contention

giorgio armani via MsGlitzy

image via knightcat

this post is inspired by MsGlitzy (and a few others). a while back, i saw this clip as i was blogwalkin. MsGlitzy's response to my comment reminded me of what Lori Goldstein said in that clip. if you followed my blog, you'd have read how i recently bitched about how peoplec could wear so many rings on one hand and other stuff i could not bring myself to do.

i did like what she did for the bloggers, whether the jewelry smothered the girls or not. was i convinced that rules were meant to be broken? hmmmm. i think you know where i stand. lol. lest you mistake, i'm not against one expressing onself freely through fashion. i certainly have no right over the rules or i should say codes by which one goes by when it comes to dressing up.        

i suppose, ultimately, like what Goldstein's said towards the end in the clip embedded above, what clicks is the confidence that shows through even when one ditches rules and looks weird - fugly, in a worst case scenario. ahh did i hear you ask for the definition of fugly? how about why runway models still measure a certain height and look a certain way? is it a relevant point for debate?

the pointy strappy flats worn with the GA dresses reminded me of a pair of shoes the style guru gave me a few years back. i wore them to death. i have the photos saved somewhere. i would love to own a similar pair soon.

what's your take on fashion rules? do you think there should be rules? what are they?