL designers were employed by the production companies. Style was dictated by people like Edith Head and Adrienne who were passionate about what they did. The film industry was saturated with their work and of course it trickled down to the every day woman. <br /><br />Today, I would claim the world has turned into a "quantity over quality" world. Rather than one expertly produced film with designer threads, we crank out films every week. The same with the music industry and all other creative outlets. Information moves much more quickly and styles change faster. This all "waters down" trends and style. In history it was a treat to go see a film, and with the higher level of appreciation went a higher level of appreciation for the garments and styles within the films. <br /><br />Also think about women's rights. The wife of the 40's/50's was to be at home and for the most part be a housewife/mother and a pretty piece of arm candy. She had time to sew her own wardrobe and put together beautiful outfits for when leaving the home. <br />Today, needless to say women work, women are single parents, women are CEO's, women teach/attend yoga. Without becoming too political, I've come across literature a few times that subscribes to the mentality that women's liberation killed glamour. Nobody was walking down the street in 1940 in their yoga pants on their way to work out. <br /><br />Lastly we need to think about the food industry and diet. Because most families have moved away from a 1940's stay at home model, nobody is at home creating nutritious meals for the family. Whether we like it or not, we are all eating garbage compared to what was available in those days. Hormones and antibiotics in food was never heard of, and I'd fathom that HFCS didn't exist either. With all of that (not to mention fast food) our body shapes have become unfavorable to the more glamourous silhouettes. I don't know a single woman who has a 1940's nipped in waist. Of course they're still out there, ok maybe I can think of one person I know but she works hard for it with a vegan diet and lots of cardio. <br /><br />Anybody and everybody can dress sharp and coifed today as they did in the day. Our bodies have changed, our lifestyles have changed our diet has changed and so has our definition of glamour. That's the very nature of fashion, change. Couture still exists, home sewers still exist who put much effort into their looks. The glamour is definitely still out there whether it's modern or historical. Everybody just has to look and put a little more effort into it than before.Brian Lingerhttp://web.me.com/dzynurbrian/Dzynurbrian/Welcome.htmlnoreply@blogger.com